User talk:Rs-nourse

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Rs-nourse!

First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks

Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
There are several tools to upload files.
Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.

Made a mistake?

Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Timmy Grey the Marquess[edit]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Sir_Thomas_Grey,_1st_Marquess_of_Dorset,_KG.png may need to research whether all points are supposed to indicate ermine. Thank you very much for placing your beautiful artwork in wiki commons.24.11.170.191

Knights of the Garter[edit]

hello, excuse me disturb you, I see you télécharcher the arms of the Knights of the Garter.

Could you tell me please: For the Knights a shield is painted?

Whether or could I find one of King Oscar II of Sweden-Norway.

Thank you for your help

good day to you

Regards--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, here are links to the arms of the house of Bernadotte, and Ssolbergj's illustration of the arms of the Union between Sweden and Norway. Hope this helps. Rs-nourse (talk) 18:42, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Sir Edward Courtenay, 1st Earl of Devon, KG.png[edit]

Your work is certainly very attractive, but the garter surrounding every shield detracts from the pure heraldry. Ditto the coronet. Unless a reproduction of a contemporary historic image I can't see the point. Is it not somewhat pastiche? On the above file, what is your evidence for the label? Also, I think placing coronets of various degrees above the shield was something which started in the Georgian or Victorian era, and was unheard of in earlier times. Thus the images are in many cases anachronistic. One more point to make: you say these images are your own work, but based on what historic sources or other authorities? You have created some highly complex quarterings but given no sources at all. The work is thus decorative, yes, but of little value to the student of heraldry who cannot rely on your work, which could thus be misleading. How is the reader to know these arms are valid and credible? Heraldry is an academic discipline not simply a decorative art form. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2013 (UTC))[reply]

I appreciate your feedback. Your opinions, and the seriousness with which you have expressed them, are sincerely respected. I am working to create illustrations for nearly 400 knights, so I will certainly make the occasional mistake and welcome the corrections. I have carefully researched each coat before I begin my work on a given piece. I pay close attention to printed blazons wherever they are available, but often must depend on visual source material from tombs, portraits, books or bookplates. I whole heartedly accept your criticism on my general lack of source references. I realize this is a Wiki no-no, but I am relatively new to the WIKI and will be going back into each illustration and rectifying this as quickly as possible. I also appreciate and acknowledge my mistake with the label on Edward Courtenay's arms. It was an unintended carry over from Sir Hugh de Courtenay, the founder knight. I have since corrected it and posted the quartered arms as they appear on his stall plate.

With regards to the elaborate quarterings. All quarterings are based very specifically on those found in contemporary blazons in books, portraits, windows, tombs, etc. I never attempt to quarter arms where no contemporary example exists. Again, I do acknowledge my error with not including references, and I will be rectifying this.

As to your aesthetic critique -- pastiche -- you are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I am in no way failing to follow the rules of heraldry when creating these illustrations, and I will do my best to explain the decisions I have made.

First, allow me to say that I have studied heraldry for over twenty years. Like you, I am immensely interested in the academic aspects and history of the practice. However, I must beg your acknowledgement that, in addition to the academic discipline, there is a rich artistic aspect to heraldry. Focusing purely on the blazon often produces dry, uninteresting executions which I do not believe was ever the intention of the heralds. One cannot ignore the history of the pomp associated with the noble knight and his coat armour. The range of charges and tinctures, shields, banners, barding and badges speak volumes to the fanfare associated with the practice of heraldic decoration, flamboyance and pride. Why else would the College of Arms exist, laws be written, and suits be filed in the name of protecting the rights to bear a coat of arms?

If you need further evidence to the wide range of illustrative interpretation of blazons you need look no further than the cathedrals, monasteries and parish churches across England and Europe. These buildings are alive with brightly colored arms and you'd be hard pressed to find any two rampant lions that look alike. So, your point about distractions and liberties is a bit lost on me. I have stayed true to the rules of the blazon -- field, charges, tinctures, et al. Yes, I have chosen to employ diapering and other more modern forms of design, but I prefer to see arms beautifully illustrated rather than mechanically cut out with overly repeated charge elements from SVG and vector files so readily available.

So why then? Throughout my study of heraldry and history, it has always amazed me at just how difficult it can be to locate existing illustration of historic arms, quartered arms, etc. I was recently writing a piece on the Most Noble Order of the Garter and found it incredibly frustrating that there was no comprehensive place to quickly reference the coat armour displayed by the knights therein. I know these arms are on display at the College, but not online. I therefore decided that I would take it upon myself to illustrate the arms of all the knights of the Order from the time of its founding through Elizabeth I – 392 to be exact -- no small undertaking to be certain.

I appreciate that you might disagree with my creative choices, and again, you are certainly entitled to your opinions. However, I will begrudgingly explain my reasoning, though I do believe your aesthetic opinions on how a blazon should be interpreted holds no weight in the grand scheme of what should or should not be added to the Wiki. Your preference for the flat, cold version of the Courtenay arms -- big yellow field, three red dots -- suggests to me that you have gone too far in the other direction. Or three torteaux can be beautifully displayed and still be academically correct and perfectly acceptable to the "student of heraldry," Garter and coronet be damned.

The practice of encircling the arms with the Garter of the Order began to see prevalence during the reign of Henry VII. It became constantly observed in the design of stall plates during the reign of Henry VIII. There are examples of earlier encirclements (e.g. Charles, Duke of Burgundy - c.1469, and Francis Lovel, Viscount Lovel (1483). Seeing as how my goal has been to illustrate the arms of all of the knights of the Order from Edward III through Elizabeth I, I made the conscious decision to encircle all of the arms with the Garter for consistency sake and as a nod to the currently accepted practice. I am not attempting to replicate the original plates or represent my illustrations as historical copies. They are my interpretations of the historical blazons, but true and accurate to the best of my abilities, and following the rules. I wanted the group of 392 illustrations to be consistent and uniform in this manner, so yes, there are definite anachronistic elements in play. I would point out that there is a great deal of precedence for this practice throughout the history of writing on the subject. Biographers, heralds, engravers, artisans, and historians have, for centuries, created all sorts of illustrative elements where the Garter and/or coronets have been added to historical arms.

With regards to the coronets. I differ with you on this issue in that I prefer to be able to quickly identify the peer ranking of a subject. Coat armour tells us nothing of this and while you are correct that it is a relatively recent practice, it is certainly the current practice and it is very much my artistic right to make such a choice as it is not outside the rules or acceptable practice of modern heraldic illustration. To be honest, my preference would have been to include the crests, helms and mantling of each individual, but alas that is additional time I cannot spare.

Again, I do appreciate your feedback. While I strongly disagree with your aesthetic opinions, I do value your corrective feedback and the ability to have such discourse in the online Wikiverse.

