Talk:Coat of arms of Poole

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of Poole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:44, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Use of a standard Wikimedia Commons style Coat of Arms[edit]

Both here and on the Poole page my attempts to use File:Arms_of_Poole.svg as the free to use Wikimedia emblazonment of the coat of arms of Poole have been consistently undone and removed on the grounds that the dolphin in my emblazonment is incorrect because since 1976 it has been depicted naturalistically. However this is a misunderstanding of the functions of heraldry - the section of the blazon relevant to the dolphin still reads "a Dolphin naiant embowed Argent langued Gules", which gives no instruction on the depiction of the dolphin. John Brooke-Little, in the 1973 edition of Boutell's Heraldry clearly states that the depiction of elements in arms is to a great extent "a matter for the artist to decide". My version of the Poole arms, which are importantly free to use as Wikimedia assets, are absolutely correct to the blazon. It is an incorrect application of heraldry to insist that what has for a time been standard practice in the emblazoning of a coat of arms (such as the naturalistic dolphin seen since 1976) is a necessary. In the spirit of the Wikimedia heraldry project my version of the arms should be kept as the primary one, and the emblazonment used by the former council should be a separate image in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ET72 (talk ET72 (talk) 18:53, 17 March 2022 (GMT)