Category talk:Device heraldry - Revision history

Maccormaic at 23:13, 31 December 2005

2005-12-31T23:13:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:13, 1 January 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
	* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
			** Actually, a lion is a ''charge''. Postures '''do'' count for a CD, under SCA Rules for Submission. A lion rampant has a counted difference from a lion passant. - [[User:Maccormaic\|Roberd]] 17:13, 31 Dec 2005 (CST)
	*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)

Conrad Leviston: I agree with Cian

2005-10-17T13:07:52Z

I agree with Cian

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:07, 17 October 2005
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
	* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
			*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)

Thomas at 12:28, 17 October 2005

2005-10-17T12:28:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:28, 17 October 2005
Line 4:		Line 4:
	----		----
	Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
			* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)

Cian: two-timing entries in subcategories

2005-10-17T06:51:31Z

two-timing entries in subcategories

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:51, 17 October 2005
Line 2:		Line 2:

	*<strike>As far as I know fimbriated only applies to ordinaries.</strike> Fimbriation applies to simple charges only (including any ordinary). Your basic description is correct though. As well as fimbriated we need [[cotised]]. As for mulletty, it may be just as well to create a redirect to [[mullet]] and add the information there. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 01:07, 10 Aug 2005 (CDT)		*<strike>As far as I know fimbriated only applies to ordinaries.</strike> Fimbriation applies to simple charges only (including any ordinary). Your basic description is correct though. As well as fimbriated we need [[cotised]]. As for mulletty, it may be just as well to create a redirect to [[mullet]] and add the information there. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 01:07, 10 Aug 2005 (CDT)
			----
			Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)

Conrad Leviston: struck out my erroneous belief

2005-08-10T06:22:02Z

struck out my erroneous belief

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:22, 10 August 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Two more [[wiki]] pages needed "[[fimbriated]]" and "[[mulletty]]". From recent [[Lochac]] discussions, ''fimbriated'' seems to indicate that a [[charge]], [[line division\|division]] or [[ordinary]] is surrounded by a [[border]] of a certain [[tincture]]. ''Mulletty'' seems to say the division or ordinary is filled with [[mullet]]s. Can someone who is more in the know complete these pages and link to them on appropriate pages (cf. [[Kingdom of the East]]'s [[device]]). - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 20:34, 9 Aug 2005 (CDT)		Two more [[wiki]] pages needed "[[fimbriated]]" and "[[mulletty]]". From recent [[Lochac]] discussions, ''fimbriated'' seems to indicate that a [[charge]], [[line division\|division]] or [[ordinary]] is surrounded by a [[border]] of a certain [[tincture]]. ''Mulletty'' seems to say the division or ordinary is filled with [[mullet]]s. Can someone who is more in the know complete these pages and link to them on appropriate pages (cf. [[Kingdom of the East]]'s [[device]]). - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 20:34, 9 Aug 2005 (CDT)

	*As far as I know fimbriated only applies to ordinaries. Your basic description is correct though. As well as fimbriated we need [[cotised]]. As for mulletty, it may be just as well to create a redirect to [[mullet]] and add the information there. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 01:07, 10 Aug 2005 (CDT)		*<strike>As far as I know fimbriated only applies to ordinaries.</strike> Fimbriation applies to simple charges only (including any ordinary). Your basic description is correct though. As well as fimbriated we need [[cotised]]. As for mulletty, it may be just as well to create a redirect to [[mullet]] and add the information there. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 01:07, 10 Aug 2005 (CDT)

Conrad Leviston at 06:07, 10 August 2005

2005-08-10T06:07:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 10 August 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Two more [[wiki]] pages needed "[[fimbriated]]" and "[[mulletty]]". From recent [[Lochac]] discussions, ''fimbriated'' seems to indicate that a [[charge]], [[line division\|division]] or [[ordinary]] is surrounded by a [[border]] of a certain [[tincture]]. ''Mulletty'' seems to say the division or ordinary is filled with [[mullet]]s. Can someone who is more in the know complete these pages and link to them on appropriate pages (cf. [[Kingdom of the East]]'s [[device]]). - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 20:34, 9 Aug 2005 (CDT)		Two more [[wiki]] pages needed "[[fimbriated]]" and "[[mulletty]]". From recent [[Lochac]] discussions, ''fimbriated'' seems to indicate that a [[charge]], [[line division\|division]] or [[ordinary]] is surrounded by a [[border]] of a certain [[tincture]]. ''Mulletty'' seems to say the division or ordinary is filled with [[mullet]]s. Can someone who is more in the know complete these pages and link to them on appropriate pages (cf. [[Kingdom of the East]]'s [[device]]). - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 20:34, 9 Aug 2005 (CDT)

			*As far as I know fimbriated only applies to ordinaries. Your basic description is correct though. As well as fimbriated we need [[cotised]]. As for mulletty, it may be just as well to create a redirect to [[mullet]] and add the information there. Thanks for the heads up. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 01:07, 10 Aug 2005 (CDT)

Cian: fimbriated and mulletty

2005-08-10T01:34:33Z

fimbriated and mulletty

New page

Two more [[wiki]] pages needed "[[fimbriated]]" and "[[mulletty]]". From recent [[Lochac]] discussions, ''fimbriated'' seems to indicate that a [[charge]], [[line division|division]] or [[ordinary]] is surrounded by a [[border]] of a certain [[tincture]]. ''Mulletty'' seems to say the division or ordinary is filled with [[mullet]]s. Can someone who is more in the know complete these pages and link to them on appropriate pages (cf. [[Kingdom of the East]]'s [[device]]). - [[User:Cian|Cian Gillebhrath]] 20:34, 9 Aug 2005 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:13, 1 January 2006
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
	* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
			** Actually, a lion is a ''charge''. Postures '''do'' count for a CD, under SCA Rules for Submission. A lion rampant has a counted difference from a lion passant. - [[User:Maccormaic\|Roberd]] 17:13, 31 Dec 2005 (CST)
	*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:07, 17 October 2005
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		Should all entries in [[:category:heraldic poses]] also be in [[:category:device heraldry]]? cf. [[Couchant]]. I would say no. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 01:51, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
	* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)		* I would agree; there's no need to fill out device heraldry with poses. They're two seperate things, really (a lion is a device, whether it's dormant or statent). IIRC, poses don't count for a CD as far as submission is concerned, while devices do, so there's precedent for keeping the two apart. [[User:Thomas\|Thomas]] 07:28, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)
			*I would say no as well. As a general rule of thumb I would avoid categorising something under both a category and its subcategory. Ahem. [[User:Conrad Leviston\|Conrad Leviston]] 08:07, 17 Oct 2005 (CDT)