R. Scott Nourse (talk) 06:41, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much indeed for your new images of "unembellished arms" minus garters etc. These are superb images which I doubt could be bettered. As I suggested on your WP talk page, these would be the nec plus ultra of heraldic images on WP, and I think I'm right now seeing the results. I will certainly be using them and helping to get them onto the pages where they belong. Thanks for the great work! (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Barons did not get coronets until the reign of Charles II (1660-1685) but for the higher ranks, peers' coronets were in regular use in the Tudor period and they looked more or less as they do now. They're certainly not a Georgian or Victorian invention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NorreysOfRycote (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrol given[edit]

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol 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. INeverCry 23:20, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Rs-nourse (talk) 23:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dinham arms - Burke's erroneous blazon[edit]

Re: File:Coat of arms of Sir John Dinan, KG.png, I had noticed Burke's erroneous blazon of these arms elsewhere, which you have I think followed. Should be Gules, four fusils in fess ermine. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 23:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the note. Looking back through my notes I see that in addition to Burke, I have included Edward Rowe Mores’ printing (1748) of the 15th century manuscript “Nomina et Insignia gentility Nobilium Equitubque sub Edvardo primo regs Militantium” (which includes the Roll of Callais) blazoning the arms of Lord Dinan as "Gules, une fesse entente de Ermine”. Perhaps the originator of that roll mistook the conjoined fusils for an indented fess. I will do some additional research on this and make the appropriate corrections. --Rs-nourse (talk) 05:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Found pedigrees in the visitations attributing the arms you mention to the Lords Dynham. I've made the change. Thank you again for calling this to my attention.--Rs-nourse (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Fitzroy[edit]

I also enjoy heraldry, and appreciate your work, but I looked at the frieze (not "freeze") from which you took the arms of Henry Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond and Somerset, and it appears to me that the border of the fourth quarter, like that of the first, is ermine. I couldn't think why France Modern should have two different borders on the same shield. Anyway, thanks. J S Ayer (talk) 13:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. This was an error on my part. I have uploaded the correction. I appreciate you calling it to my attention. --Rs-nourse (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I happened by again, and see that those two quarters still have different borders: ermine and compony (gobony). I can't find the reference to the source. J S Ayer (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of William de Fortibus, Earl of Albemarle.png[edit]

Just a query relating to the above file, part of your excellent and very useful work. Please see my query as to the correctness of the arms, posted on the file's description section. Regards.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for the note. To be honest, I don't quite know why the previous version (bendy of six argent and azure, a chief or) was uploaded. I'm not certain who's arms these are or why they were within my Sureties folder. Anyway, I appreciate the note. A new version has been uploaded. --Rs-nourse (talk) 16:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Font[edit]

Hello Rs,
Firstly let me say that you do wonderful work. I am pretty good at MS Paint, but can only look in wonder at what you have achieved. What programme do you use? I do have another question. What font do you use for the Rolls and do you know where it is obtainable? Look forward to hearing from you. Regards Kiltpin (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kiltpin, thank you so much for your feedback. I really appreciate it. I do most of my work in Adobe Photoshop, with some occasional element development on good old fashioned pen and paper (then scanned in). I also use Adobe Illustrator to create various vector elements and shapes. As to fonts, there are two that I use on the rolls of arms (no rhyme or reason as to which one and when), 1) Carolingia (http://www.dafont.com/carolingia.font) and 2) Cardinal Alternate (http://www.dafont.com/cardinal.font). Hope that helps. Best, --Rs-nourse (talk) 20:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rs, that's ideal. Kiltpin (talk) 14:10, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions[edit]

Hello Mr Nource, I really enjoy your remarkable coats of arms. They are magnificent! I saw a very nice coat of arms and I have a lot of private questions regarding this coat of arms. That’s why I want to avoid the internet. So could you please contact me at the following emails address: princo-vdb@bluewin.ch. With very kind regards, J.J. van den Broek

Dear M. Nource, Your coats of arms are indeed magnificent, and add some much beloved colour to the pages they illustrate. Your website and designs are beautiful and helpful. I'm in the middle of a research project on Edward IV's court and would love to ask you some questions about your designs, especially for the Woodvilles. Please contact me at r_orr@ymail.com, at your convenience. Thanks again, and I hope to hear from you! Cheers, RO — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.42.117.184 (talk) 20:28, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FitzAlan arms[edit]

Hello, first my compliments to you for a very nice collection of arms you uploaded, especially uploading those rolls of arms which is the first time I had the chance to see them all at once in one place and with such great quality. ;)

Anyway I was wondering if you may have some information I am seeking. I was searching around the internet for any information about the family we know today as "FitzAlan" and the arms they used prior to succeeding in Earldom of Arundel. All I can find is the generic 'gules, lion or" which was adopted from the previous family (D'Audigny or Albini) that held the earldom before them. There was certainly time for them to have an arms of their own prior to succession in Arundel and I find it very unlikely they didn't have arms of their own prior to adoption of those from Aubigny in mid-13th century. Any clues? Shokatz (talk) 15:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC) Hello. The original Fitzalan arms are usually given as barry or and gules and these arms were ofter borne by later earls of Arundel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NorreysOfRycote (talk • contribs) 13:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

KG416 Esme Duke of Lennox[edit]

Your image of the arms of Esme Stewart the Earl of March and 3rd Duke of Lennox in the Knights of the Garter series has some errors. His name was STUART not Stewart (Source: The Most Noble Order of the Garter 650 years by Peter J Begent and Hubert Chesshyre, 1999, p318. It is also painted as Stewart on the Dean's Tables, a full series of shields of the knights painted since circa 1635 and continued today, in the library of the Deanery, Windsor Castle. This is not open to the public but a full set of photographs of the shields is available as a DVD from the Heraldry Society.)

The arms you have done have a fess counter gobony azure and argent; this should be a fess checky argent and azure. The borders are the wrong way round, so the 1st and 4th are where the 2nd and 3rd should be and vica versa. The buckles' tongues should all face the dexter.

This is my own blazon taken from his stall plate in St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle with its stall reference: N25/8 Quarterly 1st and 4th Azure three fleurs-de-lis Or on a border Gules eight round buckles tongues to the dexter Or; 2nd and 3rd Or a fess checky Argent and Azure a border engrailed Gules; overall an escutcheon Argent a saltire engrailed between four roses Gules barbed and seeded proper. Crest:- Out of a ducal coronet Or a bull’s head Sable armed and crined Or with flames issuing from the mouth Gules. Supporters:- Two wolves proper. Mantled:- Gules lined Ermine. Motto:- AVANT DARNLY The Garter ensigned with an Earl’s coronet sans cap. A peer’s helm (gold). Text:- Du treshault et trespuissant Prince Emme (sic) Duc de Lenox, Comte de Marche et de Darnley, Baron de Laighton Bronswold D’Aubignye Terboulton, Methuen, et St. Andre, grand Chambellan, et Admirall d’Ecosse, gentilhome de la chamber du life de sa Ma’te et Ch’lr du tresnoble Ordre de la Jartierre. Enstalle a windesor, le 22 d’Avril 1624.

