This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Friendly reminder regarding a style of coat of arms
If you see the coat of arms in this style:
DO NOT replace it with your own arrangement for various reasons. Instead, upload your arrangement as a separate file but please read the French copyright laws before doing so when it comes to French coat of arms. Thanks. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 19:22, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
habe gesehen, dass du bei Mendrisio auf eine alte Quelle zurückgegriffen und das aktuell verwendete als Logo deklariert hast. Ich habe mich vor ein paar Tagen mit Kerzers beschäftigt und stand vor einer ähnlichen Frage.
frz. Projekt
Dem Gemreindelogo entnommen
Es wäre ein leichtes, das Wappen von der Webseite zu nehmen (und den Fehler in der Kontur zu korrigieren). Immerhin wird es auch in Reglementen (Seite 1) verwendet. Im Siegel (PDF letzte Seite) wiederum eine gerade Schildform. Auf der Suche nach einer Literaturquelle bin ich auf dieses PDF des Schweizer Archiv für Heraldik gestoßen mit einer doch detailierteren Kerzendarstellung. Auf der Suche nach der Blasonierung bin ich auf diesen Fahnenversand gestoßen. Hoppla - gleiche Kerzendarstellung.
Es spricht nichts dagegen, das Wappen aus dem Logo von Kerzers zu extrahieren und auf Commons hochzuladen. Dieses Wappen ist dem glasierten französischen Teil sicher vorzuziehen.
Das Rokoko-Wappen Mendrisios das ich Gastone Cambins posthumem Artikel[1] entnommen habe ist keineswegs über alle Zweifel erhaben. Cambin verweist zwar im Artikel darauf, dass dieses Wappen seinem Standardwerk über die Tessiner Gemeindeheraldik, dem Armoriale dei Comuni Ticinesi,[2] entnommen sei, das ist aber nicht das Ende der Geschichte. Dieses Wappenbuch verfügt über eine Serie von Farbtafeln, in denen die Tessiner Gemeindewappen in einer schlichten, zweckmässigen und zeitlos wirkenden Schildform angegeben werden. Es ist diese Schildform, die eigentlich als Tessiner Standard zu gelten hat.
Die Aufrisse im Schweizer Archiv für Heraldik sind gut und stellen so etwas wie einen nationalen Standard dar. Dieser Standard lässt sich sich im RGB-Farbraum am besten mit Aargauer Tinkturen wiedergeben, was auch der Praxis der Stiftung Schweizer Wappen und Fahnen entspricht.
Die Schweiz ist allerdings ein föderalistischer Staat und die Gemeindewappen unterstehen den Kantonen, weshalb Wappenbücher wie Cambins Armoriale eine kantonale Angelegenheit sind. Siehe zum Beispiel Die Gemeindewappen des Kantons Zürich,[3] die von Gerhard Bräunlich für Commons mitsamt der typisch zürcherischen Schildform vektorisiert wurden.
Das Freiburger Wappenbuch ist das Illustrierte Wappenbuch der Freiburgischen Gemeinden.[4] Auch dieser kantonale Standard weist eine charakteristische Schildform auf, ersichtlich in dieser Abbildung. Siehe auch bei Romont oder Dompierre auf Heraldry of the World.
Die Frage ist nun die, ob wir uns nicht an diese kantonalen Standards halten wollen, besonders in den Schildformen, wenn wir die französischen Glasurwappen ersetzen. Zum Beispiel Cossonay in der Waadt:
Glasurwappen nach Projet Blasons
SVG, Wappen nach dem Armorial des Communes Vaudoises
Die in den enzyklopädischen Artikeln verwendeten Wappen sollten wohl eher einem kantonalen oder nationalen Standard entsprechen als einem Wappen-Logo, das keinem solchen Standard folgt. Ein Bespiel ist Lausanne:
Wappen aus dem Lausanner Logo von 2018
Wappen nach dem Armorial des Communes Vaudoises
Ich kann in der Bibliothek einen Blick werfen ins Illustrierte Wappenbuch der Freiburgischen Gemeinden und Kerzers nachschlagen...
Ich bin ganz bei dir. Regionale Standards sollten vor nationalen stehen. Allerdings gibt es auch Regionen, wo es nicht den Standard gibt, sondern mehrere Standards aus unterschiedlichen Jahrzehnten existieren. Richtig spannend wird es dann, wenn jemand wie Helmut von Jan Schöpfer unzähliger Kommunalwappen ist, aber recht frei in Sachen Schildform agierte.
Zum Kanton Freiburg: Hier existiert doch noch ein zweites Wappenbuch - Armorial des communes et des districts du canton de Fribourg [6] mit dieser Schildform wie bei Gurwolf oder dem hier bekannten Fall der Stadt Freiburg. Somit haben wir schon einmal zwei kantonstypisch Standards. Wann nehmen wir welchen? Worauf wir uns vermutlich sicher einigen können, sind Gemeinden, die vor dem Erscheinen des jüngeren Wappenbuchs fusioniert haben. So beim im Buchauszug ersichtlichen Coussiberlé.
@Fränsmer: Das Illustrierte Wappenbuch der Freiburgischen Gemeinden blasoniert das Wappen von Kerzers wie folgt: In Blau zwei brennende silberne Kerzen. Zur Provenienz gibt es an: "Dieses anschauliche Wappen ist seit dem 17. Jahrhundert bekannt." Ich habe eine Foto des Aufrisses gemacht, die ich dir per E-Mail versuche zukommen zu lassen; der Spamfilter hat etwas dagegen, wenn ich sie hier verlinke.
Ästhetisch finde ich die Wappenform im Armorial des communes et des districts du canton de Fribourg ansprechender als im Illustrierten Wappenbuch der Freiburgischen Gemeinden: sie ist eigenwillig und elegant, während der Wappenform im Illustrierten Wappenbuch eine unverbindliche Altertümlichkeit anhaftet. Dass die Kantonshauptstadt die erstere Form verwendet dürfte auch ein gewisses Gewicht haben. Orell Füssli ist zudem der renommiertere Verlag als Ketty & Alexandre.
Ketty & Alexandre hat neben dem Illustrierten Wappenbuch der Freiburgischen Gemeinden auch folgende Titel aufgelegt: Die Walliser Gemeinden und ihre Wappen (1985), Les Communes Valaisannes et leurs Armoiries (1985), Les Communes Genevoises et leurs Armoiries (1986), Die Luzerner Gemeinden und ihre Wappen (1987), Die Thurgauer Gemeinden und ihre Wappen (1988), Die Gemeinden beider Basel und ihre Wappen (1989), Die Urschweiz und ihre Wappen: Die Gemeinden von Uri, Schwyz, Obwalden und Nidwalden (1990). Les Communes Neuchâteloises et leurs Armoiries (1991), Les Communes Vaudoises et leurs Armoiries (1991-1995). Eingesehen in dieser Serie habe ich nur das Buch über Freiburg und jenes über die Urschweiz. Ich stamme selber aus der Innerschweiz und kann mit Bestimmtheit sagen, dass die von Ketty & Alexandre für die Urkantone gewählte Schildform in dieser Region keine weite Verbreitung hat.
Was im Zusammenhang mit den Wappenbüchern auch einmal ausgesprochen werden soll: die Zeichnungen in den Berner Wappen von Aliman5040 sind meist dem Wappenbuch des Kantons Bern[1] entnommen. Sie sind ausgedünnt im Strich und umgemünzt auf den glasierten "Schweizer Schild" des Projet Blasons. Immer noch unverkennbar ist dabei aber der grafische Stil Hans Jennis.
Vielleicht wäre es angebracht, die Seite WPW/Neuzeichnen aufzusplitten nach Ländern (Deutschland, Österreich und Schweiz) und auf der Seite des jeweiligen Landes die regionalen Standards zu empfehlen.
_____
[1] Staatsarchiv des Kantons Bern (1981) Wappenbuch des Kantons Bern: das Berner Staatswappen sowie die Wappen der Amtsbezirke und Gemeinden, Bern: Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag ISBN: 978-3-292-16100-0.
P.S. Das Staatsarchiv Luzern urteilt: "Das von Michael Riedler, Louis Mühlemann und Joseph Hardegger herausgegebene Werk Die Luzerner Gemeinden und ihre Wappen, Chapelle-sur-Moudon 1987, ist nur mit Vorsicht zu benützen, da es wissenschaftlichen Ansprüchen nicht genügen kann." Dies gilt wohl für die gesamte Serie des Verlags, einschließlich des Freiburger Buchs, und spricht insofern auch gegen die darin verwendete Schildform. ARK (talk) 11:18, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
Ich habe mal ein Wappen bearbeitet aus de Veveys Armorial: Corserey. Hoffentlich stören dich die Aargauer Tinkturen nicht. Unter den heraldischen RGB/Hex-Paletten die ich aus der Schweiz kenne ist sie die einzige, die das Zeug zu einem nationalen Standard hat.
hab nun auch deine Mail nicht bekommen und einmal die Emailadresse ausgetauscht. Kannst du mir die Mail nocheinmal schicken?
Wenn allerdings das Staatsarchiv Luzern diese Buchserie von Ketty & Alexandre als Substandard deklariert, bringt uns die dortige Darstellung des Kerzerschen Wappens nicht sehr viel? Fränsmer (talk) 14:38, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Ich habe dir die Mail noch einmal geschickt.
Die Schildform im Freiburger Buch von Ketty & Alexandre kann so schlimm nun auch wieder nicht sein. Immerhin wird sie verwendet in einem Artikel des Schweizer Archivs für Heraldik. Ästhetisch vorzuziehen wäre wahrscheinlich die Version von de Vevey. Hast du Zugriff auf das Buch? ARK (talk) 10:43, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Vallon ist etwas sonderlich. Die Gemeinde macht einen Unterschied zwischen dem Wappen als Bildmarke im Logo und dem Wappen als Illustration. Dann gibt sie die Blasonierung an und sagt, eine offizielle Fassung sei leider nicht bekannt. Das als Illustration angegebene Wappen entspricht ungefähr der Fassung im Finanzregelement, ist also spitz zulaufend mit einer doppelt eingebuchteten Oberkante. Ich würde mich nicht unbedingt auf die Unterschiede zwischen diesen beiden Versionen einlassen sondern eher darauf tendieren, eine einheitliche Vorlage für die Freiburger Wappen in dieser Schildform zu schaffen, vielleicht nach der Fassung im Schweizer Archiv für Heraldik (die ihrerseits auf dem Freiburger Buch von Ketty & Alexandre beruht).
Marly.ch hat ein SVG-Wappen, das für Commons allerdings etwas bereinigt werden sollte (siehe dafür auch die Bitmap-Version, von der die Vektor-Version wahrscheinlich abstammt). Es wäre dennoch gut zu wissen, ob diese Schildform einer Freiburger Wappensammlung entstammt, die wir noch nicht kennen. ARK (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
@Fränsmer: Ich habe mich ein wenig mit den Waadtländer Gemeindewappen beschäftigt. Die folgendenden Wappen habe ich umgearbeitet nach Vorlage des Armorial des Communes Vaudoises (siehe Staatsratsbeschluss von 2016) , mit Aargauer Tinkturen:
Doc Taxon scheint mit den Aargauer Tinkturen leben zu können.
