User talk:Kontributor 2K

Hello

Bonjour !
Kontributor 2K (d) 08:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

• Archives :
• 2023
• 2024
• 2025

Coat of Arms of Canton of Zurich

Hi @User:Kontributor 2K I see that you are changing categories from "... in Heraldry of Switzerland" to "... in Heraldry" (removing "of Switzerland"). I always thought that "... in Heraldry of Switzerland" is more accurate and is also a subcategory of the corresponding "... in Heraldry" category. In the past I also have been corrected to add the "of Switzerland" subcategory to my coat of arms. Is there a guideline about that or is the "of Switzerland" category deprecated? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by - (talk) 10:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

One should login, to talk about "the past" and "my coat of arms" -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 11:00, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Yes sorry! This is me. Same question again. Gerhard Bräunlich (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Gerhard Bräunlich,

There is a topic here: Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology#Tree structure and the tincture templates; the main point being the complexity of developping parallel heraldic localized sub-trees, which would lead to excessive, not to say infinite, complexity, since for the whole to be consistent it must of course be done for all countries. Hence a gradual step backwards.

This said, you're welcome to join the discussion. -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 12:31, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Makes perfectly sense to me! Gerhard Bräunlich (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Editing a protected template

Hello. I wanted to edit the template Template:Igen/top and improve and add missing translations for one of the languages. But It seems to be protected against edits because it is used on many pages etc. Do you happen to know what I can do to edit the template? Jooja (talk) 08:01, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi Jooja, I can do it for you, what is it exactly? -Kontributor 2K (talk) 09:41, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

That would be great. I updated everything in one change in the template sandbox https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Igen/top/sandbox. Jooja (talk) 13:13, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for the update. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:28, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. There is just one typo from me in line 103:

|fa=نرسیم

|fa=ترسیم Jooja (talk) 13:33, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done --Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:36, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Crowns in heraldry categorisation.

I do not agree with moving files from a country-specific category (such as Category:Crowns in heraldry of Canada) to a counting-specific category (such as Category:1 crown in heraldry). I view them as co-existent. There are a number of specific categories for heraldry from such countries as Brazil, Iran, and Russia, and I believe a such a category is warranted if there is a high number of examples from specific countries. As for examples such as File:Jeanne Sauvé escutcheon.svg, I am currently in discussion with another user as to whether it would be wise to create a sub-category for crowned elements such as sceptres or animals, where a crown is not a charge by itself. Fry1989 ^eh? 14:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Bonjour Fry1989,

You're welcome, as well as the other user 'you're currently in discussion with', to join the topic here Commons talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology#Tree structure and the tincture templates (sorry for you were not invited)

This said, you probably noticed that I didn't remove files from Category:Crowns in heraldry of Canada at a glance, but also that I took advantage to fix many other issues. Regards, -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 14:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

@Fry1989: , to get straight to the point (that is discussed on the linked topic above), do you intend to reproduce each existing heraldic category in a category specific to each country (i.e. to start developing aside localized heraldic sub-trees)?

-- Kontributor 2K (talk) 14:45, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

I create categories ad hoc when I see the need. I do not intend to create a category for every little thing and every possible parameter. Is it your position that there should not be country-specific categorisation at all, even in countries with an above average number of usages of a certain heraldry element (50-100+)? Fry1989 ^eh? 17:35, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

@Fry1989: I agree that special elements could go into some aside localized subcategories, such as British/Spanish crowns, why not, but I don't agree that they should replace the general heraldic categories. The points are discussed on the project tp, the scaring one is the potential developpement of heraldic parallel full sub-trees; for an example, that kind of categories already suggests that a further developpement can have to be set up (i.e. 3 eagles or in heraldry of France, and so on), so I'm going back on that, by the way

Then, for an example, moving a file from Horses in heradlry to Horses in heradlry of a country only adds difficulty to further categorization if the file is not already correctly categorized (i.e. in 1 horse argent, or so), although it does indeed relieve the general category.

This said, I don't think that dealing with a 5000 files category is a problem, browsing the full category just takes more time, and adding localized subcategories doesn't improve the search results. It only adds complexity to the management.

Of course there are correctly maintained localized categories (example, among others), which are consistent and don't have figure related sub-catgories (yet?), so the rule is not absolute, but depends on the context. Other examples here.

edit: Also, on this file, although there is no crown element in the blazon, the category currently adds a keyword that is fully relevant in the search results, altough in contradiction with heraldry.

