User talk:Bazaraba

Ok, here is the thing with Moldavia "bison-auroch issue". You cannot just go change one arms at the time and leave it like that...it creates discontinuity and looks bad IMO. Now as far as I could see all the Romanian arms show "auroch", it is in the blason of all arms. I am not sure when, where and why or if it even occurred that is changed into a bison, but from what I've seen it is actually an alternative variant, an artistic freedom if you will to show it either as bull (standard auroch) or as a bison. Unless ofc you can prove it otherwise. As for now I have reverted all the changes. What I would appreciate before we change anything...is if you could be more specific and address this issue properly, not on upload notes but here on talk page. Namely: 1. when did the change to bison occur (with blasons and sources); 2. what arms need to be changed so we can make a proper list and change them all; 3. who did the change, meaning who used it...the state/kingdom, the royal family, other noble families, etc. Finellach (talk) 01:34, 25 March 2020 (CET)

Hello! I just now saw the message. Indeed, the blason says it is an auroch, but all of the official arms from 1867 onward show a bison. Heraldist Silviu Andrieș-Tabac wrote about this dilemma a few years ago. That being said, the Principality of Moldavia had an auroch, as well as the Governorate of Bessarabia; the Duchy of Bukovina had a bison. After the Union of 1859, heraldist Carol Popp of Sătmar used both an auroch and a bison. The 1859 variant shows an auroch or a bison, depeding on the rendition; the 1860 variant shows an auroch; the 1862 variant shows a bison; the 1863 variant (the final one during the rule of Alexander John I) shows a bison. Then, when Charles I came to power in 1866, the variant used until 1867 shows an auroch. After that, as I said before all of the official arms show a bison's head. I even know why for the arms from 1921: heraldist József Sebestyén of Căpeni was inspired by the arms of Bukovina when he painted the arms. I do have all of the original projects of arms (one of them in my possession), and I would gladly share them with you. I know, Romanian heraldry is sometimes a mess; it was the same with the arms of Wallachia, though: sometimes showing an eagle and other times showing a raven.

Mate the files you are uploading for Queen consort Marie and Helen are NOT unique, they are literally their arms (rather of their father) with the arms of the family they married into, this should be on the site. Second, neither of them were of the House of Hohenzollern...they married into the family, thus they should not be on the page either. And third, please explain to me the changes made to Hohenzollern-Romania...for one I need explanation for omitting personal arms from appearing on the page... Finellach (talk) 07:15, 1 November 2023 (EDT)

Queen Marie was granted personal arms as Princess of the United Kingdom, which she used extensively. They were not the arms of her father. Secondly, this is something which I discussed with JSpuller, to see how it will look with two accolated shields. Regarding the fact that they married into the family and should not be there, that is indeed a fair point. As for the personal arms from the page, the arms of the Crown Prince of Romania used for Ferdinand and Charles were based on those painted in the Armorial of the Order of the Elephant, but the bordure is actually just an artist's rendition, unfortunately. And the arms of the Grand Voivode of Alba Iulia were based on a wrongly described coat of arms from Elisabeta Palace. I have personally seen both the arms in the Order of the Elephant's chapel and in the Elisabeta Palace and those bordures are not there.

So if she was granted a personal arms then that is her arms, we will make that one and add it on the page...but not on Hohenzollern page but where it does NOT belong...it will go on the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha aka Windsor page. The so-called "accolated shields" have IMO no place on this site, they are literally the same arms we already have, only in this case we have them side by side...completely unnecessary. If we do this for one family then we can do it for all and there is absolutely no need for that. Same goes for the flags, what exactly is the point of the flags? This website is for the coat of arms....what warrants that we have Romanian flags? What is so special about them? This is a heraldic website, not one that deals with vexillology. Why would this family and this country be an exception to the general rule of this website? Second, if those arms in question are incorrect or they are alternatives then they should not be omitted but rather shown with the source given under it, or they should be removed completely from the site entirely, clearly I am in favor of the former. Finellach (talk) 11:39, 1 November 2023 (EDT)