Wenn wir nun davon absehen, die Glanzwappen zu überschreiben und die revidierten Wappen unter neuen Dateinamen posten, dann wird sich die Diskussion verschieben: weg vom Gezeter über einzelne Überschreibungen, hin zur grundsätzlichen Frage, ob die revidierten Wappen auch auf der französischen Wikipedia erscheinen sollen. Die folgenden revidierten Wappen habe ich schon auf der französischen Wikipedia eingebunden:
Letztlich, glaube ich, werden wir das Projet Blasons davon überzeugen müssen, dass dies der richtige Weg ist. ARK (talk) 09:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Für die Schildform würde ich mich nicht allzusehr an den Amtsstempeln orientieren, die oft antiquarische Stücke sind. Die zeitgenössische Form ist meist auf der Website einer Gemeinde zu sehen, und hierbei fällt auf, wie oft sich die Gemeinden der Westschweiz einfach auf Commons bedienen. Villarsel-sur-Marly.ch und Villars-sous-Yens.ch/ sind Beispiele einer unbesehenen Übernahme. Villars-le-Terroir.ch und Lasarraz.ch/ haben zumindest den Glanzeffekt entfernt. Ich frage mich, ob man diese Wahl nicht einfach respektieren soll durch eine neue Version des betreffenden Glanzwappens minus des Glanzeffekts. ARK (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Naja. Ist es nicht ein wenig unbefriedigend, die Glanzwapppen einfach ohne Glanzeffekt zu übernehmen? Damit legitimieren wir doch diese in eine willkürliche Standardform gepressten Wappen, obwohl "außerhalb der Wikipedia entstandene" Schildformen (ja selbst wenn sie auch nur einfache sind wie in Genf oder Waadtland) in der Literatur existieren.
@Fränsmer: Der écusson espagnol ist ja nicht einfach eine Fiktion. Dies ist eine Schildform, die auch in der Schweiz tatsächlich anzutreffen ist, wenngleich im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert wahrscheinlich nicht mehr so häufig wie früher. Den Glanzeffekt darf man in der Kommunalheraldik wohl als "unheraldisch" bezeichnen ohne mit Widerspruch von ausserhalb des Projet Blasons rechnen zu müssen. Mit dem écusson espagnol, ohne Glanzeffekt, ist die Sache nicht so einfach. Natürlich war es fahrlässig vom Projet Blasons, diese Schildform im Jahr 2006 zum schweizer Standard zu erklären, aber immerhin handelt es sich dabei fraglos um eine korrekte, auch in der Schweiz verwendete Schildform.
Ein Beispiel: das Armorial des communes vaudoises (1972) verwendet eine spitz zulaufende Schildform, die im Beschluss des Waadtländer Staatsrats (2016) zur Illustration der offiziellen Blasonierungen verwendet werden. Diese Schildform kann also für die Waadt als "amtlich" gelten.
Dann besteht aber auch die WPW-Doktrin wonach die aktuelle amtliche Fassung eines Wappens verwendet werden soll.
Die Waadtländer Gemeinde Vufflens-le-Château unterhält auf ihrer Website eine Seite über ihr Wappen auf der ein runder Schild abgebildet ist. Nach der Doktrin der aktuellen amtlichen Fassung habe ich diesen runden Schild in meiner Vektorisierung nachgebildet.
Die Waadtländer Gemeinde Villars-le-Terroir verwendet nun aber auf ihrer Website ebenfalls ein Wappen mit einem runden Schild. Warum soll ich nach der Doktrin der aktuellen amtlichen Fassung nicht analog verfahren und das Wappen von Villars-le-Terroir so reproduzieren, wie es halt ist, obgleich es sich dabei nachweisbar um den leicht modifizierten Glanzwappen-Aufriss ab Commons handelt: ohne Glanz, mit einer zurückhaltenderen Palette? An der Heraldik gibt's eigentlich nichts zu rütteln. ARK (talk) 14:34, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Glaube hier hab ich mich unklar ausgedrückt. Ich stelle nicht écusson espagnol grundsätzlich in Frage, sondern die Seitenverhältnisse "der Franzosen". Das "bernische" écusson espagnol ist bsp. ein anderes als das aus dem frz. Wappenprojekt. Fränsmer (talk) 16:04, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Ich freue mich über jedes Wappen, bei dem eine (ältere) Wappenform abseits eines "neuzeitlichen Einheitsschildes" vektorisiert wird und somit ins 21. Jahrhundert gehoben wird. Das ist für mich kein Muss, aber warum ein 0815-Wappen, das irgendjemand digital erstellt hat, wenn es doch etwas aus der Literatur gibt, das Jahrzehnte Bestand hat und - oft - mehr Charakter hat als eine Grafik aus einem "Fließbandprojekt"? Fränsmer (talk) 16:15, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hallo @ARK: Ich hab diese Woche CHE Cottens FR COA.svg von der Gemeindeseite übernommen. Wäre es hier nicht besser, das Wappen in die Vevey'sche Schildform (wie hier) zu ändern oder parallel und somit beide Schildformen als Varianten hier anbieten zu können? Fränsmer (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Ja, der doppelt eingebogene obere Schildrand entstammt bekanntlich dem Armorial illustré des communes fribourgeoises aus der heraldischen Serie des Verlags Ketty & Alexandre, der sich auch in anderen Werken dieser Serie mit fantasievollen Schildformen hervorgetan hat. Eine alternative Fassung des Wappens in der Schildform Veveys wäre zu begrüssen. ARK (talk) 15:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Gut, werd es mir die Tage anschauen. Die Frage ist nur, überschreiben oder separat und (bei Bevorzugung von der Form von Vevey) welche Dateinamen? Fränsmer (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Ich würde die bestehende Fassung nicht überschreiben sondern die neue Datei dann unter CHE_Cottens_FR_COA_02.svg einstellen. Die gegenwärtig offizielle Version wird uns ja noch einige Zeit als offiziell erhalten bleiben, und unter ihrem eigenen Namen bleibt sie einfacher auffindbar.
Für die enzyklopädischen Artikel würde ich dann die Vevey-Schildform vorziehen. Die Kunstdenkmäler des Kantons Freiburg halten sich ja auch an die Veveysche Schildform.
Ich habe das Wappen noch einmal überarbeitet, danke für den Hinweis! Ich würde wohl die Galliker-Version drinlassen so wie's jetzt ist: das ist neutral. Wenn dir die de Vevey Schildform so ein riesiges Anliegen ist, dann soll's mir aber recht sein. Oder mach doch ein paar de Vevey Wappen! :-) ARK (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Da Fribourg doch eine größere Sache ist, hab ich mal in Genf mit de:Bardonnex angefangen. Hier nutze ich die Vorlage aus Auguste de Montfalcon, Armorial des communes genevoises, Genève, 1925. Kannst du da mal schauen, ob man darauf Zugang erhalten kann? Fränsmer (talk) 13:18, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Gute Idee! Aus dem Armorial des communes Genevoises (1925) sind die Farbtafeln von Seite 1, Seite 6 und Seite 7 online abrufbar. Heraldry of the World hat möglicherweise alle Wappen des Buches unter seiner Kategorie Genf. Meine lokale Bibliothek besitzt eine Auflage des Werks von 1977; Dies scheint eine Neubearbeitung und Aktualisierung zu sein, nicht nur ein Faksimile der Auflage von 1925. Ich habe dieses Buch mal bestellt. ARK (talk) 19:45, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Super! de:Aire-la-Ville hab ich schon einmal angefangen, werde aber die Schildform nochmal nachjustieren (mir sind die "Bögen" unten nicht orginalgetreu genug), bevor ich hier weitere Wappen hochlade und nochmal eine zweite Version nachlegen muss. Fränsmer (talk) 13:17, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
@Fränsmer: Delta-9 ist ein schweizer Grafiker namens Steve und lebte in Genf als er seine Wappen schuf. Wahrscheinlich arbeitete er sogar direkt vom Armorial des communes Genevoises, fand es aber nötig, die Wappen anhand der schweizer Glanzvorlage des Projet Blasons zu "modernisieren." Wenn du beim Überarbeiten der Wappen irgendwelche Elemente von Steves Arbeit wiederverwendest, sei bitte darauf bedacht, dies in der Dateibeschreibung zu vermerken. Fehlende Attribution wird von den militanten Parteigängern des Projet Blasons sicher als Plagiat oder Vandalismus ausgelegt. Diese Angriffsfläche sollten wir ihnen gar nicht erst bieten. ARK (talk) 09:11, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
@Fränsmer: Das Armorial des communes Genevoises hat in der Ausgabe von 1977 eine ungewöhnliche Schildform, die am unteren Rand des Schilds eine Horizontale aufweist (siehe Abbildungen). Das scheint mir für die Zecke einer Enzyklopädie etwas zu experimentell. ARK (talk) 12:42, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Ja, das ist wirklich etwas speziell. Das würde ich nur im Einzelfall verwenden, wenn die Quellenlage auf diese Schildform hindeutet. Fränsmer (talk) 15:59, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I18n bei Wappen St Radegund OÖ.svg
Servus,
du hast bei File:Wappen St Radegund OÖ.svg bei den verschiedensprachigen Beschreibungen die Sprach-Vorlagen ({{Bar}}, {{It}} usw.) herausgenommen und durch expliziten Text (Sprachnamen) ersetzt. Nur bei Deutsch, English und Français hast du die Vorlagen gelassen.
Gibt es dafür einen Grund? Ich habe bei WC noch nie gesehen, dass statt der Vorlagen die Sprachnamen verwendet werden, und ich sehe auch keinen Vorteil darin. Meiner Meinung nach ist die Verwendung der Vorlagen Standard. Sie sorgt für Einheitlichkeit, und man kann durch Überfahren des Sprachnamens mit der Maus die Sprache erkennen, auch wenn man die betreffende Schrift nicht lesen kann. -- Renardo la vulpo (talk) 12:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Habe eben file:CHE Les Clees COA.svg hochgeladen. Mir ist aufgefallen, dass die Schildform mittlerweile nach oben hin leicht breiter wird. Sollte die nicht gerade hoch gehen und oben zwei rechte Winkel bilden? So ist es doch bei "älteren" von dir vektorisierten Dateien. Fränsmer (talk) 17:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Danke für das neue Waadtländer Wappen! Hast du das Gatter von Delta-9 übernommen? Falls ja, solltest du dies wohl in der Dateibeschreibung mit Template:Attrib dokumentieren.
Bei der Prüfung eines Scans aus dem Armorial des communes vaudoises habe ich festgestellt, dass, wie erwartet, die oberern beiden Ecken tatsächlich im rechten Winkel stehen. Im Wappen von Sainte-Croix habe ich deshalb die Eckpunkte so weit nach innen verschoben, bis sie sich jetzt in vertikaler Linie über den unterhalb liegenden Bearbeitungspunkten befinden. ARK (talk) 10:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
Hallo,
da ich weiterhin Probleme hab, im Wappenprojekt zu antworten, mach ich das Thema einfach mal hier auf.
Hab das Wappen von Rocourt aus dem Wappen von Grandfontaine von Taktaal erstellt. Bin nicht so ganz mit den Konturstärken zufrieden. Kannst du was zur Infobox beitragen?
Im Wappenprojekt hätte ich dir eigentlich im Bereich Jura geantwortet, dass ich es schade finde, dass die Stiftung liquidiert wird. Liegt dir das von dir erwähnte Heft mit den jurassischen Wappen (und evtl. andere für uns interessante) denn vor?
@Fränsmer: Ja, ich besitze beinahe das vollständige Set der zwanzig Hefte in dieser Serie. Das Heft 16 hat neben dem Artikel über die Hoheitszeichen des Kantons Jura auch je einen Artikel über die Hoheitszeichen des Kantons Neuenburg und des Kantons Genf. Heft 14 hat einen Artikel über die Hoheitszeichen des Kantons Freiburg. Jeder dieser Artikel behandelt alle Gemeindewappen des jeweiligen Kantons mit Blasonierung und einer kurzen Erläuterung zur Provenienz jedes einzelnen Wappens, sowie einer farbigen Wappenzeichnung im Stil von Louis Mühlemanns Wappen und Fahnen der Schweiz.