This can be checked soon as a full set of photos were taken of the stall plates a couple of years ago and will soon be available on disk from the Windsor Castle shop. Bedsitdriver (talk) 10:52, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note @Bedsitdriver. Very much appreciated, and I am certainly going to track down some of the resources you've mentioned. I have corrected the illustration based on your blazon. With regards to the spelling of the name, the original surname of STEWART was adopted by Walter Stewart, 3rd High Steward of Scotland (a reference to his position). The French spelling of STUART was not used until the mid-16th century when it was adopted by Mary, Queen of Scots during her stay in France -- she changed the spelling to make it more pronounceable by French speakers. The spelling was also adopted by her second husband, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnely and their son James (VI and I), thus beginning its use by the British royals. However, other Scottish nobles continued to use the traditional STEWART spelling, e.g. Stewart of Stewart, Stewart of Barclye, Stewart of Bute, etc. Esmé Stewart was also from the house of Stewart of Darnley, but he and the Dukes of Lennox that followed him -- until the death of Charles Stewart (d. 1672) -- typically maintained the spelling as STEWART (although they appear to have been somewhat interchangeable) --R. S. Nourse (talk) 05:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Hugh Bigod, heir to the earldoms of Norfolk and Suffolk.png[edit]

Keep up the great work, much appreciated. By any chance do you have a source for these tinctures? It is usually said that after his appointment as Earl Marshal, Bigod adopted the arms of the Marshal family, Earls of Pembroke, formerly Earls Marshal, Per party or and vert, a lion rampant gules. Can you shed any light? (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC))[reply]

File:Sir Thomas de Granson, KG.png[edit]

Great image, but should be paly, as per your description, not barry!(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 21:36, 20 June 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your correction to File:Sir Thomas de Granson, KG.png.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:31, 24 July 2015 (UTC))[reply]

The arms of the City of Gloucester[edit]

Hello, I wondered, would you be able to create a rendition of the arms of the City of Gloucester? That is, or three chevronels between ten torteaux three, three, three and one gules. There is already an illustration of them here, but it would be better if I had an illustration in your style in order to fit in with the series of shields in an article I'm writing.

(ps, thanks for all your work in the field of heraldry. Your emblazonments are always of a high standard, and your reconstructions of medieval armorials are an invaluable resource.) Zacwill16 (talk) 22:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your kind comments. I've uploaded the Coat of Arms you requested. I hope its to your liking. Best, --R. S. Nourse (talk) 23:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Zacwill16 (talk) 12:58, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arms displayed by Hugh de Mapenor, Bishop of Hereford, at the signing of Magna Charta.png[edit]

May I query your source for File:Arms displayed by Hugh de Mapenor, Bishop of Hereford, at the signing of Magna Charta.png, please see my edit to the file description. ("Arms displayed by Hugh de Mapenor, Bishop of Hereford, at the signing of Magna Charta": Impossible as these were arms adopted and first invented much later by Thomas de Cantilupe (c.1218-1282), Bishop of Hereford, as is well recorded). Nice image though as always.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC))[reply]

As always, you keep me honest. I have scoured my records for the source on this. I'm quite confident that I made a mistake as your point on Thomas de Cantilupe is obviously correct. I have submitted a request to have the file deleted. Your monitoring is appreciated. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 02:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An over-drastic solution! I have simply changed the file name to File:Arms of See of Hereford.png.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

File:Arms displayed by Richard Poore, Bishop of Chichester, at the signing of Magna Charta.png[edit]

Thanks for your response above and for taking my points raised so positively. It's always a pleasure to find your latest images and study them. I'm working on categorising whatever I find en passant under the family name in Category:Coats of arms of families of England. If you could possibly add appropriate cats to your new productions that would be very useful indeed. This then gives a database of historical images mixed with modern images, which is a valuable check on accuracy. A wider query as to your source which refers to "arms displayed at signing of Magna Carta": I think I can say with certainty that no roll of arms was made at this event and I think the earliest English roll was late that century. See Wikipedia:Roll of arms. Or perhaps we are referring to seals appended to the document, which I don't think survived and would not show tinctures. Sounds a bit dubious to me.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 13:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

I will most definitely tag my works going forward. Great idea on that family group, btw. As to the Magna Carta nonsense, if I recall correctly I had illustrated these based on a book I had come across in the Mormon Church Library in Los Angeles, CA many years ago. I looked back through some of my notes and noticed that it was a self-published work by an author I cannot locate in any catalog -- Mark Northrup Ryland. I did some minor cross-checking with Burke's Armory, but clearly there were errors that I overlooked. To your point, there was no roll of arms from the signing. And while the names (and many of the seals) survive there are no tinctures on the seals. So apart from the very obvious, de Clare, Fitz Walter, etc., some of them were a long shot. Anyway, I've deleted many of them as they come into question.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 00:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you're going to have fun with this! Many thanks, I have already seen your new categorisations on your excellent images of all those rolls of arms you have contributed in Category:Rolls of arms, which I had not seen before - a great body of work to your further credit. Is it all your work, and where do you find the time?? (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:06, 13 August 2015 (UTC)) PS Perhaps instead of deleting the images you refer to above, which would surely be a waste, you could simply rename them (as I did with your image of the arms of the Bishop of Hereford, see previous section above), the images themselves are probably quite valid, just the attribution to bearer was wrong in your source. Might take some research to re-assign to correct bearers.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:14, 13 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

I'm a bit OCD when it comes to this stuff. You start me on something and I won't stop until it's done ;-) Yes, It is all my work, so with a full-time job and a family it gets done in the wee hours of the morning. But as you can see, I have gotten it down to a fairly templated process. AND Luckily I function best on 4 to 5 hours of sleep per night. I have begun submitting renaming requests as I encounter issues. Thanks for the advise there. I really do need to spend some time better understanding the finer details of Wiki work. At some point I'm going to post the charge library I've built up -- I create my charges as high resolution PNGs, so some people out there might enjoy using them. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that will be very useful. May I suggest you apply for file re-naming privileges? See Commons:File renaming, which will allow you to change file names yourself.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 10:25, 23 August 2015 (UTC)) PS One more minor matter for your attention, see next section.[reply]

File:Coat of arms of Sir Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk, KG.png[edit]

Has the label argent usually shown by you in the arms of Category:Coats of arms of Thomas of Brotherton, 1st Earl of Norfolk been omitted from the quartering in this image?(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 10:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Good catch. Was just an oversight on my part. I've corrected the error.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 06:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks re: Category:Coats of arms of families of England[edit]

We're about to smash through the 800 barrier - thanks almost entirely to your work, which has quadrupled the size of this now very useful cat. Very many thanks!(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 13:49, 26 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Request for Images[edit]

Hello and let me start by saying your work is amazing!

