Talk:Swedish heraldry/Archive 2

Numismatic displays of heraldry?
I just love the way European countries use heraldry in their coinage, and I have seen some rather striking examples in bronze commemoratives. I wonder if this 1924 coin by Lea Ahlborn (and possibly some other Swedish coins) should be discussed somewhere in this article. Wilhelm_meis (talk) 07:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

A-class
Irrelevant of any GA status, there are a few small things I'd like to see changed for A-class status: I wish you the best, - Jarry1250 (t, c) 16:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Source 10 is Original Research as a reference; for A-class it would fine as a footnote, but the statement about canting does need a reference.
 * Another source for 9 would be an improvement (optional)
 * A couple of statements in the first half of the second paragraph of characteristics need references
 * I'd prefer the avoidance of apparently; if the source says that, then in the least it is believed would do better.
 * I'm in two minds over the translation of the Swedish coat of arms into English blazon. I'm really not sure whether a plain English version would be better.
 * and is not affiliated... and other public entities. could use a source (shouldn't be too difficult)(optional)
 * The military heraldry is lacking in general terms. I'd use the Swedish Army, Swedish Navy, Swedish Air Force and Swedish Home Guard images first, with some explanation/context, then the example with the battlegroup. This is really the key change that needs to be made.
 * Preferably fulfil the fact tag in the regional introduction
 * If English-style blazon is not used, the Swedish language 'blazons' should be prioritised. I don't know how much the original sources used them, but I'm not 100% sure they're completely necessary, given the common-language descriptions and Swedish 'blazon'.
 * Thank you for the comments, and for your helpful contributions! I am in full agreement about the military heraldry section and the cite needed (which I tagged) in the Regional heraldry section, but I have run upon a dearth of sources in this regard.  Were I still in Sweden, I could most certainly find satisfactory sources, but I have very limited resources on Okinawa, and my own books simply do not delve this deeply into Swedish heraldry specifically.  I've been looking around some, but perhaps it is time for me to take my query to WikiProject Sweden and see if I can recruit a volunteer there to help me find Swedish sources.  Thank you for pointing out the ref tags I borrowed for footnotes.  The migration to actual footnote format was long overdue, but it's done now.  I think I'll wait and see if we can get a little more input on how to handle the blazons (anybody around here got experience with presenting blazons translated from a foreign language? WP:MOS doesn't say a word about it!).  I could go either way on it myself, I just want to do whatever works best for our readers (who I suspect may be largely Swedish).  As to "is not affiliated...", that passage was added for clarification, but for the reader interested in learning more, I think sufficient sources are present in the paragraph (although the reader must know a little Swedish; sorry, I can't fix that).  Let me know if you look again and disagree.  I'll keep digging for more sources to bring a little more illumination to the military and regional heraldry questions.  Thanks again for the feedback!  Wilhelm_meis (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Protection of private arms
As far as I can see Swedish law doesn't explicitly protect private arms, the laws and statutes that are referred to in the article only mention official arms i.e. arms used by the government, government authorities, counties and municipalities. Also the edict from 1762 or 1767 regarding noble arms can't be found in Svensk Författningssamling which means that it must have been repealed. It's possible that Riddarhusordningen contained provisions regarding protection of noble arms before 2003 when it ceased to be a law. To my knowledge the only way you can protect private arms in Sweden is through trademark protection or by protecting certain patterns. - Björn Knutson 09:49, 24 May 2009 (CET)


 * That is my understanding of it exactly - in order to get personal arms protected by law, one must get the arms registered as a logotyp, and only official arms (government bodies, military, counties, municipalities, royalty) are expressly protected under statutory law. I don't know what it means that the 1767 law can't be found at SFS.  I had the thought that laws available on the web site might not go back that far.  In any case, whether or not the law still stands today, it played a decisive role in the development of personal heraldry in Sweden.  If it has been repealed, I'd like to find confirmation of that in a reliable source.  It would be interesting to note.  I would also like to find more information on Riddarhusordningen.  Can you get it?  Being in Japan, I have very limited resources these days.  I'm also looking for information on the 1884 edict that granted ducal rights to the provinces.  Anyway thank you for your comments, and I hope you will stick around and help us improve the article.  Wilhelm_meis (talk) 16:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

question re: blazon
Article states "Unlike the macaronic and highly stylized English blazon, Swedish heraldry is described in plain language, using only Swedish terminology.". Why are the Great Arms described partially in blazon? // roux   05:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's artificial. There was (and continues to be) a debate over whether we should use them WT:HV. The point is here that including the Swedish is a bad idea; so do we 'translate' it into English prose or blazon? - Jarry1250 (t, c, rfa) 07:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, that debate. Given that the Swedes specifically do not use blazon, I see no reason why it should be used here. Perhaps in addition to a (sourced) translation from the Swedish, but certainly not instead of. // roux   08:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I am waiting to see what consensus (if any) is reached on the H&V discussion of how to handle these cases in general before rewriting something I may have to come right back to and rewrite again. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion at WT:HV.  Thank you for your input! Wilhelm_meis (talk) 15:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 22:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)