Die beiden jurassischen Wappen habe ich mit den entsprechenden Angaben aus Heft 16 ergänzt.
Hallo Rudolf, wie kommst du dazu dass diese Datei mit Adobe gezeichnet sei? Es ist doch eher so dass du eine Inkscape-Datei vom Register mit dem optimizer behandelt hast. Es wäre aber weit besser nichts, aber auch schon gar nichts vom Register zu verwenden,
und stattdessen diese Wappen neu zu zeichnen, in den Relationen und Tinkturen der Referenz. Wenn ich mal Zeit habe kann ich das machen; aber bitte, verwende keine Registerwappen !
Und mache keine falschen Angaben, die andere dann korrigieren müssen, nur weil du den SVGcheck verabscheust -- sarang♥사랑09:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
So genau habe ich nicht nachgeforscht; aber nun sehe ich, dass bereits das Register die komprimierte Datei enthalt, allerdings mit einem recht ineffizienten tool verdichtet. Solcher code sollte IMHO nicht in Commons hochgeladen werden - wir haben hier genug das besser sein sollte, da sollte nicht noch mehr von dieser Art kommen. -- sarang♥사랑13:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@Sarang: Ich würde vorschlagen, dass du dem Bündner Wappenregister zwei Wappen entnimmst, ein einfaches geometrisches und ein komplexeres figuratives, und diese dann so überarbeitest, dass sie deinen Ansprüchen genügen. Dann stelle diese beiden revidierten Wappen auf Commons ein und verfasse ein Tutorial, das Schritt für Schritt darstellt, wie man von einem ungenügendenden Wappen wie jenen im Bündner Register zu einem korrekten Wappen gelangt, so wie du es auf Commons sehen möchtest. Idealerweise sollte das Tutorial auch in verständlicher Weise darstellen, warum diese Anstrengungen unternommen werden sollen, warum also eine einfache W3C-Validierung des SVG-Codes nicht gut genug ist. Wenn wir diese beiden idealtypischen Wappen und das Tutorial vorzuweisen haben, können wir die Angelegenheit den Zeichnern im Forum der Wappenwerkstatt unterbreiten und schauen, ob sie darauf eingehen wollen. Vielleicht lassen sich sogar die Bündner Wappenkommission und das Staatsarchiv Graubünden davon überzeugen, dass für ihre Wappenzeichnungen strengere Kriterien zu gelten haben. ARK (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Gute Idee! Ich sehe nur eine grosse Schwierigkeit: viele können mit Inkscape oder einem andern tool umgehen, verstehen aber nichts von SVG und haben auch kaum die Bereitschaft, sich damit auseinanderzusetzen. Heraldik-Fachleute müssen ja wirklich keine tiefere Einsicht haben, was effizienter Code ist. Ich weiss dass das den meisten herzlich egal ist, wie eine Zeichnung intern aussieht, und sie wollen das garnicht wissen.
Natürlich kann ich zeigen wie zB aus Bündner 600x700.svg Schritt für Schritt ein vollständiges Wappen erstellt werden kann.
Ich kenne die SVG-Techniken und kann inzwischen auf den ersten Blick erkennen, welche Strukturen einfach sind und wie sie manuell erstellbar sind. Aber ganz sicher werden die meisten sich nach den ersten zwei Sätzen abwenden, weil sie garnicht verstehen um was es geht. Es gibt viele hundert Beispiele in SVG Simplified, auch über fünfhundert Wappen in SVG simplified Coats of Arms, einige mit ausführlicher Diskussion des Entstehungsprozesses.
Ich fürchte sehr, dass es mir an pädagogischem Geschick mangelt, so was rüberzubringen. Vor allem, wenn kein Interesse dafür besteht. Gerne werde ich exemplarisch ein paar der einfachen Bündner Wappen manuell zeichnen; aber ich habe schon oft gesehen dass Leute zum Ändern einer Farbe nicht einfach diese austauschen, sondern mit Inkscape drüber fahren und so aus 400 byte 40 KB machen.
Für komplexe Strukturen sind Inkscape&Co das optimale Mittel, vor allem wenn der Code anschliessend versäubert wird. Aber Inkscape und Adobe sind nicht imstande zu erkennen was einfach ist, und machen alles nach demselben Schema. Anstatt wie ich zu differenzieren -- sarang♥사랑14:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Aus heraldischer Höflichkeit sollte das erstere Wappen wohl seitenverkehrt erscheinen, auf dass es dem zweiteren zugeneigt sei. ARK (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Ja, überarbeite das Wappen doch mit deinem Schild von Bardonnex! Das Wappentier gewänne wohl auch mit einer etwas zurückhaltenderen Kontur. ARK (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Ich hab nochmal mein Schild von Bardonnex über die Vorlage aus 1925 gelegt. Ganz 100% stimmen die "Bögen" unten ja nicht überein. Bin ich zu pingelig?
Hab gestern einige Genfer Wappen überflogen. Wenn die Zweifel bzgl. dem Schild ausgeräumt sind werd ich die nächste Zeit einige davon angehen. Dafür reichen meine bescheidenen Inkscape-Kenntnisse aus. Fränsmer (talk) 16:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
ich dachte, es wäre einfach mittels dem Wappen von Confignon auch Cartigny und Celigny zu erschaffen. Aber die Muscheln sind von Delta9 nicht ganz wie in dem Wappenbuch (haben links und rechts je eine "Rippe" zu viel).
Kannst du die Muscheln bzw. eh dann auch die Wappen umsetzen?
Ich habe das Armorial des Communes Genevoises von de Montfalcon mal in der Bibliothek abfotografiert. Es wird jedoch ein paar Tage dauern, bis ich mich der Sache annehmen kann. ARK (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Fred de Siebenthal ist nicht nur der Herausgeber des Buchs von de Montfalcon, er wird auch als Zeichner der Wappen aufgeführt.
Bemerkung am Rande: Das Blau in diesem Buch ist bemerkenswert hell gehalten, so dass die Aargauer Palette meines Erachtens ganz gut passt. ARK (talk) 06:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Zwei weitere Genfer Wappen::
Versoix GE
Gy GE
Für die Garbe von Gy sollte man wahrscheinlich die Version aus der zweiten Auflage von 1977 nehmnen; die ist stärker stilisiert und wirkt besser bei kleiner Darstellung. ARK (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Le Conseil d'Etat du Canton du Vaud (2016). Arrêté 175.12.1 sur les armoiries communales (AAC)
Hi, I have seen your uploads where you cite as source l'Arrêté 175.12.1 sur les armoiries communales (AAC). I don't know if you've noticed but they use two types of azur in the annexe (for an exemple see both Froideville and Goumoëns, both on page 21 in the link). I'm aware of the Farbkarte Kanton Aargau but since the Fondation des Armoiries et Drapeaux Suisses is a german speaking organisation I'm not sure it is relevent to use their standard for the canton of Vaud. Since we have this Arrêté that covers all ground I think it would be much smarter to make all the coats of arms of Vaud municipalities according to it, using the same colors.
However, I'm afraid I can't support a new tincture specification for the Canton of Vaud, and I would urge that the Argau specification be used consistently as a de facto national standard instead.
In line with traditional heraldic principles, the Canton of Vaud's Arrêté sur les armoiries communales explicitly disavows any normative force that might accrue to the coats of arms therein included:
1 Seuls les blasonnements figurant dans le fichier central numérique font foi pour la traduction héraldique des armoiries communales.
2 Les extractions du fichier central figurant en annexe du présent arrêté sont présentées en tant qu'illustrations.
These arms are largely taken from the Armorial des communes vaudoises (1972). For the most part, I'm happy to adhere to the shield shapes and charges used in that work, but I fail to see the necessity or, indeed, wisdom of adopting the arbitrary undocumented tinctures used in the Arrêté's digitisation of these arms.
The Schweizerische Heraldische Gesellschaft (SHG) is a much older, much larger organisation than the defunct Stiftung Schweizer Wappen and Fahnen (SWF, 1986-2023) ever was. Both organisations have published extensively in both print and screen media, but neither has ever released any tincture specifications for either print or screen, nor shown any absolute consistency in the tinctures they used. The SWF, however, showed a fairly large degree of consistency in supporting as a de facto national standard the only creditable tincture specification ever published in Switzerland, the Farbkarte Wappen im Kanton Aargau (adopted on Commons as the Aargau tinctures template). The Canton of Graubünden's more recent Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen is not creditable due to its partial reliance on the set of wholly outdated "web safe" RGB colours, and for the awkward circumstance that the actual coats of arms published by the canton do not adhere to this specification to begin with, among other issues.
It seems sensible to follow the SWF in treating the Aargauer Farbkarte as a de facto national standard for one overriding practical reason: labour is a very scarce resource when it comes to improving the coverage of Swiss public heraldry on Commons, and the task ahead is dauntingly substantial. It would be misguided to waste the very limited labour we have available on the creation, consistent implementation, and controlling of twenty-six different cantonal tincture specifications when there is a perfectly serviceable national solution already at hand.
@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: I would also kindly request that you revert all those modifications to the file descriptions of arms posted by me where you incorrectly set the tinctures parameter from AG to VD. For the reasoning outlined above, I can neither support the modification of any of my uploads to conform to the proposed VD tinctures template. Thank you. ARK (talk) 14:06, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. I'm still puzzled because, while I agree that the AG palette is a good basis to make COA, the azure used is more celeste than azure, and from my understanding celeste is a colour that is widely used in the german world but not the french one. I do not have a problem with the rest of the colours from the AG palette, so maybe there is a middle ground somewhere (maybe a swiss-german palette and a romand palette with different azur). The azure used here (#037baf) would be somewhere between the colour you use and the one used by the french speaking Project, and coincidentally close to the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen from GR.
I know all of this is rather costly in time. It's for this reason that I want to make sure we get the direction right before continuing to make COAs. All in all I'm really glad that we have this opportunity to move away from the 3D effect for swiss COAs, which was always a mistake IMO, but I want to make sure that the colours used make sense within the history of the COAs. I think if we can solve the azure it's all straight forward from here. Thanks, Espandero (talk) 14:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, since you have not answered my previous message and you have uploaded File:CHE Céligny COA-06.svg I have created a new palette, Template:Tincture/drawRO (name might change since it clashes with an eventual romanian palette), which uses the same colours except the azur (taken from the FR palette), and I have uploaded a new file for Céligny using this palette. I made this new palette so I don't have to change all the other colours every time (they're almost the same as the FR palette anyway). I think it's unfortunate to double the work but I guess we cannot agree. I think Céligny is a fitting exemple of why I do not find the AG palette coherent for french speaking cantons given the fact that the municipality website clearly shows a deeper azur. It's regrettable that you give priorities to a palette from the other side of the country, but it is what is. Anyway thanks for your work and see you around. Kind regards, Espandero (talk) 13:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Philosophically, I don't see the need for further Swiss palettes. Unlike the AG palette, the proposed VD palette isn't based on a published standard that governs heraldic tinctures; it's based on who-knows-whose arbitrary digitisation of the canton's standard print armorial. While the proposed RO palette is based on a published standard, its modification to that standard doesn't really cover all the public heraldry of the region it purports to cover. The standard print work on Geneva's arms, for instance, features a fairly light azure tincture that is distinctly closer to the azure tincture of the established AG palette than of the proposed RO palette.
Pragmatically, I could support additional palettes if their introduction hastened the process of superseding the French-style "3-D" legacy arms of the 2006 to 2012 period. If, let's say, SpinnerLaserzthe2nd were to commit to making over the remainder of the canton of Vaud's not-yet-superseded communal arms -- complete with all the file description trappings, including the proper attribution of elements borrowed from prior art on Commons -- I'd be happy to allow my own work on the Vaud arms to be converted to the new palette.