I am looking for the unembellished arms for some of the nobles you have detailed, specifically, Tiptoft 1st Earl of Worcester, Lionel de Welles 6th Baron Welles, John Neville 1st Marquess of Montagu, John Sutton 1st Baron Dudley, Walter Devereux 7th Baron Ferrers of Chartley. Would it be possible to get these from you? I am working on a Wars of the Roses project. I can be emailed at ctos999@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 174.117.34.127 (talk) 12:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you an email. let's discuss offline. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 15:02, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fane vs. Vane arms[edit]

There is a subtle difference between the arms of Fane and Vane, concerning of which hand the gauntlet, and whether palm up or palm down (see file description of File:FaneArms.PNG). The error is in File:Arms of Fane, Earls of Westmorland.png * 3. You could possibly just rename the files "Vane arms". Regards(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 02:15, 30 October 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks. I have corrected the gauntlets to reflect "back affrontée"--R. S. Nourse (talk) 07:19, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, thanks(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC))[reply]

One more Fane slipped the net!File:Quartered arms of Fane, Earls of Westmorland.png(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks. Now corrected. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 16:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Peyton arms[edit]

Just a brief thank you! I was working on a WP article and needed an image of the Peyton arms, of which I knew the blazon. So I thought "Why not have a look at the new Category:Coats of arms of families of England. I did that and on looking under P, sure enough I found one of yours: File:Armorial Bearings of the PEYTON family of The Bartons, Colwall, Herefordshire.png. The system is now becoming seriously useful! Many thanks for all your work.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 21:04, 22 March 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Love it! Glad to be contributing.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 04:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

--NorreysOfRycote (talk) 17:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)--NorreysOfRycote (talk) 17:54, 4 April 2018 (UTC)== File:Coat of arms of Sir Robert Willoughby, 1st Baron Willoughby de Broke, KG.png ==[reply]

Hi again! Stumped as to the above. Have consulted your stated source, but does not match to arms sculpted on his monument in Callington Church, Cornwall, which show arms of Willoughby of Eresby in 1st q.,( see File:WilloughbyArmsCallingtonChurch.jpg). Don't see where the or, fretty azure comes from. Am I missing something? Have replaced the above with your similar image of Willoughby of Eresby, in his WP article, pending any clarification if you are able! Many thanks.(Lobsterthermidor (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC))[reply]

See Surrey Roll and the arms on the Tomb of Sir Fulke Greville and Elizabeth Willoughby, 3rd Baroness Willoughby de Broke in Alcester Church in Warwickshire. http://www.multiwords.de/genealogy/BeauchampOfPowykUsfleteCA.jpg Note the first two quarters on her Lozenge.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 05:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Early Willoughbys bore quarterly Ufford (sa cross engrailed or) with Beke (gu cross moline arg). Later, arms for Willoughby were adopted (or fretty az). All 3 coats appear on various Garter stall plates.

While on the subject of Willoughby, may I point out a mistake in the arms of the 1st Earl of Lindsey (a Charles I Garter knight)? His stall plate has a shield with 24 quarterings, which might be impractical for you to reproduce (although I can send you the blason if you want) . I don't think he would have used, or did use, the Ufford and Beke quarterings without the or fretty azure of Willoughby. The other mistake is the escutcheon of Norreys. This refers to the 2nd, not the 1st, Earl's marriage. The 2nd Earl was also a KG (1660 under Charles II), so it's confusing. Lastly, you probably know this, but you can buy a CD with detailed photographs and descriptions of all the surviving Garter stall plates here: http://stgeorgesshop.secure-basket.com/c/36/Register-of-Garter-Stall-Plates Meanwhile, please keep up your good work. It really is wonderful. NorreysOfRycote (talk) 18:29, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cruse/Cruwys arms[edit]

Thanks for your response above, haven't looked at it yet, have had a summer wiki-break. Looks interesting. I think your File:Armorial Bearings of the CROOSE (Cruse) family of The Lodge Estate, Burlton, Herefs.png should look like File:CruwysArms.png, regarding the bend! In 2014 I took a load of photos in Cruwys Morchard Church, Devon, of the family's monuments, covered with these arms, but have lost the images! I'm not sure I got the division of the bend the right way round, possibly gules should be uppermost. Regards Lobsterthermidor (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheyne/le Chen coat of arms[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you could help me by creating or suggesting another user who may be able to assist creating the coat of arms of the Cheyne Clan of Scotland. It is Azure, a bend, between six crosses crosslet fitchée, Argent. Appears to be similar to Bosnia and Herzegovina coat of arms. Regards Newm30 (talk) 19:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the CHEYNE arms you've requested. Enjoy. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 04:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Newm30 (talk) 07:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ARCHER of Umberslade Hall, Warwickshire and[edit]

I admire your artwork displaying many of the ancient and modern coats of arms.

At https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armorial_Bearings_of_the_ARCHER_family,_of_Little_Hereford,_Herefordshire.png#.7B.7Bint:filedesc.7D.7D

you display arms described as Armorial Bearings of the ARCHER family, of Little Hereford, Herefordshire Arms: Azure three arrows or. (But this artwork shows arms that are blazoned in the English language as: Azure three arrows or, points upward.) My understanding from Burke is that the French blazon would be: D'azure trois flèches d'or without the additional "points upward"; French normal is points upward, English normal is points downward.

My assumption is that ARCHER of Little Hereford is a cadet branch of ARCHER of Umberslade Hall because of the similarity in arms. If you please, could you produce Armorial Bearings of the ARCHER of Umberslade Hall, Warwickshire. Arms: Azure three arrows or. (i.e. Azure three arrows or, points downward)

Such arms could also be placed on Wikipedia Commons and displayed at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Archer,_1st_Baron_Archer

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Archer_(antiquary).

Am I understanding how to blazon their arms or am I misguided?