-- Kontributor 2K (talk) 18:10, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Ping

Went ahead and posted to the admin noticeboard. If you have a specific user to get feedback from or a specific note to make, go ahead and make it (& please do!) but otherwise don't blanket revert needful warnings about inaccurate images, especially ones claiming to represent base forms of important designs.

[As far as the most recent comment, lots of other inaccurate images created by underinformed but eager users isn't any reason at all not to start fixing some of them, especially ones with simple titles that will get more coverage. And, of course, if it's the English Wikipedia articles mostly based on English heraldry that are just wrong on this point, sorry for the trouble. Point out the issues and I can help fix the articles instead.] — LlywelynII 13:48, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Blazon Project - substitut

Bonjour @Kontributor 2K,
Grand merci pour tes corrections sur le blason de William Davisson :
Comment faut-il enregistrer le substitut de son nom d'utilisateur pour ensuite pouvoir l'utliser dans le Template:COAInformation ?
J'ai vu par exemple que le tien était K2. Pour moi, ça pourrait être Hy ?
Est-ce que ça permet ensuite d'ajouter une catégorie pour retrouver ses créations ?
Bien à toi,
Hypsibius (talk) 13:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Bonjour Hypsibius,

En dessous d'un certain nombre de blasons mis en ligne, cela pose plus de problèmes qu'autre chose,

Néanmoins, tu peux toujours te créer une catégorie globale pour tes fichiers, en attendant,

Et en attendant, le mieux est d'utiliser image = F,

Cordialement, -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:53, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

D'accord, merci @Kontributor 2K !

C'est fait, comme tu l'as vu. Je note les dernières corrections pour les appliquer à l'avenir.

J'ai quelques autres blasons à venir pour compléter la série des premiers médecins du roi et surintendants du jardin des plantes.

Bonne journée,

Hypsibius (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Eastern Christian Heraldry

Hey!

Here to disagree :) Yes, there is no category for Western Christian Heraldry (yet), but, as a matter of fact, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic heraldry are way more similiar than Catholic and Protestant. Also, there is a Cat for "Eastern Christianity", while i haven't found any for Western Christianity. Lastly, i am planning on creating "Christian Ecclesiastical Heraldry" so that it'll all make more sense.

Best regards, Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 13:52, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü: , Category:Ecclesiastical heraldry is already a sub-category of Category:Christian heraldry,

Then, it's not certain that adding a mother category "Eastern Christian heraldry" for orthodox/non-orthodox-eastern catholic categories does provide a real overall benefit, also from some point of view, mainly logical too, the "Catholic heraldry" mother category should include western-Roman and eastern catholic (orthodox/non orthodox) heraldries categories. Protestants have their own. So let's go for over-categorization instead of dealing with existing ones first?

There are many potential risks in a system where categories are over-entangled;

BR, --Kontributor 2K (talk) 14:10, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey,

the data we have is huge so the category system can be huge. Please try to understand how the categories work. "Christian heraldry" is mainly consisting of "Christian symbol XY in heraldy" and "Ecclesiastical heraldry" consist of heraldry used by clergy and church institutions. But until now, it is hard to find "Eastern rite heraldry" cause the categories don't exist and "ecclesiastical heraldry" includes more than it should include. If you critize my changes, please do it constructively.

BR, Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 14:36, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Till now, the category "Ecclesiastical heraldry" is totally missing the categorization by denomination, especially for the Eastern Christian tradition. That's what i am trying to do here while organizing the categories "Ecclesiastical heraldry" and "Christian heraldry" the way they are intended to be organized. Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 14:40, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Hey (or Ho) @Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü:

As you can see I have added a relevant category here Special:diff/1088321547, yet if you move up the hierarchy you'll see that it's inconsistent.

Then you say "please try to understand how the categories work", actually I don't understand, I just see that Category:Ecclesiastical heraldry already contains subcategories like Category:SVG ecclesiastical heraldry or Category:Ecclesiastical heraldry by country, among others.