@Fränsmer: Any thoughts on the azure issue in the Romandie?
@Sarang: If new palettes were to be introduced, I'd request that the documentation of the palettes be redesigned. It's very unfortunate that the current design allows for the provenance of any given tinctures palette to be ascertained only from the palette catalogue maintained by the German-language Wikiprojekt Wappen. This information should be available up-front with any tinctures palette specification on Commons. The same goes for the recommended usage of any given template, which may not be inferrable from the title alone. This, however, would obviously be an entirely different conversation. ARK (talk) 13:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer. I would like to say that the VD palette was never really what I had in mind when I started this discussion. I think it was made too fast and I'm much happier with the RO palette, even for Vaud. As for the COAs of Geneva, the much more recent publication Les communes de Genève et leurs armoiries uses a palette closer to the RO than the AG. But obviously colors are subject to interpretations and there is no wrong way of making COAs in this regard. Published standards don't really have more weight than other interpretations, and that might be the reason the swiss heraldry associations never took the time to actually decide on any real standard (and btw the AG palette is not even that close to the AG standard, especially the red).
The only real thing I'm interested in is making sure the COAs are as close as what the municipalities are used to. That's why I think it's important to look at the Arrêté for Vaud, or any sort of official versions in use. The impact of COAs on Wikipedia is quite significant and it's common to see the 3D versions on smaller municipalities' website. An exemple I like a lot: the flags used by the municipality of Massongex, in Valais, were made according to this file, which uses generic towers from the french COA project. Every small changes or mistakes we make might have an influence on how these COAs are made in the future. And if we stay true to current official versions maybe there won't need to be other people remaking every COAs in 10 years like we're doing now.
Anyway I'm happy to see that we are reaching an agreement on this matter. I hope we can also find a way to change the VD palette into the RO one @SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: . Kind regards, Espandero (talk) 14:32, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Article 3 of Arrêté 175.12.1 reaffirms the heraldic orthodoxy that only the textual descriptions (seuls les blasonnements) of the arms are legally binding, and that the heraldic drawings shown in the document are to be considered as illustrations only (sont présentées en tant qu'illustrations). The document does not have a single instance of the term céleste, yet in the file description of CHE Vully-les-Lacs COA.svg you take the liberty of tacitly amending the legal text's "azure" to "azur (céleste)." You also include a céleste tincture in your VD palette, despite the fact that the legal text does not call for it, and that the "special" tincture of céleste is virtually unknown to present-day Swiss heraldry. Those lighter hues of blue in the municipal arms of Aargau and Geneva, for instance, aren't instances of céleste either, they're manifestations of the fact that azure in Switzerland -- including some of its francophone parts -- is often rendered considerably lighter than it is in, say, France. So, instead of using the fairly light blue in the arms of Vully-les-Lacs VD as a rationale for the introduction of a céleste tincture that is unsupported by the legal text, why not use it as evidence that azure can be rendered as a lighter hue even in Vaud? Once that point is conceded, why not concede that the AG palette might be suitable for Vaud as well? Other than the azure, do you have objections regarding other tincture values in the AG palette that might render it unsuitable for Vaud? ARK (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, I had sent an email to the Vaud government and I had shown the arrêté to see if they use the VD palette. If the Vaud government replies, I will let @Espandero respond and we can see what we can do about the VD palette. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 18:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes I understand that the images in the Arrêté are only there for illustration purpose, and that's why I don't think the VD palette is necessary. Azur is the only problem I have with the AG palette. As far as I'm concerned municipalities that are shown with lighter azur in the Arrêté, like Goumoëns, can use the AG palette. I'm not advocating for a ban on lighter blue, only that we use it for the right situations. - Espandero (talk) 18:59, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: I'm afraid I cannot confirm your complaint regarding gules in the AG palette. The Farbkarte Wappen im Kanton Aargau calls for the "binding" (verbindlich) RGB value of 240, 0, 0, which maps exactly to the hex value of #f00000 as used in the AG palette. If you would like to substantiate any of the other alleged deviations from the Farbkarte that you claim to have found in the AG palette, please specify the diverging RGB and hex values!
The book Les communes de Genève et leurs armoiries is part of a series that isn't held in high regard for its lack of scholarly standards and its questionable design choices. Neither is it in any way official. De Montfalcon's book, by contrast, is publié sous les auspices des Archives d'État. Its revised second edition of 1977, which also comes with an avant propos de l'archiviste d'Etat, doesn't feature a significantly darker hue of azure.
If the arms depicted in the Arrêté 175.12.1 are understood to be for illustration purposes only, then why assume that the arbitrary and unheraldic difference between two different kinds of azure needs to be reproduced for encyclopedic purposes? Why not be consistent and use the lighter azure throughout, as it already appears in a pre-existing palette? ARK (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, you are right but the colors on the link are not correct compared to the RGB values (I only checked that, I should have been more careful). The RGB values of the palette are indeed correct.
Now as far as tinctures go I think your vision is too narrow-minded. Every choice in heraldry is an arbitrary choice. Like I've said, the fact that a palette has been made official by an organisation doesn't mean anything; you could still make Aargau's COAs with any tincture you'd want it would still be correct. The only thing that matters is that the description of the COA is correctly transcribed in the drawing. I am not saying "please stop making light azure COAs of Vaud". I was reaching out to ask you if you would consider switching to a darker azure because the lighter one is not used often in Vaud, and I'm using the Arrêté to show that (the second sentence of my first message is "I don't know if you've noticed but they use two types of azur in the annexe", which essentialy is the main message of this whole conversation).
And palettes are not part of the heraldry rulebook. We could honestly make as many palettes as we want. I could make my own palette with my own tinctures and upload COAs using it on Commons but to me it wouldn't make much sense to impose them on Wikipedia thereafter, just as much as I don't think it makes sense to apply a palette from the canton of Aargau to the COAs of many other cantons. On the French Wikipedia we have the Principle of least astonishment (which they have on English Wikipedia as well) and I think what I'm looking for here is in line with this principle. I want that when someone visits Wikipedia and then goes on the municipality's website they find two versions of the COA that are as close as possible in regards (so I guess Wikipedia:No original research also applies in my metodology, although the Blason project and Delta-9's COAs changed the game somehow), at least for the tincture because it's the most striking difference (the shape could be argued too, but to me it's not really a concern from what I've seen).
I understand that we have two very different philosophies concerning heraldry: you like to go dig into books and make COAs with defined tincture palettes; I like to make them closer to the latest official version possible. I think the middleground here is using a palette as long as the colors are the ones used by the municipality (azure being the only tincture that I have found to be a problem yet; sinople has different variation from time to time but I'm yet to find an exemple where the difference is as clear as the dark/light azure). I think Celigny is also a great exemple of that for Geneva: as mentioned already the municipality's website shows a dark azure and your version of the COA uses a light azure. To me it doesn't make sense to put your version on Wikipedia in this scenario.
Now I'm not sure why this conversation is circling back as I thought we had an agreement. By the way I want to make sure you know that SpinnerLaserzthe2nd and I are not exactly on the same page so please do not take what he says or does as mine. I do not really aprove of the changes he makes to files that are not his, like the ones he made of my version of the Lully COA yesterday. Like I've said, for me the perfect solution is using the RO palette, which uses the AG tinctures except for the azure. Best regards, Espandero (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I know you don’t like the changes I made but what if people wanted to correct the colours because if you take a look carefully at this section on Lully's website, you will find an image of the municipality’s COA right beside the description of the COA. Does Vaud ever had its own council/organization that takes care of COAs from Vaud? I had sent an email to the cantonal government of Vaud about which the palette they are using and I am awaiting a response from them. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 22:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
You really should read COM:OW. Like any other guidline, abuses can lead to blocking I guess. The main thing to understand is that, for COAs, you can only overwrite if you are correcting an obvious mistake. Since I made the delibarate choice of the colours there is no mistake. But this is an entire different discussion so if you have other questions regarding this matter you should talk to me on my talkpage, because now we're polluting ARK's talkpage with things that have nothing to do with him. Espandero (talk) 22:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
To clarify. The Canton of Vaud makes available a potted history of les armoiries communales, highlighting the collaboration between the Cantonal Archives and the Commission cantonale des armoiries communales, which resulted in Olivier Dessemontet and Louis Nicollier's tome Armorial des communes vaudoises of 1972. As pointed out above, the illustrations in this book form the basis of the illustrations in the Arrêté 175.12.1 sur les armoiries communales of 2017. And yes, Nicollier's arms use a fairly dark azure, which is reflected in the majority of the azure in the Arrêté, with the lighter azure in a few of the arms most likely being an editing glitch of sorts. Feel free to contact me via email, and I'll send you a few snaps of the arms in the book.
While Nicollier's drawings in Dessemontet's book are as "official" as they can be, I don't believe an official formal digitisation of their tinctures has ever been offered. The illustrations in the Arrêté are pretty much an informal digitisation. As far as I'm aware, only the cantons of Aargau and Graubünden have ever published formal digital palettes for their municipal arms. Our best bet might be to ask the Vaud Cantonal Archives to create such a palette. Then again, the commitment to implement such a palette consistently across the board for the whole set of the canton's municipal arms on Commons would have to be there, and I'm mostly looking at SpinnerLaserzthe2nd for this to happen. Short of somebody stepping in who is known to be able to turn over large bodies of work at speed, my strong preference would be for the consensus between Fränsmer and I to prevail, namely that the Vaud's inappropriate "3D" arms should be superseded by new drawings using Nicollier's shield shape and the AG palette, with Delta-9 et al.'s drawings properly attributed whenever they happen to be re-used. ARK (talk) 08:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I really don't understand this obsession with palettes. The reason I'm here is not to demonstrate that Vaud has a palette, or to ask that such palette is made (this is only SpinnerLaserzthe2nd's doing). I really could care less about palettes. I only made Template:Tincture/drawRO so we can find a consensus for municipalities in Romandy because using the lighter azure on those COAs doesn't make sens in most cases given what's in use today (and even as you said yourself given Nicollier's work).
I do not think the decision between you and Fränsmer is anywhere near a consensus because this doesn't only affect German Wikipedia, so my voice should have meaning in all this. A consensus would be to use the RO palette because it's the midpoint in our likings (AG palette but with darker azur). I don't know what I've said for your message from 13:03, 17 May 2023 to be forgotten like this. It seemed we were close to agreeing, so I'm sorry if I said anything that offended you.
Then again if you chose to continue with the AG palette I will go ahead with what I've said on 13:46, 11 May 2023: I will make separate files for each municipalites when I feel the AG palette is not justified. It will be a pain in the ass but if we cannot reach an agreement it's the only solution that makes sens to me. Espandero (talk) 08:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: I'd imagine SpinnerLaserzthe2nd would still be opposed if I supported your proposal.
@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: If I supported Espandero's RO palette, would you retract your VD palette and support it as well? You didn't seem to have any problem supporting the AG palette for Vaud arms before Espandero raised his issue with the azure. If Espandero's proposed palette were adopted, the Vaud arms might still stay in the AG camp rather than switching to the RO camp because even the Arrêté's darker azure might still be closer to the AG palette's azure than the #2B5DF2 tincture that the proposed RO palette borrows from the French palette.
