Commons:Deletion requests/File:CoA Ravensburg, BW.svg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This file doesn't look like any coat of arms of Ravensburg used anywhere now or in history. The bottom is totally wrong, the towers are very unusual, the whole design is unheraldic (too thin lines, strange shade of blue not used in German heraldry).File:Wappen Ravensburg.svg exists and is much better in every respect. This file is misleading and not useful. Anvilaquarius (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- You realise that heraldry doesn't follow strict rules like with vexillology or corporate trademarks, and that a coat of arms is defined solely by its blazon so its appearance is decided by whoever draws it? This one is based on an older depiction (renaissance era) I came across which had the bottom as such, but made using elements and tones from other arms on commons. There is no such thing in heraldry as "too thin lines". There is also no "shade of blue" "used in German heraldry" - there are tinctures such as Azure, Bleu Celeste, Water-Colour, etc. but they possess no specifically defined shade and the blue used here is used extensively in commons for Azure even on German arms. There are good articles on Wikipedia and elsewhere about this. Essentially this is an older coat of arms in the same heraldic "style" that appears widely across Wikipedia to address a specific use case - historical list articles like on the List of States in the Holy Roman Empire where arms were added with a mismatch of proportions, were anachronistic to the era of the Empire, some having only the escutcheon whilst others had surrounds, civic arms widely used in place of ecclesiastic or dynastic, and so forth. Essentially the use case for this coat of arms boils down to be used like the flag icons in equivalent modern-day articles so it needs to be clear and distinct, made with identical image proportions to other arms used in such an article so that table formatting in such articles isn't impaired, and made stylistically similar to other arms on Wikipedia so that the arms themselves don't distract from actual content. --Nomadic1 (talk) 08:24, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- The reason provided by the DR is not valid for deleting the file. Kathisma (talk) 20:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:37, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