Sincerely yours,68.40.122.133 11:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the arms you've requested for ARCHER of Umberslade Hall, Warks. Enjoy. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 04:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello![edit]

I see you haven't edited for a year- I hope everyhting is OK! Just a quick question really, about your designs (which are indeed magnificent). Are they user-generated versions or scanned (and recoloured perhaps) from the source? (St John Hope, for ex) I hope you don't mind me asking- nothing personal I assure you, it's just I've been asked the same question on en.wp per an article review I have in process. Thanks again- take care! Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk) 22:54, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't added any new illustrations in a while. I've been doing quite a bit of custom work for individuals. As to the designs, they are my work based on originals or illustrated from various rolls of arms where only a blazon is available. Curious what you are referring to in your example, "St John Hope." I can't locate the image you've referenced.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 03:31, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for getting back to me, Rs-nourse. It was regarding this illlustrtaion- Hope is mentioned in the description. It is pretty old though. I was asked in this A-class review dscussion, if you can advise. I don't thikn it's a deal breaker in any caes, but. Thanks very much again! Nice work, by the way- I use the all the time! Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AH! I see now. I thought you were referring to the arms of a "St John Hope." Yes, I referenced the stall plate descriptions in William St. John Hope's "The Stall Plates of the Knights of the Order of the Garter 1348 – 1485: A Series of Ninety Full-Sized Coloured Facsimiles with Descriptive Notes and Historical Introductions, Westminster: Archibald Constable and Company Ltd, 1901." for my Garter illustrations.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 02:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Error in File:K-087-Coat of Arms-FITZMARMADUKE-John FitzMarmaduke ("Johan le FizMermenduk").png[edit]

Hi Rs-nourse. I just noticed that File:K-087-Coat of Arms-FITZMARMADUKE-John FitzMarmaduke ("Johan le FizMermenduk").png is currently incorrect. It shows the Thweng arms Argent, a fess between three popinjays vert, not those assigned to FitzMarmaduke Gules, a fess between three popinjays argent. Regards Newm30 (talk) 00:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent catch! Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have made the appropriate corrections. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 19:09, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of George Nugent-Temple-Grenville, 1st Marquess of Buckingham, KG, KP, PC.png[edit]

Hi Rs-nourse, this coat of arms appears to be a scan out of some publication. Could you please add the source for it? We would need it to evaluate its copyright status. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 06:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is not a scan. It is an original illustration created in the style of 18th/19th century engravings. If you look at my Commons page I believe you will see that I've illustrated 1000's of shields/coats of arms in the same style. Thanks for your input. Feel free to remove it from Buckinghams' page if you deem it inappropriate to the subject. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rs-nourse, thank you for the clarification. If this is your own work, I would like to see the blazon and a reference for it. You are right that I noticed it on Buckinghams' page (which is on my watchlist). I do not mind its addition but I would like to see in the article the blazon and a bibliographic reference for it added as well. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 22:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Several sources for the blazon, "Vert on a cross argent, five torteaux (Grenville)," but the main being that of the Marquess of Buckingham's Order of the Garter stall plate located at N6/2 in St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. In this instance he opted to use the Grenville arms without quarterings. Bernard Burke, in The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, 1864, p. 426 (https://books.google.com/books?id=WmpmAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=burkes+armory&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZ7cvJnJ3bAhUKjlkKHW1EDQUQ6AEIKzAA#v=onepage&q=Grenville&f=false), states the following: "Grenville (Temple-Nugent-Brydges-Chandos-Grenville, Duke and Marquess of Buckingham and Chandos). Quarterly, 1st and 6th, vert on a cross ar. five torteaux, for Grenville, 2nd, quarterly, 1st and 4th, or, an eagle displ. sa., for Leofric; 2nd and 3rd, ar. two bars sa. each charged with three martlets or, for Temple; 3rd, erm. two bars gu., for Nugent; 4th, ar. on a cross sa. a leopard's face or, for Brydges; 5th, or, a pile gu., for Chandos." Again, George Nugent-Temple-Grenville, opted to use the Grenville arms alone, without his quarterings, on his Garter stall plate, which is why I have illustrated them that way. See also: Debrett's Peerage of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1840, (https://books.google.com/books?id=DuwDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA554&dq=%22George+Nugent-Temple-Grenville%22+%22MArquess+of+Buckingham%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4gPHioJ3bAhWQpFkKHbCSBMEQ6AEIPTAD#v=onepage&q=%22George%20Nugent-Temple-Grenville%22%20%22MArquess%20of%20Buckingham%22&f=false) --R. S. Nourse (talk) 02:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ladies of the Garter[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ladies_of_the_Garter

Hello according to wikipedia Philippa of England (1394-1430) wife of Erik of Denmark, Norway and Sweden was ladies of garter in 1408, would you have a representation of his coat of arms thank you

Have a nice day

cordially--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While I haven't personally illustrated the arms of the various "Ladies of the Garter," prior to their creation as Companions, the impaled arms of Erik of Denmark and Philippa of England (his wife) have been illustrated by User:Jacques63 , shown at right. Hope this helps. Best, --R. S. Nourse (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes thank you very good day

cordially--Dunkerqueenflandre (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Coat of arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Coat of arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted.

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Castillo blanco (talk) 06:30, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Made appropriate correction. Thank you.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 19:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Fagan's updated arms[edit]

[1] File:Lady Mary Fagan Coat of Arms.pdf
--Heralder (talk) 08:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know the source of this image? Further, any details on the 2nd and 3rd quartering? Thanks.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Garter-encircled arms of Baudouin , King of the Belgians[edit]

Baudouin , King of the Belgians, was the 927th Knight of the Order of the Garter. [2], [3] and [4]
--Heralder (talk) 08:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I somehow failed to include both Baudouin, King of the Belgians, and Paul, King of Greece. I have added Baudouin, and am working on the arms for Paul of Greece. I appreciate you bringing this to my attention.--R. S. Nourse (talk) 19:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Peters[edit]

Hello there are the Mary peters COA image links. In the Garter female arms have 8 pointed shields. Crest could be changed (for the full armorial achievements I check at Garter heraldic sculptor [5]). In your style the best option is a coat of arms without crest as Lady Mary Fagan.

Links: [6] Compete image [7] (25 June), [8] (25 June)

About Lady Mary Fagan's arms I can not provide you more information, try to get the information from the uploader. There is a image of her garter banner at Windsor Castle with the new quartered arms: 4th banner on the right [9].

Thanks and Regards--Heralder (talk) 22:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--Heralder (talk) 22:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Heralder. Very much appreciated. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 14:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are your images copyright or free-use?[edit]

I ask because a few of them would have been of use to me when I was preparing my little book "Lives and Times of the Garter Knights 1348-1600" for publication. I don't suppose I have ever earnt more than a couple of hundred pounds from sales, so paying a licence fee would not, sadly, have been an option. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lives-Times-Garter-Knights-1348-1600/dp/9163736055/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1501439506&sr=1-1&keywords=Lives+and+Times+of+the+Garter+Knights+1348-1600 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Armigerius (talk • contribs) 06:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All of my work on WikiCommons is available for use under the rules of the Creative Commons license. Credit should be given, but you don't have to pay to use. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 16:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KG1010 to 1014 Incorrect numbering and correct blazons[edit]

Note the correct numbering of the following companions. You have apparently assumed ladies come before gentlemen but in these cases Viscount Brookeborough takes precedence over Lady Mary Fagan and the Marquess of Salisbury over Lady Mary Peters. Lady Mary Fagan departed from the correct way to address her as Mary Lady Fagan, preferring to be addressed formally as Lady Mary and has been recorded as such at her request. I believe the same is true for Mary Lady Peters who is always referred to as Lady Mary Peters.

