Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of coats of arms

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. postdlf (talk) 17:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of coats of arms[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This list article should have been displaced with Category:Coats of arms years ago, the list is unnecessary. Arms Jones (talk) 21:55, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 22:13, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:58, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per WP:CLN proposer has offered no valid reason why this should be deleted. Why is the list unnecessary? Why is this better treated as a category? This article is valuable because a hierarchical list can convey information over and above categories. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no other information in the list than a number of links. Some lists may be valuable, if the links are explained or grouped in certain way, but not this list: there is nothing more to this list than the links. Who is updating it? Some of the links are misspelled and go to redirects. A category is self-updating and hierarchy is better treated by subcategories. Lists like this was used in Wikipedia ten years ago, before categories were built out. Arms Jones (talk) 21:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The list has a messy layout, like noone has given it any real thought. The hierarchy of the list is unclear, sometimes cities come directly under countries, other times under subdivisions. In some cases links are placed in the wrong place in the hierarchy, as compared to where a city is acctually situated. Many coats of arms which should be at least mentioned in a list like this, are not there. Some links doesn't go to articles but just to file images, which doesn't explain anything to the reader; if you should just show images, it is better to show them in a gallery together with other images. Many links are red. Very few articles link to this list, in spite of the fact it has been around for years. This list shows none of the advantages of lists stated in WP:CLN but many of the disadvantages. Colapeninsula, in what way is this list better than Category:Coats of arms? Arms Jones (talk) 15:43, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but purge. National and provincial coat of arms should certainly be in, but those for towns should be purged. Coats of arms of monarchs and (where siginificantly different) heirs, but those for other members of the royal family should be purged, as should those for noble families: rename to National and provincial coats of arms, possibly splitting out the royal ones, but they are for the head of state. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NOTDUP and WP:LISTPURP. Northamerica1000^(talk) 18:58, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.