Then I can't only criticize the fact that all these are planned to be entangled with rite-specific categories, i.e. over categorized. Is that a constructive? -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Tbh, i don't see why you'd think that this means a over-categorization. In fact, it is a compromise between a mistake made in the past and the need to categorize the huge amount of data in a way that makes sense. I'll explain why: Ecclesiastical heraldry is extremly diverse. Orthodox are totally different than protestant CoAs, Catholic CoAs can differ between rites, ... . Till now, an unknown amount of Orthodox CoAs is not categorized at all in this category. That's why we'll need to categorize with rite-specific categories. "Ecclesiastical heraldry by country" is not solving this problem. But as you can see with "Ecclsiastical heraldry in Ukraine" it is well possible to entangle these categories. Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 15:31, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Little addition: Yes, orthodox is "catholic" in a certain sense, but not in a heraldry one. Also, Eastern Catholic is "Roman Catholic" in a certain sense, but once again, not in a heraldry one. Maybe that helps, cf. also: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Catholic_ecclesiastical_heraldry Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 15:33, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü,

I see that there are also categories like this one, dedicated to SVG files, and mixing together CoAs with/without ornaments, although I 'm not absolutely certain that raising this point is relevant yet,

And I'd like to add that it would start to cause issues if this categorization principle were to extend to elements specific to heraldry, like here --Kontributor 2K (talk) 15:08, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

As a reply to: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AEcclesiastical_coat_of_arms_images_that_should_use_vector_graphics&oldid=prev&diff=1101503554

I think so, but i am not sure. With the SVG one i just followed the example of "Coats of arms by representation type". Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

@Noah.Albert.ZivMilFü: I thnink so too, and follow with high interest, --Kontributor 2K (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Lobsterthermidor

Hello, I have noticed from your contribution history that you are following my every contribution and edit to Wikimedia Commons, and either deleting, amending or criticising. I percieve this as aggressive editing. In future, as an act of courtesy, please discuss any aspects of my edits, or work in general, by leaving a message on my talk page, before deleting my work. You seem to be aggreived at me not adding "sort keys", I do not believe this is a requirement, so it is not grounds for deletion. Thank youLobsterthermidor (talk) 16:07, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

@Lobsterthermidor: Not to mix heraldic figures with proper names is not a requirement??

This organization of the sub-categories is what you believe to be suitable, i.e. clear? and at the opposite this organization or this one is not what should be done, according to you? do you prefer the sub-categories mixed wihout distinction?

I'm not following you, your contributions appear in my watchlist, and as an act of courtesy I've corrected a lot of your edits through time, including sort keys on files or categories (more to come), but not only: for an example after you created Category:Ermine shields with a canton (diff.) , I'm the one to have categorized Category:Bassett (of Uley, Gloucestershire) arms to the newly created category (diff.) since you forgot to, although you were the creator of this latter category too.

Incidentally, I also had to take care of that myself.

So, if your actions do indeed require some surveillance, there is no aggressiveness, rather apathy and above all a great void.

This said, if you want to discuss, too, wether a category Cross of Toulouse in heraldry should be created (diff.) while there is already a Category:Toulouse cross in heraldry (2008), then each category categorized in each other: diff.#1, diff.#2, I'm your man, since I still don't understand the purpose.

Contrary to the indispensability of clearly separating figures categories and proper names categories. Isn't it?

R. -- Kontributor 2K (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Bordure of pieces in the coat of arms of the viscounts of Cabrera (Principality of Catalonia)

I'm so sorry, but the coat of arms of the viscounts of Cabrera has the Catalan heraldic charge of the bordure of pieces, not the bordure embattled: https://dibujoheraldico.blogspot.com/2014/10/cabrera.html.

Joaquim_Link (talk) 06:47, 23 September 2025 (UTC +1)

Yes, Wikipedia relies on personal websites and blogs. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 09:39, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

But the correct version is the uploaded by me (with the bordure of pieces), not the old one (with the bordure embattled). Joaquim Link (talk) 08:23, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

And so? --Kontributor 2K (talk) 10:00, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

If you may restore it to my edition. Joaquim Link (talk) 12:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

¿ restore where ? --Kontributor 2K (talk) 12:24, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Here: https://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%9C%E0%B8%B9%E0%B9%89%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%8A%E0%B9%89:Mattis/Articles-Arts_1. Joaquim Link (talk) 02:44, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

https://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/คุยกับผู้ใช้:Kontributor_2K#Bordure_of_pieces_in_the_coat_of_arms_of_the_viscounts_of_Cabrera_(Principality_of_Catalonia) --Kontributor 2K (talk) 08:10, 25 September 2025 (UTC)