@Fränsmer: As I recall, you've raised the concern in the past that the azure in the AG palette might be too light for some municipal arms, especially in the canton of Fribourg. Could you support the proposed RO palette since its #2B5DF2 tincture addresses this concern? ARK (talk) 16:51, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
It depends on the municipality in Vaud. If we found out that a municipality in Vaud does not use the RO palette, then we can use the VD one. Like I said before, I had sent the email to the Vaud government regarding the palette. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Where? In the Arrêté Rossenges' COA is made in the same tinctures as the rest. I honestly believe the more logical approach is to stick to RO for most and AG for Avenches (I think), Valbroye, Vully-les-Lacs, Goumoëns, Tévenon and Echichens. I think two palettes is enough to cover the color differences. I guess the green in the Arrêté is a little darker than the sinople of AG but since it's not a matter of dark green/light green I don't feel too strongly about it. Let's make things simpler and drop the VD palette, which was never asked for. - Espandero (talk) 18:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: Thanks! Just to make sure, though: by withdrawing the VD palette, do you also give your explicit backing to Espandero's RO palette?
If we're going to introduce the RO palette, I think we should follow the established precedent in which Swiss heraldic standards are specified on a per-canton base rather than a per-municipality base: see, for instance, this German-language list of cantonal armorials (caveat: it's a work in progress). We'd say, then, that the RO palette is, for example, recommended for the Canton of Valais, but that the AG palette remains the recommendation for those romand cantons whose standard armorial indicates a preference for a lighter azur, as seems to be the case with Geneva. Would this be palatable? ARK (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
We will let other Swiss users (apart from Esperanto and Sherwood since we already know them a lot) decide because we don’t want to start another series of tensions between the German part and the French part (which what happened in Jura back then right before it became a separate canton). SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 20:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Just so we're clear, what SpinnerLaserzthe2nd is refering to is the conversation he started on the Swiss project on french Wikipedia. I do not think more people will participate in a meaningful manner, as is often the case with those kind of subjects. Sherwood6 and I are the only ones working specifically on swiss municipalities on fr Wikipédia.
ARK: I think implementing rules like that shouldn't be necessary. There are cases like Versoix where they use the light azur and some like Gy that use a really dark tone. From what I can see on this page Auguste de Montfalcon also used real gold for or so the azur is kinda cherrypicking because AG would not be as similar a palette. The best way to make sure would be to have a list like the Arrêté for each canton, but in the current situation leaving the freedom of choice between AG and RO is better IMO. I could email the Archives d'Etat of Geneva tomorrow to see if they have such a list somewhere if you find it helpful. - Espandero (talk) 21:21, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
You guys are very fast in this discussion compared to other (heraldic) Wikipedia discussions :)
On the one hand I like the fact, the AG palette fits to so many regions. If there was no bavarian palette and no alsatian palette, AG would work there very well. But I also see the problem in the lack of a darker blue. But neither the RO nor the VD palette does have Carnation. So which palette works for Saint-Martin, Valais?
If we would discuss about Germany I'd definitely agree with the idea of every municipality could differ from regional standards, just because in some regions even neighbour municipalities can have their CoA roots in different decades, differrent heraldists... The one swiss canton I can see such in rudiments seems Fribourg.
I don't get very comfortable with the RO palette's blue. For me it is a darker version inside what I still call celeste.
@Espandero I do not know if municipality websites are good references. Who is responsible for the colors they use there? The web design agency? The guys who made the town's corporate design? Is there really heraldic competence involved or even available inside the municipal administration?
For which cantons would you want to establish the RO standard? Most Jura CoAs can be seen as "bernish" by Jenni? How about Fribourg? When I see the reference, coloring the CoA of the City of Fribourg in RO blue can be seen as cherrypicking, too :P - for me the blue used in Fribourg's CoA book by de Vevey is neither RO nor AG. Fränsmer (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
So, I see the necessarity for a blue that fits for individual cases like Fribourg but that is not the RO blue in my opinion but we also need Carnation. RO does not have that. Fränsmer (talk) 21:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
You feel the RO's azure is a kind of celeste? I'm not sure I understand? Did you mean the AG palette?
For the municipalities' website, I'm mentioning them because, like I said earlier in this conversation, I think it's important to see what's in use within the municipalities. Of course it can differ a lot from one municipality to another but I'm only suggesting we aim as close as that with both RO and AG.
I haven't really looked at Jura yet but the RO palette would suit Valais well and a majority of Vaud. Fribourg is a tricky one because I guess they could be influenced by the german speaking part. But as I said I don't want to establish a standard, I would like for the RO and AG palettes to be used when it seems necessary.
And for carnation I would personnaly use the one from the FR palette but I honestly don't have a preference. - Espandero (talk) 22:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
I wanna rephrase a bit what I said in my last message: IMO the best way to work is with a list like the Arrêté, which is recent and coherent from start to finish (except maybe the lighter azur ones, but they're coherent within themselves so not a problem). Municipalities' websites are a last ressort for when we can't find such a list.
I would have liked a bit of homogeneity throughout Switzerland, that's why I like the idea of having only the RO and AG palettes. VD could also work but then it means we need to change every colour on the COAs that have already been made. In general I'm more in favour of recent exemples of COAs and if we go with the VD palette we need to find a source with a distinct palette for the other french speaking cantons. That's why I'm not really a fan of taking de Montfalcon's work for this, as he uses an old style palette with real gold. So we either ask the Archives d'Etat if they have such a list or use Les communes de Genève et leurs armoiries which is the most recent book about the GE COAs (I understand it wasn't made with the Archives d'Etat but it was made by qualified people anyway, it's a serious book). - Espandero (talk) 08:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: There's a simple reason why the arms on the websites of Versoix and Gy look so different.
The heraldic image mark in the Versoix logo is based on the version of the municipality's coat of arms by Fred de Siebenthal in the Armorial des communes genevoises of 1925. Hence the shield shape, and hence the light azur. The heraldic image mark in the Gy logo is simply a reworking of Delta-9's take on de Siebenthal's design, using the Projet Blasons' ostensibly Swiss shield template, which underlies all the Swiss "3D" arms. I have just posted the revised CHE Versoix COA.svg and CHE Gy COA.svg using the AG palette, whose light azure is an adequate match for the light azure in de Montfalcon's work on Geneva's municipal arms. The second edition of de Montfalcon's work (1977), incidentally, seeks to modernize de Siebenthal's drawings. It does so by using a distinctly odd shield shape, which I wouldn't recommend for adoption, but the drawings as such are simplified and still have a contemporary feel to them. The metallic effect used for argent and or in both editions of de Montfalcon's work is an unfortunate fad of the 1920's. The Café HAG [Armorial de la Suisse] was using that effect in the 1920s as well but had the good sense to abandon it in the 1930s. I don't think de Montfalcon's work should be judged unfavourably because of this aesthetic lapse. It's a rigorous scholarly work, which all too often cannot be said of the heraldic series published by Ketty & Alexandre, which suffers from plenty of aesthetic lapses of its own.
Ok, given your explanation I think AG sounds like a fair palette for Geneva, but for Gy I'm having doubts because even if the municipality used Delta9's work, they still changed it to a really dark azur. Maybe there's a historical reason behind that. Should I seek the Archives d'Etat's opinion on this just to make sure? - Espandero (talk) 12:26, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, third message in a row but I've just tried the Armée suisse palette on the Vouvry COA and I really don't think this red works in more complex designs. Its a good fit for the cantons but not for the municipalities I guess. - Espandero (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero Yes I feel the RO's blue is a kind of light blue or celeste. When I have in mind palettes like BW, BY or UA or the blue of the french flag I cannot other than subsuming RO's blue under light blue or celeste. Fränsmer (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
If from your POV the azure from the RO palette is too close to céleste, then the azure from the AG palette is céleste. Now I wouldn't be against swaping the RO azure against, say, the azure from the GN palette, but it's a much darker azure compared to the VD one. I think being exposed more to the FR azure this last few days I'm starting to feel it's not a great tincture. It feels almost purply. - Espandero (talk) 21:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: It's good to know you aren't impressed by the tinctures used in the Swiss Army's Règlement 51.340 sur les drapeaux. Neither am I.
On Commons, these tinctures have been made into the CH palette, but the template has found only very limited usage. Doc Taxon has used it for a small number of Swiss municipal arms, but its main application has been only for the cantonal arms contained in the Règlement.
These cantonal arms, most of them distinguished by the suffix "matt" in their file names, have their place in Commons history. They were posted to Commons as part of the first efforts to push back against Delta-9's "3D" arms on the French model. When these matte arms first appeared, they did manage to replace Delta-9's glossy set of cantonal arms right away. ARK (talk) 10:22, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
I believe there is room for new cantons files while we are at it. I like that the current files are a set using the same source and I had to fight to keep them that way, but it could be argued that a more "common" red is needed. Maybe the AG palette can be used for that, since its azure is slightly similar to the Swiss Army's règlement. But that would be an entirely different conversation.
For the matter at hand, I'll send an email to the Archives d'État this week-end to ask for their view on this. I feel some sort of cooperation with them would be really interesting and would take all this work to a more official level. - Espandero (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
On Wikiprojekt Wappen we've had a fair amount of discussion over the palettes we endorse in the palette calogue. At one point Doc Taxon, having apparently given up on the Federal Department of Defence's tinctures as a potential national standard, suggested that the AG palette could be renamed to CH. I opposed the idea because the AG palette is known outside Commons as the "Farbkarte Aargau", and changing the name away from "Aargau" would break a vital link between the AG palette on Commons and the Farbkarte it is based on.
I wonder, though, if we could revisit the idea of abandoning the CH palette in favour of the AG tinctures, but do so -- per Fränsmer's request -- in the context of providing the "non-heraldic" extra tinctures (primarily carnation and purple). So the New CH palette would be a superset of the AG palette that has all the AG tinctures but also includes extra tinctures. One could even have two variants of the New CH palette: New CH 1 and New CH 2, whereby New CH 1 would retain the lighter blue of the AG tinctures and New CH 2 would introduce the darker blue that would be more appropriate in some cases. This would put both the RO palette and the legacy CH palette out of business and leave the AG palette as a slightly redundant oddity that would still be chugging alongside, perhaps to be joined by any other cantonal palettes we still might want to define in the future (such as a potential GR palette, once the Bündner Wappenkommission has fixed the palette's glaring shortcomings). Just thinking out loud, obviously... ARK (talk) 19:44, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
ARK: this seems to me like a great idea, much closer to what I intended when I started this conversation. Like I said on my talk page, my choice for the darker azure would be the one used on this file. This way we can cover all grounds and we'll have a more homogeneous set of files. - Espandero (talk) 12:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, @Espandero: just checking -- would you be happy to abandon both the proposed RO and the legacy CH palettes for a new CH palette that came in two variants, one with the legacy AG azure, one with a yet-to-be-specified darker blue? If so, would you recolour the matte cantonal arms using the new CH-1 palette, or would you allow these arms to remain as they are, thereby leaving them unassigned to any specified template? ARK (talk) 12:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes we can delete or put aside the RO palette for a CH palette with darker azure than AG. For the current cantonal arms I'd leave the files as they are since they represent the matt set. I don't think it's a problem to have two different sets for the same thing. The flags I can see on Google Maps for Luzern, Ticino and Zug use a darker azure than the matt files but I don't think it's a problem to use the AG palette given the current tinctures used. - Espandero (talk) 13:23, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Modern Swiss public heraldry usually seeks to limit itself to the six regular tinctures (argent, or, azure, gules, vert, and sable), avoiding the irregular ones wherever possible. The irrgular tincture tawny (brown) made it into the Farbkarte Aargau only because some Aargau municipalities refused to take the cantonal heraldic commission's advice of dropping the brown tincture from their arms. Other irregular tinctures that occasionally show up in Swiss public heraldry are carnation and purpure. Céleste doesn't exist. Neither do naranja, cendré, or anything else. Not that I'm aware of, anyway.