KG1010 Alan Henry Viscount Brookeborough

Or a cross engrailed per pale Gules and Sable in the first quarter a crescent Sable a baronet’s badge (at the top of the cross on the shield in Windsor Castle).

The crescent is recorded at the College of Arms as sable and as a charge not a difference. The arms may be at variance with some online examples and is not the same as the arms of the 3rd Viscount in Debrett. The crescent should be in the dexter chief and is best regarded as a permanent mark of difference rather than a cadency mark and therefore should not be particularly small. Lord Brookeborough's crescent is black and there are complicated historical reasons why Field Marshal Lord Alanbrooke's (KG898) ended up red.

KG1011 Lady Florence Mary Fagan, aka Lady Mary.

Quarterly, 1st and 4th Per fess Argent and Gules in front of two Swords in saltire proper pommelled and hilted Or a cup also Or issuant therefrom a garland Vert between two laurel branches proper for Laurie; 2nd and 3rd quarterly Gules and Or in the first and fourth quarters a mullet Argent for Vere.

The blazon of Lady Mary's arms is at variance with that given in Burke's Landed Gentry. The only significant difference is that what is called a wreath of oak proper in Burke's should be a garland Vert. In the record painting of the grant the garland includes the outline of four flowers which are reproduced on the banner, the shield and the stall plate. Obviously these flowers are also green. Note that both the garland and branches are issuing from the cup, neither placed above them, and a laurel branch proper has red berries.

KG1013 Viscount Cranborne, Marquess of Salisbury

Quarterly 1st and 4th barry of ten Argent and Azure overall six escutcheons three two and one Sable each charged with a lion rampant Argent for Cecil; 2nd and 3rd Argent on a pale Sable a conger’s head erased and erect Or charged with an ermine spot Sable for Gascoyne.

No cadency mark is used and note the correct way to show the conger eel’s head.

KG1014 Lady Mary Elizabeth Peters

Arms:- Per pale Azure and Gules five annulets fretted in fess three and two Or between a circlet of ten oak trees eradicated Argent fructed Or.

Online images show the field to be both Azure/Gules and Gules/Azure. The correct version granted by the Kings of Arms is Azure/Gules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bedsitdriver (talk • contribs) 18:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this feedback. Very much appreciated. I have corrected each file accordingly, viz.

--R. S. Nourse (talk) 22:21, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford University logo[edit]

The coat of arms at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_Arms-Seal_of_Oxford_University.png has a spelling mistake : "Univeristy" for "University". Another coat of arms exists on Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oxford-University-Circlet.svg

Also, the University has redefined its primary logo as at https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/media_wysiwyg/Oxford%20Blue%20LR.pdf The University has also confirmed the shade of Oxford blue in the same publication.

Thanks for this feedback. And apologies for the late response (I've been away for awhile). I have corrected both issues. --R. S. Nourse (talk) 04:29, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lincoln's Inn[edit]

The Flickr user Baz Manning has photographed [a large number of] coats of arms of High Court Judges and other senior figures in law and politics, displayed on the walls and windows of the Great Hall at Lincoln's Inn. A great many of these people have Wikipedia biographies but few of their armorial bearings have not been illustrated. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quartered arms of Sir William Brooke, 10th Baron Cobham, KG[edit]

I appreciate the beautiful work that you are doing. I am a WikiTree genealogist and am looking for an image of the arms of William Brooke, 10th Baron Cobham to use on his WikiTree profile. I'm not sure that the arms that you are have correct. They look like the six quartered Brooke arms of his father.

In "The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent: Volume 3" ( https://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol3/pp404-442 ) it states that "he bore for his arms fifteen coats; Brooke, Cobham, Delapole, Peverel, Braybrooke, St. Amand, Bray, Haliwell, Norbury, Butler, Sudley, Montfort, Croser, and Dabernon"

It would appear that his arms are shown on the end of his father's tomb (which he erected in 1561). The heraldry is described here: https://www.kentarchaeology.org.uk/arch-cant/vol/62/brooke-tomb-cobham-kent

There are images of these crests here: http://www.paginae-meae.me.uk/atrium/gravesend/cobhamchurch.html

There is another variation from the same church on WikiMedia here:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RobPavey (talk • contribs) 04:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first edit on WikiMedia so apologies if I am not doing it correctly. RobPavey (talk) 02:25, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Rob, for this feedback. Very much appreciated. As the actual quarterings used on the 10th Lord's stall plate are unknown, I did some in-depth research and decided to re-illustrate the quarterings based on the 10th Lord Cobham's 16th century portrait, which uses the same 12 quartering depicted on one of the great mantles at Cobham Hall (the mantle reverses 6 and 7), viz.

1: Gules, on a chevron argent a lion rampant sable crowned or (Brooke)

2: Gules, on a chevron or three lions rampant sable (Cobham)

3: Argent, seven mascles gules (Braybrooke)

4: Azure, two bars undee argent (De la Pole of Chrishall, Essex & Castle Ashby)

5: Gules, a fess argent between nine cross-moline or (Peverel (of Langton)

6: Argent, a chevron between three eagle's claws erased sable (Bray modern)

7: Vair, three bends gules (Bray ancient)

8: Or, on a bend gules three goats argent (Hallighwell)

9: Sable, a chevron between three bull's heads cabossed argent (Norbury)

10: Gules, a fess chequy argent and sable between six crosslets formée fitchée argent (Boteler)

11: Or, two bends gules (Sudeley)

12: Bendy of ten or and azure (Mountford of Beaudesert, Warwickshire)

Thank you again, --R. S. Nourse (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:Arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png[edit]

Copyright status: File:Arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have literally marked every file I've ever uploaded. At the time they were uploaded I followed the correct process and each file has Creative Commons licensing information on their page. It will take me an inordinate amount of time to add new tags to every image. How can this be good for the Commons community? I've put up thousands of my own illustrations, free for use under a CC license. Please advise on how to rectify this in some automated way. I don't have hours to make updates, so any file incorrectly tagged will be deleted (I guess). --R. S. Nourse ([[User talk:Rs-nourse#top|talk

Hi EugeneZelenko, please see Commons:Coats of arms: "Coats of arms drawn by users based solely on the definition (blazon) without any reference to the original drawing (representation) are usually safe for upload." These are not reproductions of original artwork by third parties, thus there is no copyright issue, Rs-nourse has clearly identified himself as the creator of all there images, and has quoted the correct licence for that scenario.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:13, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have declined the speedy deletion of these files and removed the tags. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (ancient).png[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (ancient).png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Ju Ta 17:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (modern).png[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (modern).png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Ju Ta 17:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JuTa, please see Commons:Coats of arms: "Coats of arms drawn by users based solely on the definition (blazon) without any reference to the original drawing (representation) are usually safe for upload." These are not reproductions of original artwork by third parties, thus there is no copyright issue, Rs-nourse has clearly identified himself as the creator of all there images, and has quoted the correct licence for that scenario.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:15, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Armorial Bearings (ancient) of SCUDAMORE, of Kentchurch, Holme-Lacy, and Ballingham, Herefs.png[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This file may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Armorial Bearings (ancient) of SCUDAMORE, of Kentchurch, Holme-Lacy, and Ballingham, Herefs.png, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

