User talk:NSamson: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (22 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
To sign your posts on talk pages, use four tildes (<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>) at the end of your message. -[[User:NSamson|NSamson]] ([[User talk:NSamson|talk]]) 02:10, 9 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
==Comments== | ==Comments== | ||
[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MP-Liber_Additamentorum-170a.jpg Folio 170a]. The man who made modern illustration has been confirmed as credible source on many occasions. He is behind the sites such as Aspilogia.com and so on. [[User:Finellach|Finellach]] ([[User talk:Finellach|talk]]) 22:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC) | |||
BTW you are right, it is most likely that the arms with three lions is in fact FitzMatthew...I just noticed it appears in Historia Anglorum. Still the colors are reversed. Cheerio. [[User:Finellach|Finellach]] ([[User talk:Finellach|talk]]) 23:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC) | |||
==Categorization== | |||
With over 13000 files, I propose that we add categories for each file, so that arms containing the same charge may be grouped properly. | |||
Also, this is the closest thing I could think of in order to find arms by blazon. | |||
For example, the Capet arms is categorized as Fleur-de-lys. | |||
Arms containing more than one charge would have several categories, until each and every charge contained in the arms had been identified. | |||
If a charge cannot be identified, it should also be categorized as 'Unidentified Charge', even if the other charges could be identified. If another user could identify the charge, the 'Unidentified Charge' category for that specific arms should be deleted and replaced with the proper identification. -[[User:NSamson|NSamson]] ([[User talk:NSamson|talk]]) 02:28, 24 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
This is a great idea, but personally I don't really think its feasible given the sparse amount of members this wiki has. [[User:Novov|Novov]] ([[User talk:Novov|talk]]) 08:50, 24 June 2018 (UTC) | |||
==Method== | |||
Export as Plain SVG. | |||
Open - realign to center and middle | |||
Latest revision as of 03:32, 5 July 2022
To sign your posts on talk pages, use four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. -NSamson (talk) 02:10, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Comments[edit]
Folio 170a. The man who made modern illustration has been confirmed as credible source on many occasions. He is behind the sites such as Aspilogia.com and so on. Finellach (talk) 22:24, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
BTW you are right, it is most likely that the arms with three lions is in fact FitzMatthew...I just noticed it appears in Historia Anglorum. Still the colors are reversed. Cheerio. Finellach (talk) 23:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Categorization[edit]
With over 13000 files, I propose that we add categories for each file, so that arms containing the same charge may be grouped properly.
Also, this is the closest thing I could think of in order to find arms by blazon.
For example, the Capet arms is categorized as Fleur-de-lys.
Arms containing more than one charge would have several categories, until each and every charge contained in the arms had been identified.
If a charge cannot be identified, it should also be categorized as 'Unidentified Charge', even if the other charges could be identified. If another user could identify the charge, the 'Unidentified Charge' category for that specific arms should be deleted and replaced with the proper identification. -NSamson (talk) 02:28, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
This is a great idea, but personally I don't really think its feasible given the sparse amount of members this wiki has. Novov (talk) 08:50, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
Method[edit]
Export as Plain SVG. Open - realign to center and middle