Carnation is often sneaked into the rendering of a coat of arms even though the blazon does not mention it. For instance, the municipal coats of arms of the canton of Zurich are composed only of the regular tinctures, according to their blasons. Carnation is used tacitly, however, whenever there's the face or body part of a Caucasian person shown.
Purpure is specified explicitly in a blason whenever it appears in Swiss public heraldry.
I've just posted a test rendering of the St. Stephan BE arms, which require, implicitly, carnation and, explicitly, purpure (the saint's brown outfit in the legacy arms on Commons is incorrect according to the official blazon).
I've mixed and matched the AG palette's regular tinctures with the irregular tinctures specified in the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen] [PDF], that's RGB #ffbb99 for carnation and #880080 for purpure, which looks acceptable to me.
This might also suggest that the azure specified in the Bündner Standard (#0033ff) could be used for the darker blue we seek to incorporate in the second variant of the new CH palette, resulting in a hybrid twopack of palettes composed entirely of colour values taken from the two official tincture specifications available in this country.
Yes that would be perfect. Both carnation and purpure look great, as does the azure.
For the Troistorrents COA I didn't use carnation when I made it because I knew it was an irregular tincture (see this file). I'm thinking of touching up the design a bit, should I add carnation? For purpure I can think of Chardonne's COA but the description only says fleuris au naturel. It's not really explicit but it should be purpure anyway right? Thank you. - Espandero (talk) 21:29, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks!
This would seem like an elegant and straightforward solution. There's a catch, however.
Sarang has gone ahead with the Graubünden arms and created a GR template, which already has a few implementations in its Commons category (several of which should not be there in their current version because they do not use the tincture values as specified in the palette).
The main problem with Sarang's GR palette is that it specifies the colours as implemented in the SVG arms published by the canton of Graubünden], whereas the heraldic palette published by the canton, contained in the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen [PDF], has a different set of tincture values. Thus the azure used in the official arms is #1c63b7, whereas the palette specifies #0033ff, for instance.
A couple of months ago, I had a brief email exchange about this matter with the president of the Bündner Wappenkommission, who acknowledged the problem. It doesn't look like anything has been done to fix that problem, though.
Neither carnation nor purpure appear to be implemented anywhere in the set of official Graubünden arms, so, contrary to the azure, we only have the specified values to work with for these two irregular tinctures, not the implemented ones.
If we wanted to implement the proposed mix-and-match CH palette now, we'd need to go with the specified GR tincture values, not the implemented ones. This, however, would create an incompatibility between the new CH palette and the GR palette.
We could press the Bündner Wappenkommission and ask them to resolve the issue one way or the other; adjust the specification to the implemented values or vice versa. This would take some time.
Immediately available would be the solution of switching the GR template to the tincture values specified by the Bündner Wappenkommission. This would mean that every one of the hundred-or-so official SVG arms would have to be re-tinctured for Commons so as to comply with the official specification. ARK (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
I would be more in favor of switching the GR template to the tincture values specified by the Bündner Wappenkommission. If some files are not correct according to that we could flag them as such and slowly replace them. I don't think time is an issue. As long as we know which files still need some work done I think it'll be fine. - Espandero (talk) 12:56, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Fair enough. To be clear, however: SpinnerLaserzthe2nd and I have both just posted a coat of arms that actually complies both with the aspect ratio and the RGB values specified in the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen, Obersaxen Mundaun COA.svg and CHE Rhäzüns COA.svg. I don't think there's yet a single other file available on Commons that meets both of these criteria, and since none of the SVG files published in the Bündner Wappenregister comply with the Wappenkommission's own RGB values, this would leave some 100 arms to be re-tinctured and uploaded to Commons.
For use in Inkscape, here's a palette of the Bündner tinctures as specified:
Five of the six canonical tinctures in the Bündner Wappenkommission's specification use a "web safe" RGB value (only the yellow defies the pattern). This doesn't look like a set of tinctures carefully chosen for today's digital environment. It looks like a set of colours copied and pasted from a random manual of the nineteen-nineties, when technical limitations still imposed rather narrow constraints on what RGB colour values could be used. These constraints are no longer a concern today, as no legitimate reason exists any longer for limiting one's work to the small set of "web safe" colours.
There's also an aesthetic aspect to this. The RGB colours mandated by the Bündner Standard (especially the #f00 and the #03f) are the kind of colours that get referred for re-tincturing to the Wikiprojekt Wappen with some frequency because they are felt to be "too garish" (zu grell).
Whereas the RGB values implemented in the Bündner Wappenregister look decent enough (they may have been arrived at by way of automated conversion from CMYK), I have my reservations about the RGB values specified in the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen.
Maybe we should look for our darker blue, carnation and purpure elsewhere.
Then again, when setting up the Bavarian palette, we relied on the implemented rather than the specified RGB values of the reference, and for the very same reason: we didn't like all those "web safe" colours in there. The root of the isse might be that colour specifications for heraldry still get drawn up by people who primarily work in the CMYK colour space and can't be asked to keep up with what's been happening in the RGB space during the last two decades or so. ARK (talk) 10:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I agree with you that #f00 and #03f are not looking great. It would be all right with me to use the implemented azure instead. For purpure and carnation I think the versions in your Inkscape palette work well. It's a pity that we have to mix the way we chose the colours but I think it's the better option. - Espandero (talk) 11:00, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes, but on the other hand: cherry-picking between the specified and the implemented Bündner RGB values feels like an inelegant hack. An entirely different idea might be contacting the Staatsarchiv Aargau and asking them if they'd be interested in extending their Farbkarte along the lines of our discussion above, so that the extended specification would become a viable national reference for Commons and beyond. They might decline because the aim is perhaps outside their remit as a cantonal institution. If they accepted, however, I have little doubt they would do a good job. It wouldn't be an instant fix, but in the end we'd have a solid specification from a single authoritative source. ARK (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
What if we simply take the values from the squares on page 5 of the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen for azure, purpure and carnation without looking at the RGB values (so in hex #0166B3 for azure, #A13D96 for purpure and #F59680 for carnation)? I feel the RGB values are quite clearly mistakes since both the squares on page 5 and the COA they have listed on their website use the same tinctures. If I understand your message from 10:46, 28 May 2023 correctly when you contacted them about this they said it was a mistake right? If so the only issue is they never fixed the RGB values on the PDF, and I wouldn't really see it as cherrypicking if we select all 3 the same way. Even if it has mistakes I think the Bündner Standard is a solid enough source to base part of the palette on.
It would obviously be easier to take that route anyway. With the Staatsarchiv Aargau it would feel more convoluted than need be and I have a strong feeling they would decline (have you had any contact with them in the past?). - Espandero (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: I have never talked to the Staatsarchiv Argau regarding this template. I have, however, discussed the Bündner Standard für Wappendarstellungen with the president of the Bündner Wappenkommission. I put it to him that surely the RGB values specified in that document were used in error. He replied that, no, they were indeed the correct ones. This discussion occurred about half a year ago and didn't result in any changes to either the implemented or the specified RGB values used on GR.ch. We might start importing the Bündner coats of arms into Commons using the SVG files provided on the official website, and we might assign the GR palette to them that Sarang created on the basis of the implemented rather than the specified RGB values. However, we'd be doing so at the peril that the Wappenkommission might still decide to convert all their implemented coats of arms to the specified values.
Your suggestion of using the RGB values used in the PDF specification might provide a quick fix to the issue, but I can't confirm that these values correspond to the implemented values, depending on what method is used to determine what the values are.
I get values that differ from yours when I either use the eyedropper tool in Firefox directly on the PDF, and when I import the PDF to Inkscape. Here's a table that lists all the different values:
GR Colour
Implemented
Specified
PDF Espandero
PDF Firefox
PDF Inkscape
Azure
#1C63B7
#0033FF
#0166B3
#0065b7
#1C63B7
Carnation
—
#FFBB99
#F59680
#FF9581
#FF9581
Purpure
—
#880080
#A13D96
#9C3EA0
#9F2899
I notice that the azure values determined by importing the PDF to Inkscape are an exact match of the azure as implemented in the official Bündner coats of arms. In that case, wouldn't we want to use the carnation and purpure values in that column, assuming that those would be the implented values if carnation and purpure were implented anywhere in any Bündner arms (which apparently they are not)? ARK (talk) 12:16, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
The answer from the president of the Bündner Wappenkommission is very strange since the values ARE wrong according to every other aspect of their work (pfd and list). I doubt they'll remake the COAs in the colors specified in RGB given how ugly they are. The PDF Inkscape column seems like the best option to me. It's odd that the Bündner Wappenkommission specified carnation and purpure since none of their COAs use them (even for Klosters), but it's great for us I guess. - Espandero (talk) 13:07, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero: There is no plausible explanation for the discrepancy between the specified and the implemented tincture values of the Bündner Standard, especially since the Standard explicitly states that its colour values do indeed govern the files provided. There might be an explanation for the inclusion of the irregular tinctures in that the primary intended use case of this document seems to be the creation of new municipal coats of arms among the current proliferation of municipal mergers: Even if the arms eventually approved in any future merger are unlikely to be rendered in anything other than the regular tinctures, the designers of newly submitted arms may perhaps be given the opportunity of at least making a case for the use of irregular tinctures. Who knows.
Using the tincture values from the PDF Inkscape column in the above table, the proposed palettes for CH-1 and CH-2 are the following, then:
I've run two tests using these palettes: St. Stephan for carnation and purpure, and Vufflens-le-Château for the darker azure. I feel that the carnation tincture might be a bit too salmon-looking, but given that carnation is so ephemeral in the scheme of things, I guess I could live with that.
I've started to work with the new palette for Valais and Vaud. I really like it, especially for Monthey and Val-d'Illiez. For a few of the VS ones, Taktaal had already made SVGs without the 3D effect, but I remade them with the CH-2 palette and the shield shape discussed. I only changed the SVG COAs on the french speaking Wikipedia because I don't want to globally replace his work without checking first.
For VD I'm focusing on the Aigle district for now. Some were already made without the 3D aspect so I'm wondering if for the likes of Chessel you'd like me to upload a separate file with the CH-2 palette or if you don't mind me overwriting your version, with the azure the only adjustment? - Espandero (talk) 13:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't mind having the azure in all of my Vaud arms changed to the value specified in the GR palette. As a matter of practicality, however, I would advise that you hold off making these changes until the new CH palette is formally specified and can be used in the file description.
The formal specification has been delayed because I allowed myself to be get sidetracked into firming up the coverage of the Graubünden arms. I'm still having discussions about the new CH palette with Sarang , who believes the palette should be a single specification rather than two separate variants, with the distinction between the darker and the lighter blue being mapped onto the distinction, already implemented, between azure and céleste (I disagree). I'm also planning to post the proposal to the Wikiprojekt Wappen Forum for a final round of consultations. ARK (talk) 12:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the zip file. I'll try to rework the Bex and Aigle COAs accordingly as there are a lot of details I'm not really happy about. I don't have a lot of time right now but I should be able to do it and to continue switching the VS files' shield shape in two weeks. Best regards, Espandero (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
il n'y a pas de quoi!
Sarang's mathematically crafted shields (écus en pointe) for the cantons of Vaud and Valais should become available in the escutcheon shapes category shortly.