And also:

Yours sincerely, Ju Ta 18:04, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JuTa, please see Commons:Coats of arms: "Coats of arms drawn by users based solely on the definition (blazon) without any reference to the original drawing (representation) are usually safe for upload." These are not reproductions of original artwork by third parties, thus there is no copyright issue, Rs-nourse has clearly identified himself as the creator of all there images, and has quoted the correct licence for that scenario.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coat of arms of William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire, KG, PC.png[edit]

File:Coat of arms of William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire, KG, PC.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Lobsterthermidor (talk) 18:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks on your work by User:JuTa[edit]

Hi Rs, I have noticed in the course of my recent contributions to this site that many dozens of your much valued images have been questioned by User:JuTa for not having credited the creator properly "This media file is a derivative work incorporating another work or works. While the source of this file has been identified, essential source information for all work incorporated in this file is missing." This is clearly absurd as all the content is your own work. He threatens deletion of all those files "seven days after this notice". This reckless misinterpretation of the wikimedia guidelines has to be halted urgently! We cannot afford to lose your valuable work, which we are so honoured to have on this site. What can be done? I will leave a message on the talk page of User:JuTa informing him of his error, but this must be stopped urgently. Regards and you have my sympathy for this hideous and misguided attack on your work.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm please to say that as a result of a discussion at village pump, and with useful input by other concerned users, all your images have now been restored. I'm copying the discussion here so that if it ever looks like happening again, you can see what arguments were used to defeat the deletions. Best wishes, Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rs-nourse, a valuable contributor on heraldry under misguided attack, help needed!

User:Rs-nourse has contributed thousands of premium quality images on heraldry, all his own work, but he is now being threatened by User:JuTa with mass speedy deletions for supposedly not having credited authors of derivative work. We are lucky to have such a talented artist contributing his work to our site. All the work is his own, as he states in the licences, there is no derivative work to credit! What can be done to halt this misguided threat by User:JuTa and make him discuss his concerns before he jumps to what are totally erroneous conclusions? Please see recent posts by User:JuTa at User talk:Rs-nourse which set out his erroneous concerns. Is he really able to just delete all this great work so casually and negligently?Lobsterthermidor (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Rs-nourse, JuTa as a courtesy. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 16:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You raised this on JuTa's user page 15 minutes before bring it here, then did so without waiting for their response. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User's uploads are coats of arms. Appear to be historical ones, so user is not designs' authors. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Pigsonthewing, I am panicking a bit, as it seems speedy deletion is threatened. Similar threat being made to his work by another admin, who as you advise I won't name here, but have raised it on his talk page.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EugeneZelenko, thanks for your rapid response. I'm not sure I follow your point, please elaborate/clarify. Are you saying that he's not allowed to reproduce a design seen on a coat of arms, i.e. following the pattern set down but in his own unique way with his own artistic interpretation? The arrangement of a coat of arms, i.e the "blazon" (written instruction for artists, i.e. Gules, a chevron or - meaning, "a gold chevron on a red background") is not subject to copyright restrictions, that would be a misunderstanding I think. Is that the problem?Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Commons:Coats of arms: "Coats of arms drawn by users based solely on the definition (blazon) without any reference to the original drawing (representation) are usually safe for upload." The coats of arms created by Rs-nourse seem to be based on the blazon (which is mentioned in the description, for example in File:Coat of Arms of NEFYDD HARDD, of Caernarvonshire, Lord of Nant Conway.png "Argent a chevron sable between three spear heads of the second, embrued, points upward"), so they are OK imho. COM:AGF should apply too. BrightRaven (talk) 08:58, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have not looked at all the files, but File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (ancient).png, for example, is perfectly legit. The blazon and its source are clearly mentioned in the description (moreover, it is a PD book published in 1848). It is not right to flag it as "no source". BrightRaven (talk) 09:09, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BrightRaven, thanks for your input and for directing us to the guideline Commons:Coats of arms, which seems pretty clear. However, even the statement of the blazon or source is surely unnecessary in the file description - although much encouraged for its usefulness to students of heraldry - there is no copyright on coats of arms - unless reproducing original artwork. In other words we should not set a precedent that any coat of arms image which does not quote the blazon is liable to speedy deletion. It is important to clear up this issue definitively, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of images of coats of arms on wikimedia, which would all qualify for speedy deletion under these misguided criteria. The use/bearing of another person's coat of arms, for example displaying it on one's tomb, used to be a serious offence a few centuries ago, dealt with by the Heralds' Court, in at least one famous case meriting the death sentence. The unauthorised display of the royal arms in England will still today cause a visit from the police, but the reproduction of coats of arms, in one's own artistic interpretation, for academic/exposition purposes, has never been a legal/copyright issue. We await a fuller response - and hopefully retraction - from the two persons concerned who have threatened speedy deletion of all these images, due it seems to a genuine misunderstanding of the issue, which is no doubt somewhat distressing to Rs-nourse - and to others here interested in heraldry, like myself, as his work (with other notables such as Sodacan, etc) forms the backbone of the heraldry project on wikimedia. I'm copying your statement to Rs-nourse's talk page, as a handy riposte in case of future ocurrences.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 14:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JuTa seems to have already speedily deleted a few thousands (!!) of these CoA images. Of the few that remain, it would seem that the few that are not 100% Rs-nourse’s {{Own work}} (assuming COM:AGF) are derivative works including (as “clipart”) what is obviously {{PD-old}}. These should be tagged as such, but the whole thing needs to be undeleted and reevaluated by users interested in making/keeping Commons as a repository of free media. (It is especially commendable that some Heraldry artists are willing to freely license their work, by the way, as so few do it.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:37, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree (and with much that Lobsterthermidor and BrightRaven say above), and am quite disappointed to see that the tagging and deletions were done so hastily and without discussion or detailed rationale—especially considering the quantity.

