Talk:Coat of arms of Canberra

It would be great if the coat of arms could be enlarged by clicking on it and the colours clearly identifiable and thefeatures on the coat named with the colour associated with it. Maybe even the significance of the features. Stephen

Inaccurate translation
The motto was originally rege, lege, grege, which is not "for the Queen, the Law and the People" (as shown on the coat of arms), in that:
 * rex is "king", not "queen"
 * greges is "the great unwashed", the "lower orders"


 * Actually the translation seems to be correct and is used by Debrett's Peerage. The motto is used by a number of other cities.

I can only find references for the motto being the correct English translation for Pro Rege, Lege et Grege. There is no reference to mobs etc Ozdaren (talk) 01:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The translation is correct. Compare with the motto of the Danish royal guards: "Pro Rege et Grege" = "For King and People". 89.239.209.112 (talk) 21:13, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Coat of Arms of the City of Canberra.
The Australian Capital Territory does not have a Coat of Arms. These are the Arms of the City of Canberra.

http://www.cmd.act.gov.au/flags/

http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/coat_of_arms.html

Fair use rationale for Image:Canberra coat of arms.png
Image:Canberra coat of arms.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 30 July 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved  Dr Strauss   talk   20:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Canberra → Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory – Because legally the City of Canberra doesn't exist, and all acts passed by the Australian Capital Territory legislature bears the coat of arms of the ACT. Gus7896 (talk) 07:45, 30 July 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Difficult. Canberra is a city in most senses, and the coat of arms was designed as a coat of arms for Canberra rather than the ACT. These days it is both. Andrewa (talk) 12:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Inclined to support, if only because it is prominently featured at Australian Capital Territory and not at Canberra, and is consistent with Flag of the Australian Capital Territory, and, well, because it's official stuff. No such user (talk) 10:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of Canberra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091002005152/http://www.archives.act.gov.au/home/educational_resource/find_of_the_month/2008/november_2008/previous_find_of_the_month to http://www.archives.act.gov.au/home/educational_resource/find_of_the_month/2008/november_2008/previous_find_of_the_month

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 6 November 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory → Coat of arms of Canberra – The official name as per various ACT government websites is "Coat of Arms of the City of Canberra": None of these refer to the coat of arms as the ACT coat of arms.
 * https://www.cmtedd.act.gov.au/communication/flags
 * https://www.parliament.act.gov.au/Explore-your-Assembly/resources/fact-sheets/symbols

This page should not be named the coat of arms of ACT because there is no coat of arms for the territory (yet). See this press release from March 2019 that recognises that the territory does not have a coat of arms. In current context, the Canberra coat of arms is seen as the de facto ACT coat of arms cause there isn't one. The article can be edited to include the above link and explain it is often seen as the de facto ACT coat of arms. A separate Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory article can be created (instead of a redirect) if the territory coat of arms is created and unveiled.

The page should also not be named by its full name or official name, but instead "Coat of arms of Canberra" in line with City of Sydney, City of Melbourne and City of Brisbane coats of arms wikipages.

File:Coat of Arms of the Australian Capital Territory.svg should also be renamed on Commons if the article is renamed. I will submit a separate request move on Commons when the time comes. Marcnut1996 (talk) 05:00, 6 November 2019 (UTC) —Relisting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:43, 13 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose the proposal is to reverse a move made only 2 years ago. The discussion from July 2017 was fairly limited and I have pinged so that they are aware of the current proposal. I thought it might be helful to set out a number of matter that might help any discussion
 * The article title policy is not limited to official titles, but with an emphasis on common titles.
 * It is fairly pedantic to distinguish between Canberra & the ACT.
 * If it is to be moved to link to Canberra rather than the ACT, "Coat of arms of Canberra" would be the title
 * Marcnut1996 is correct that the official name is the "Coat of Arms of the City of Canberra" - see
 * the sucessor to the Federal Capital Commission is the National Capital Authority
 * there is no separately constituted body for the City of Canberra.
 * the only official use of the "Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory" that I am aware of is the authorisation for the centenary of federation coins
 * Proposals for a Coat of Arms for the ACT are not new -
 * What tips me to weak oppose at the moment is that 60% of people come to this article from CoA of the ACT rather than Canberra - see redirect views. Its a weak oppose because whatever people search for brings them to the same page. If the ACT decides to implement an official coat of arms, I would clearly support moving this page to Coat of arms of Canberra for reasons of precision and disambiguation. --Find bruce (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose. While there's no doubt that the official name is coat of arms of Canberra (the city, which does not officially exist), it's marginally more famous as the coat of arms of the ACT, partly because it is never used by the city council etc. simply because they don't exist either. So as I said last time, difficult. But no new relevant evidence has been presented since that last, successful, RM. And does it really matter? The article makes the position clear, and that's the appropriate place for such clarification, where unlike in the article title we can cite our sources both primary and secondary. The redirect gives navigation from the other name. The choice of title here only really matters for reasons of purism. Thanks for the ping. Andrewa (talk) 18:26, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Leaning Oppose. One is de facto, the other is technical.  Usually, de facto usage is preferred for titles, and the technical truth is explained in the body. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:51, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong support. It is not pedantic at all to distinguish between a city and a territory, and this is undoubtedly the coat of arms of the city and only used as the arms of the territory in a secondary sense. User:Find bruce is giving very strong arguments for support - and if people come to the article looking for the territory's arms, it's probably because they don't realise that the territory doesn't have its own arms! StAnselm (talk) 09:01, 20 November 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 30 April 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 13:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory → Coat of arms of Canberra – As the ACT government is in the process of designing a coat of arms for the territory that will exist alongside the city coat of arms (expected to be completed by 2024), the name "Coat of arms of the Australian Capital Territory" is no longer the common name for the Canberra coat of arms as determined by independent, reliable, English-language sources (WP:Commonname). See these various reports of the design process that exclusively use the term Coat of Arms of the ACT to refer to the proposed new design:
 * ABC report 2021
 * RiotACT 2019
 * RiotACT 2021
 * Canberra Daily 2021
 * Canberra Times 2018
 * Canberra Times 2019

See also the various reports produced by the government on the new coat of arms
 * Main consultation website
 * Report of inquiry into the change
 * Government response

Additionally, official pages about the coat of arms use the name Canberra Coat of Arms
 * ACT Flags and Emblems

The current name could cause confusion to those looking for info about the proposed ACT Coat of Arms when they are directed to a page about the existing one. Safes007 (talk) 04:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Strong Support : Though I recognise the outcomes of the previous move request did not result in a move, the 2024 circumstances are considerably different from those in 2017 and 2019 when the concept of a distinct Territory Coat of Arms was not on the cards, or just a hypothetical. We face a very real probability that a new ACT Coat of Arms of will be announced, but an imposter will inhabit its Wikipedia page. I also strongly support the move suggestion on the basic principle that it is and has been misnamed for many years, which has in some part (despite the efforts of official sources) exacerbated the ‘de facto’ nomenclature used to support the current naming. Gtlloyd (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.