The Armorial Valaisan isn't very good at providing blazons (as in French blasonnements). However, there's an informative piece on the municipal arms of Saint-Maurice District, which has all the blazons and detailed summaries on the provenance of the respective arms. I've worked the information into the file description of c:File:CHE St Maurice COA.svg. You might want to do likewise for the district's other municipalities. ARK (talk) 07:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
@Doc Taxon, Espandero, and Sarang: In the WPW Forum, Doc Taxon has just strongly supported my proposal of using three colour codes for blue values in the revised CH Palette: "b" for the darker blue of the GR Palette, identified as azure in the colour box; "B" for the lighter blue of the AG Palette, identified as "céleste" in the colour box; and "l" (for "light azure" or "lichtes Blau") also of the AG Palette, also identified in the colour box as azure. We might still treat the "B" as an undocumented feature that isn't listed in the documentation, given that céleste is such a marginal irregular tincture. The three codes would give us two equally valid azure values in the palette, one darker, one lighter, without structurally conflating the lighter azure with céleste. The revised CH palette would also maintain compatibility with the French palette by including céleste for the exceedingly rare occasions in which actual céleste is required. I believe this would be a sane and structurally sound palette design to adopt.
What to do, exactly? The files in question can either be reworked to conform to the revised CH Palette, or they can be released, as they are, into the wilderness of arms that do not conform to a specified palette, or they can be re-assigned to the original CH palette once that palette has been re-issued under a different name. Personally, I'd favour the option of re-issuing the original CH palette under a new name and assigning the files in question to this palette. For the re-issue of the palette I'd suggest a name such as SF for "Schweizer Fahnenreglement" [PDF, 7.3 MB] or "Swiss Flag Regulations". What say you? ARK (talk) 10:51, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'm happy to see that things are moving forward. I also support your proposal for the revised CH Palette.
For the canton's COAs, I think it's best if we keep them as they are and create a new SF palette. It's the best solution in regards to the overwriting rules of Commons anyway. - Espandero (talk) 16:29, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Espandero, Sarang, and SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: The revised CH palette has got off to a good start, as it now sports more than 300 files in its Commons category. These files have mostly been re-categorised from the non-Aargau arms in the AG palette category, with modifications made to the tinctures where required, such as darkening the azure in arms pertaining to the cantons of Vaud and Valais. Some of the arms in the CH palette category have also been retinctured from the colour values specified in the former CH Palette, whose remaining implementations are now gathered in the SF palette category. Another batch of arms in the CH palette category have also been retinctured from the RO palette category and the VD palette category. As the CH palette now satisfactorily resolves the darker azure issue, whose previous lack of a resolution was the sole rationale for the RO and VD palettes, would it be acceptable to you to have those two palettes and their corresponding Commons categories removed? Having outlived their usefulness in moving the discussion along, I believe they now only pose a maintenance issue we can do without. Their removal would also bring closure to this whole lengthy discussion. ARK (talk) 18:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks,@Espandero: As far as I understand the process, I believe the most straightforward way to remove the palettes, as well as their respective Commons categories, would be for their creators to post a speedy deletion request. In your case, this would involve the RO template. ARK (talk) 19:41, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
Right, I've started by asking for the delition of the var files that still use the RO palette. Once they are gone I'll ask for the deletion of the template and all related pages. - Espandero (talk) 08:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Tinkturen weglassen bringt die Dateien in eine Wartungskategori, die schon sehr viele Eintrage hat.
Inkarnat heisst bei uns 'carnation' ("c", im Gegensatz zu "C" fur céleste) Du kannst jeden beliebigen Farbton in der RO-Palette einstellen (carnation ist je nach Palette gelb bis orange). Ich hab in Tincture/drawRO schon mal die Beispiele c und p aktiviert, mit den dort definierten Farben. Die Kategorie nannte ich "Swiss romande", ist dir "Romandie" lieber ?
Mit RO und CH haben wird doch schon zwei helvetische Paletten, was die Uberlegungen mit S1 und S2 obsolet macht ? Oder soll es einen eigenen Namen fur die Deutschschweiz geben ? Jede Palette kann naturlich jetzt schon zwei Blau haben, b und B. -- sarang♥사랑17:30, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Das Problem mit der Wartungskategorie ist ihre Beschreibung als "Wartungkategorie" im Sinne der Erwartung, dass jemand dort "Wartung" vorzunehmen habe. Den vollen Umfang der 21'948 Dateien, die gegenwärtig als Wartungsfall erfasst sind, wird aber bestenfalls irgendwann einmal eine KI warten. Das Problem löst sich jedoch von selber auf, wenn man Wappen ohne definierte Palette nicht als Regelverstoss, sondern bloss als faktische Begebenheit wertet.
Der auf Deutsch geläufige Ausdruck für carnation ist "Inkarnat". Das gilt auch für die Malerei. Die primäre Sprache auf Commons ist jedoch Englisch, hence carnation. Der korrekte französische Ausdruck für die französischsprachige Schweiz ist "Suisse romande" -- was dem Ausdruck "Romandie" vorzuziehen wäre, weil es in einem internationalen Kontext verständlicher ist. Die anglophone Wikipedia verwendet dafür "Romandy", was jedoch die meisten englischen Muttersprachler ohne geografische Nachhilfe auch nicht verstehen. Bitte warte noch zu mit der Überarbeitung der RO Palette, denn wenn mein Vorschlag der erweiterten AG Palette einen Konsens findet, dann wird die neu vorgeschlagene RO Palette obsolet.
Wenn mein Vorschlag der erweiterten AG Palette einen Konsens findet, dann werden die neu vorgeschlagene RO Palette und die bestehende CH Palette obsolet. Es ist mir bekannt, dass jede Palette bereits azure und céleste zulässt, aber céleste ist eine "Sondertinktur", also eine jener Tinkturen, die im strikten Sinn als unheraldisch zu gelten haben. Sondertinkturen sind in der Schweiz eigentlich verpönt. Die verschiedenen kantonalen Wappenkommissionen, die im Verlauf der letzten hundert Jahre eingesetzt wurden um die Gemeindewappen zu "bereinigen", kämpften eigentlich immer für die Abschaffung der Sondertinkturen. Oft scheiterten sie jedoch mit diesem Ansinnen am Widerstand der Gemeinden, die zum Beispiel das Braun in ihrem Wappen nicht aufgeben wollten -- deshalb (und 'bloss' deshalb) enthält die AG Palette ein Braun. Es geht nun nicht darum, eine céleste Sondertinktur zu haben, sondern es gilt dem Umstand Rechnung zu tragen, dass der Farbton der regulären Tinktur Blau in einigen Gebieten der Schweiz üblicherweise eher heller, in anderen Gebieten eher dunkler dargestellt wird. Deshalb die zwei Varianten der vorgeschlagenen neuen CH Palette: eine mit regulärem helleren Blau, die andere mit regulärem dunkleren Blau. Kein céleste. Kein lavierendes Gewurstel mit der BY Palette (Braun, Inkarnat und Purpur als Zugeständnisse an die Realität, dass diese Sondertinkturen halt manchmal auch vorkommen). ARK (talk) 12:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Doc besteht darauf dass das Fehlen einer Tinkturangabe, bzw eine Tinktur ohne Palette als fehlerhaft kategorisiert wird. Mein Einwand, dass es Fälle gibt wo das zugelassen werden muss (z.B. merkwürdige Farben in einer PNG) wurde nicht erhört. Leider habe ich so gar keine fachliche Kompetenz, nur meinen Zweifel an solchen Kategorien.
In der RO-Experimentierpalette habe ich mal das carnation-Feld "inkarnat" genannt; gibt aber eher heilloses Durcheinander als dass es eine Hilfe wäre: der one-letter-code sollte "c" bleiben, und in den Kategorien der Tinkturkombinationen muss es weiterhin "carnation" heissen. -- sarang♥사랑16:27, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Es war nie meine Absicht, irgendwelche Änderungen an den Tinkturnamen der Paletten vorzuschlagen. Ich wollte bloss die Korrektheit des deutschen Worts Inkarnat verteidigen. Bitte entschuldige die mangelnde Klarheit! ARK (talk) 16:50, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Ich habe ein paar Wappen aus der Kategorie der Bündner Palette entfernt, weil die betreffenden Wappen nicht in dieser Palette tingiert sind. Das Erscheinen eines Wappens in einer Wartungskategorie verhindern zu wollen durch Angabe einer inkorrekten Palette ist meines Erachtens kein legitimer Grund für die Verbreitung von Falschinformation. ARK (talk) 18:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Frage zu Aargau
IMHO sollte Wappen Aargau matt.svg in "CHE Aargau COA.svg" umbenannt werden.
Wappen Aargau.svg sollte als superseded by obigem getagt werden, und seine links dorthin replaced.
Was meinst du ?
Fur Wappen Tessin matt.svg gilt dasselbe;
eigentlich fur (fast) alle Wappen in Matt coats of arms of Swiss cantons - sie sind von guter Qualitat und sollten von den Artikeln verwendet werden. Konversion nach COAInformation, falls noch nicht erfolgt.
In den Artikeln sollten keine "Glanz"wappen aufscheinen.
-- sarang♥사랑17:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I don't think renaming the Aargau COA is a good idea. All the matt files use the colours from the Fahnenreglement (available online but the link on the files is dead). There has been talk of remaking the cantons COA with the new AG palette, but this would mean new files with a different category. I believe the matt files should not be modified anymore as they are all matching the parameters of the set. Best regards, Espandero (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
The "matte" cantonal arms, posted to Commons right after their publication in 2008 by the Swiss Department of Defence, are an early milestone in the effort to replace the Delta-9-style glossy Swiss arms. The 'matt' part of the file names serves as a welcome reminder of that effort, which still isn't complete today by a long shot. I don't think there's a need to change the file names to the standard internationalised name format.
Galliker and Giger's Gemeindewappen Kanton Aargau (2004) isn't only the source of the Farbkarte [PDF] that underlies the AG Palette as its reference. The CD-ROM that comes with the book also contains all the SVGs of the arms belonging to the municipalities of the canton of Aargau, which is largely the source of these arms as posted to Commons. The CD-ROM also contains the official version of the cantonal arms, but these arms apparently haven't been posted yet to Commons. I'd imagine that the cantonal arms on that CD-ROM, once they're posted to Commons, would be named CHE_Aargau_COA.svg.
The CD-ROM also contains a complete ready-made set of all the municipal flags in SVG format, which is a resource SpinnerLaserzthe2nd might be interested in.
Delta-9's cantonal arms of 2006 are largely if not entirely disused today across the global wikipedias. If somebody would do the honours and replace all remaining global usages, I'd commend that undertaking. Upgrading the file description of Delta-9's cantonal arms to COAInformation, to the extent that it hasn't yet happened, is fine by me, too. ARK (talk) 10:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Palettes
As fas as I understood, we are cleaning up the use of palettes for Swiss coas.
Palettes NW, GR, D9 and VD are fine as they are now;
CH will be changed to other colors, mainly them of AG.
AG and RO will so become obsolete.
To show all the colors, I set in Wikipedia:WikiProjekt_Wappen/Neuzeichnen#Farbpaletten
AG and CH immediately together; they are very different: AG uses 6 tinctures, CH 8.
Somebody with the right knowledge will have to set the 8 CH colors,
which are currently completely wrong.
Afterwards the then used obsolete palettes must be replaced (by using tools as much as possible).
Then the not longer used palettes are deleted everywhere.
As soon as the correct colors are defined, I can help with that work -- sarang♥사랑17:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Sarang: Thanks for your continued interest in the new CH palette and your continued willingness to assist in getting it done! Sorry also for the recent lack of initiative on my part. Life got in the way.
As it stands, the agreed-upon colours for the new CH palette are all the AG palette tinctures with purpure and carnation added from the GR palette. Moreover, the GR palette azure will be the main blue, to be coded as 'b' for the coloured boxes. The AG azure will be the new CH palette's lighter "alternate" blue. In accordance with the established practice encoded in the GN and BY palettes (and others in their wake), the lighter azure from the AG palette would then be expected, in the new CH palette, to move from the "b" to the "B" slot.