Regarding blazons, where official (or at least recorded) versions are available they’re a valuable inclusion for provenance, educational value, and verification, but their omission should not be sufficient ground for deletion in itself. More generally I would argue that illustrating arms from a blazon is exactly the artistic equivalent of paraphrasing a piece of writing in one’s own words: as long as you’re not copying or imitating others’ creative expression, you’re not infringing on their IP. The ‘Platonic form’ of the arms described in a blazon (whether explicit or deduced from a given emblazonment) is a non-copyrightable idea. (I might add that there’s little scope for individual style in many heraldic elements, which have highly conventional forms making them more like letters of an alphabet than pictures. The example mentioned above, Gules a chevron Or, would certainly fall below the American ToO and probably many lower ones as well, unless executed with an extraordinary amount of w:diapering, ornamental contouring or suggestion of dimensional moulding with light & shade. That said, human & animal figures, among other more complex elements, can exhibit considerable creativity and distinctiveness.)

Regarding laws regarding misappropriation of arms, these are non-copyright restrictions, which I think of as a combination of personality rights & trademark protection. (At any rate I believe the only heraldic authority that still has any legal teeth of its own is the Lord Lyon’s court. Of course one would expect misrepresentation that’s outright fraudulent to be criminal anywhere.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:24, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support mass restoration of all deleted images. It is not reasonable to expect a contributor to respond to thousands of these tags in a single week. If any individual images appear to be problematic, they can be nominated through a regular DR. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:02, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

this is unacceptable behaviour. the user has been active for two days after being notified, but did nothing to reverse the obviously wrong tags.

if it had been any ordinary user, s/he would have been blocked for disruptive editing.--RZuo (talk) 21:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also

Support the mass restoration of the deleted files. BrightRaven (talk) 08:25, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While this is not a vote I also (morally)

Support their undeletion, having gone through the quagmire that was "Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Media without a source as of 30 May 2021" and similar bad tags like "Commons:Deletion requests/File:1815 US passport - LONDON.jpg" (yes, a US GOVERNMENT file from 1815 tagged for speedy deletion) I wonder how much of this automated deletion is has already destroyed. I think that we should have a new version of deletion requests where these tags create new pages where users can challenge them, also because they are not permanently recorded in a searchable archive (unlike DR's) we can't know how many good files have been deleted because of such tagging. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the drastic action of mass deleting these files does not appear to have received any support here at all. I am not surprised. The question now is: how do we go about getting these images restored? I have had no response from User:JuTa, to my post on his talk page, and it seems the user who did the deletions was User:Fitindia, again I have left a message on his talk page. As I said these images are the backbone of the wikimedia heraldry project, we cannot afford to be without them.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great news guys, User:Fitindia has restored the thousands of images he deleted. Still no reply from User:JuTa who may be on a wiki-break, we need confirmation from him that this will not happen again. Thanks for all the support - sadly Rs-nourse now seems inactive, but as he generously donated his valuable images to the project, we can say we've fought on his behalf with success. I am copying this discussion to his talk page, for future reference.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 12:23, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LobsterT (et al), after the assault on my work by Donald Trung, I lost heart and quit publishing on Wiki Commons for a couple of years. I appreciate all that you did to have my work restored. I am back now and will begin publishing new work very soon. In the meantime, you might note that I have removed all of the white backgrounds from my Garter illustrations. I also reworked quite a few and updated various coronets. Thank you all again for your help and support. It is deeply, DEEPLY appreciated. R. S. Nourse (talk) 04:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Foliot Arms in SVG Format[edit]

Hi Rs-nourse, thank you for all your great work over the years - it is certainly a great contribution to the the field of heraldry. Would you happen to have the SVG file for these arms that you uploaded (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armorial_Bearings_of_the_FOLIOT_family_represented_by_Hugh_Foliot,_Bishop_of_Hereford_in_1219.png)? I am working on some other Folliot arms and I'd like to extract the lion rampant. Many thanks in advance!

Missing Coat of Arms - Order of the Garter[edit]

I tried to add 'File:Shield of Arms of Sir Joseph Austen Chamberlain, KG.png|Sir Joseph Austen Chamberlain, KG' to George V after H. H. Asquith, 1st Earl of Oxford and Asquith, but I was not allowed to, because of userpage restriction. Reigen (talk) 02:13, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. I have added Sir Joseph as you suggested. R. S. Nourse (talk) 15:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	Amazing work, thanks so much for such high-quality images. Mpaniello (talk) 13:19, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mpaniello. Very much appreciated. R. S. Nourse (talk) 22:46, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Rs-nourse

Timmy Grey the Marquess[edit]

Knights of the Garter[edit]

File:Coat of arms of Sir Edward Courtenay, 1st Earl of Devon, KG.png[edit]

Autopatrol given[edit]

Dinham arms - Burke's erroneous blazon[edit]

Henry Fitzroy[edit]

File:Coat of arms of William de Fortibus, Earl of Albemarle.png[edit]

Font[edit]

Questions[edit]

FitzAlan arms[edit]

KG416 Esme Duke of Lennox[edit]

File:Coat of arms of Hugh Bigod, heir to the earldoms of Norfolk and Suffolk.png[edit]

File:Sir Thomas de Granson, KG.png[edit]

The arms of the City of Gloucester[edit]

File:Arms displayed by Hugh de Mapenor, Bishop of Hereford, at the signing of Magna Charta.png[edit]

File:Arms displayed by Richard Poore, Bishop of Chichester, at the signing of Magna Charta.png[edit]

File:Coat of arms of Sir Thomas Howard, 4th Duke of Norfolk, KG.png[edit]

Thanks re: Category:Coats of arms of families of England[edit]

Request for Images[edit]

Fane vs. Vane arms[edit]

Thanks for Peyton arms[edit]

Cruse/Cruwys arms[edit]

Cheyne/le Chen coat of arms[edit]

ARCHER of Umberslade Hall, Warwickshire and[edit]

Hello![edit]

Error in File:K-087-Coat of Arms-FITZMARMADUKE-John FitzMarmaduke ("Johan le FizMermenduk").png[edit]

File:Coat of arms of George Nugent-Temple-Grenville, 1st Marquess of Buckingham, KG, KP, PC.png[edit]

Ladies of the Garter[edit]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Coat of arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png[edit]

Lady Fagan's updated arms[edit]

Garter-encircled arms of Baudouin , King of the Belgians[edit]

Mary Peters[edit]

Are your images copyright or free-use?[edit]

KG1010 to 1014 Incorrect numbering and correct blazons[edit]

Oxford University logo[edit]

Lincoln's Inn[edit]

Quartered arms of Sir William Brooke, 10th Baron Cobham, KG[edit]

Copyright status: File:Arms of Sir Richard Weston, 1st Earl of Portland, KG.png[edit]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (ancient).png[edit]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Coat of Arms of the See of Hereford (modern).png[edit]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Armorial Bearings (ancient) of SCUDAMORE, of Kentchurch, Holme-Lacy, and Ballingham, Herefs.png[edit]

File:Coat of arms of William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire, KG, PC.png[edit]

Attacks on your work by User:JuTa[edit]

Foliot Arms in SVG Format[edit]

Missing Coat of Arms - Order of the Garter[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Navigation menu

Search