However, I would like to argue that it should not do that: It should be given a code of its own. The conflation of alternate lighter azure with céleste is, and has always been, absolutely erroneous, as alternate lighter blue and céleste are two very different things functionally: the former is a variant of the regular tincture azure (highly prevalent in some German-speaking regions), whereas the latter is the irregular tincture céleste (virtually inexistent in German-language heraldry). To mark this distinction, I would like to propose a code such as "β" rather than "B" for alternate lighter azure, with "B" continuing to stand for céleste where the lighter blue actually is meant to be the the irregular tincture. Thus, "B" (for céleste) would be absent from the new CH Palette just like "n" (for naranja) is absent: neither of these sondertinkturen exist in Swiss heraldry.
I will need to make the argument for this change of perspective on the WPW forum but I never got around to it in the last few days. I shall rectify the omission as soon as I can, as this whole matter has been drawn out for long enough. ARK (talk) 09:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
"β" might be troublesome as most keyboards do not have this letter. BTW, it will mean changing other templates to accept that new character; therefore it was less invasive to abuse the "B". -- sarang♥사랑10:43, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
@Sarang: The lack of Greek keys on non-Greek keyboards didn't stop you from creating the Δ9 template. But even so, a separate code for light azure wouldn't need to be "β". It could be plain ASCII, such as "l" for light azure or "h" for hellblau. I don't suppose the "invasiveness" calculus would be different for a new light azure code as opposed to the codes used for any of the non-standard tinctures (vair, ermine, etc.) whose introduction you're currently experimenting with – except that that the introduction of a 'light azure' tincture variant would correct an error that is as deeply ingrained as it is messy.
I've revised the tincture values of the CH Palette as shown in the WPW Palette catalogue.
My reservation regarding the use of these values in the actual palette is the unsettled status of the azure vs light azure vs céleste issue.
Moreover, I believe the WPW palette catalogue is the wrong place for documenting the provenance and usage of these templates. This documentation should be provided on the individual template pages. The template catalogue should also link to the templates, not just to the Commons categories. The best way to do so might be dropping the Wikipedia links to the respective political entities and linking to the template pages on Commons instead. ARK (talk) 15:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Δ9 had been another situation: it depended a closed set of 491 images which are validated by a tool; it was intended that nobody needs to type the greek letter manually. But the questioned lettercode needs to be typed in future again and again or each file.
Even now we have some difference in the semantics of the color codes; user:Delta-9 called gules geules, or the Spain calls vert sinople. It is just another example when in this exceptional case the light blue otherwhere known as céleste is called 'azure'.
The letters "b" and "B" stand both for 'blue' ot 'bleu' or 'blau', I could not take "a" for azure because it was used for 'argent'. I cannot see an urgent need to introduce a new lettercode for light blue, it will be more difficult for editors to keep in mind a special code for light blue in Switzerland. The succeeding templates and modules would have to check that "B" is illegal when used with this palette; but finally "b" and the other code (β,h,l,…) are treated the same way to be 'azure', in display and category.
ARK, I understand your concerns about abusing the céleste-letter for light azure. But inventing a new code will make it more difficult - not so much for the templates, but for all the editors which will have to use it ! -- sarang♥사랑17:20, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
@Sarang: The Greek letter isn't a requirement I ever asked for. I'd be happy to go with an ASCII code for the light azure. variant.
Your claim that we're just quibbling about "semantics" is greatly mistaken. The requested new code for the light azure variant isn't about semantics, it's about the structural integrity of the nomenclature of tinctures.
Historically, heraldry as a scholarly domain was created in France. The French came up with the nomenclature as a central part of that domain. Over the centuries, other European nations followed suit and adopted the French system as well. In the process, different nations, using their own languages, started using different names for the tinctures. The fact that these different translations of the French names are different from the original French names doesn't matter. The fact that some people sometimes get their spelling wrong of any one tincture doesn't matter either.
What does matter is that the heraldic tinctures as a system have remained stable over the centuries across all the countries that adopted the system. As a system, the tinctures break down into six regular structural positions and a bunch of irregular ones. Keeping up the distinction between the regular and the irregular structural positions of this system saveguards the system's structural integrity. By contrast, equivocating between regular and irregular positions in this system, for instance by allowing a single code such as "B" to map arbitrarily and interchangeably to a regular and an irregular postition in the system, degrades the integrity of that system.
Regarding the problematic status of the "B" code once a new code is adopted for the light azure variant, I'd suggest that it could be retained as an undocumented feature. We'd hang on to it but wouldn't tell anyone. "B" could continue to map to "céleste", with its RGB value matching that of the light azure variant. This would obviate the need to program an error response to the "illegal" use of "B". It would even be (marginally) useful, because there's a hypothetical possibility that céleste might be specified in the blazon of a Swiss family arms, even as its use remains highly unlikely in public heraldry. In that specific case, it would be desirable to have the file description's colour box read céleste rather than azure.
Also, I'd prefer to conduct the remainder of this discussion -- and arrive at a conclusion -- in the WPW Forum's corresponding thread. I'm awaiting Doc Taxons response there, and I'd expect him to be amenable to the argument from structural integrity of the tincture nomenclature. In fact, I suspect that's what he was getting at when, a bit further up in that thread, he called the initial proposal "exemplary" (mustergültig) with respect to its treatment of the two azure variants. ARK (talk) 12:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Neuer Parameter für alle "W"-Vorlagen
Hallo Rudolf, du machst sehr wenig Gebrauch von meinen Neuerungen; dennoch will ich dich auf eines meiner letzten Anbauten hinweisen.
Speziell bei Wappen kommt es ausserordentlich oft vor, dass zB die Gebietskörperschaft sowohl in der Beschreibung als auch als Kategorie angegeben wird.
|blazon of ={{en| of the municipality of {{W|Kerzers}} in the canton of Fribourg, Switzerland}}
|blazon ={{fr| de la commune fribourgeoise de {{Wf|Kerzers}}, en Suisse»}}
Da liegt es doch nahe, zur Kategorisierung den ohnehin bereits geschriebenen Parameterwert des W bzw. Wf heranzuziehen.
Das funktioniert jetzt; die komplizierteren Fälle sind in Template:W#Category_option beschrieben, bei so einfachen Gegebenheiten wie bei Kerzers genügt es,
das {{W|Kerzers}} zu {{W|Kerzers|+}} zu erweitern, und schon kann die Kategoriedefinition wegelassen werden.
Bei dieser Datei kann genausogut auch das {{Wf|Kerzers}} erweitert werden - es funktioniert mit jedem W, W× und W××.
Danke, @Sarang: Ich habe die vorgeschlagene Änderung mal eingearbeitet als Teil einer umfassenderen Revision der Dateibeschreibung von Kerzers-coat of arms.svg. Allerdings hege ich meine Vorbehalte gegenüber dem Ausbau von COAInformation zu einer Scripting-Sprache mit einer Syntax, die sich nicht intuitiv verstehen lässt. COAInformation ist in seiner bisherigen Form einfach zu erlernen anhand des Bestands von Wappen, die diese Vorlage bereits verwenden. Je mehr Sonderkniffe hinzukommen, deren Zweck und Funktionsweise sich nur durch das Studium der Dokumentation erschliessen, desto höher wird die Schwelle für Neulinge, sich überhaupt mit COAInformation abzugeben.
Hier ist ein Vorschlag zur Vereinfachung von COAInformation: Warum geben wir bei COAInformation die references-Zeile mitten in der Tabelle aus anstatt am Ende dieser Tabelle? Erschiene diese Zeile am Ende der Tabelle, dann liesse sich references schlicht und einfach mit <references /> beschicken; die Literaturverweise liessen sich dann weiter oben in der Tabelle in gewohnter Wikipedia-Manier mit <ref> und </ref> eingeben und es erschiene dann am Ende der Tabelle in gewohnter Manier ein konventionelles Literaturverzeichnis. Ich habe nun in Kerzers-coat of arms.svg die blazon- und die date-Zeile je mit einem Literaturverweis versehen. Das Literaturverzeichnis erscheint nun zwischen diesen beiden Zeilen, was ganz offensichtlich Unfug ist. Die Positioinierung der references-Zeile am Ende der COAInformation-Tabelle würde ein zentrales Stück Wikimedia-Syntax auch in COAInformation brauchbar machen. ARK (talk) 18:01, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Hallo Rudolf, bei Durchsicht von CoA fallt mir auf, dass ein langst eliminerter Parameter wieder auflebt.
Ich hab die so unhandlichen Parameter 'óther_fields' und 'óther_versions' zu fields bzw. versions umbenannt; die alte form mit others wird zwar verstanden aber als deprecated Wiederganger kategorisiert, je nachdem ob sie auch einen Wert haben als COAI v, ohne Wert als COAI u. Schon vor langem habe ich alles aus- und aufgeraumt, nun taucht es wieder auf.
Es gibt offensichtkich einige die immer wieder den Parameter aufleben lasssen, ohne jede Notwendigkeit.
Lasst sich schnell mit VFC wieder aufraumen. Besser, de Leuten zu sagen, sie mogen doch den Schrott weglassen. -- sarang♥사랑06:03, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Bin ich ein Angeschuldigter, der diesen veralteten Parameter verwendet, oder bin ich die Person, die den Leuten sagen soll, dass sie diesen Parameter nicht mehr verwenden sollen? ARK (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Das sieht nun besser aus als vorher, danke! Weiss Jarekt um die Überschneidung mit dem bestehenden References-Parameter? Was sagt er dazu? Lässt sich die Zweigleisigkeit nicht verhindern? Auf Deutsch müsste "References" wohl "Einzelnachweise" heissen.
Eine weitere Verbesserung an COAInformation bestünde auch darin, den Tincture-Parameter auf Tinctures zu ändern. Wappen die nur eine einzige Tinktur verwenden sind eine äusserste Seltenheit. ARK (talk) 09:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
CHE Ollon VD COA.svg
Hi, I've just finished making the last COA of the district of Aigle. I wanted to ask you if I could overwrite File:CHE Ollon VD COA.svg with a version with smaller lines to fit the style of the district. The file needs to be overwritten anyway to change the colours to the CH palette. I have the file ready to be uploaded. If you'd rather keep the file as it is I can upload the new version as a var file. Best regards, Espandero (talk) 15:40, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
This isn't a file I created, it's Fränsmer's. I just pulled it out from the file history of CHE_Ollon_COA.svg, where Fränsmer had posted it to overwrite a Delta-9-style design, only to be reverted in turn. According to Fränsmer's original posting summary, the design is extracted from a PDF on Ollon.ch. This means it falls under the principle upheld by the Wikiprojekt Wappen which says that a municipality's most recent "official version" of their arms must be used. I'm frankly not a great fan of this principle myself, as in Switzerland the "official version" of a coat of arms on a municipality's website may turn out to be a Delta-9-style design that had been taken from Commons. Even so, I don't think adjusting the contour widths of an "official version" is inherently more problematic than changing its tinctures to match a Commons palette, which has been the favoured practice for years. @Fränsmer: what's your take on this? ARK (talk) 07:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't know why I am not logged in, but well... I am okay with overwriting it. The one who made the file for the municipality surely didn't have a contour width in his mind. So they are just made by his own preferences and quite random. 46.14.91.21412:03, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have grantedautopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. GPSLeo (talk) 17:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
frz. Projekt
Dem Gemreindelogo entnommen
Glasurwappen nach Projet Blasons
SVG, Wappen nach dem Armorial des Communes Vaudoises
Wappen aus dem Lausanner Logo von 2018
Wappen nach dem Armorial des Communes Vaudoises
-coat_of_arms.svg)
This section has been moved to Category talk:Graphic Lab-ch#Wappen — Ping me please if you continue there!
Confignon
Versoix GE
Gy GE
