Talk:Coat of arms of Australia

message: Sorry I have removed the following - this is simply not true... (cute story though)
The menu of many popular Australian restaurants feature a dish named The Coat of Arms. It is served on a plate with slices of kangaroo meat arranged on the left hand side, emu meat on the right hand side and usually vegetables in the centre.
MinorEdit July 1, 2005 07:24 (UTC)
I know of at least 3 restuarants in my area which offer this meal.  Perhaps 'many' is an exageration, but anyone who says it's not
true either doesn't live in Australia or simply doesn't get out much.
--jmd 00:09, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Dish

message: I recall reading in Croat dijaspora media many years ago that today's Australian coat of arms was bought? from a Croatian immigrant who was using as his own coat of arms.  Does any have anymore information/sources to verify if this is accurate or not?
Cheers,
croatian_quoll 05:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I spoke to a Mr Drvenzina who was the chariman of Goulburn Valley Water (a fruit framer in Shepparton, Vic) who told the story that his family did design the Emu/Kangaroo concept which then became the coat of arms. 182.239.213.197 (talk) 04:18, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Croat migrant's invention

message: I am very much interested to see both a 1908 and a 1912 version of the coat of arms, with appropriate captions.  GilliamJF 20:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The 1908 version is on the main page.  While I don't have any official versions I do have some photographs taken recently of a monument to federation from Stawell Victoria which was unveiled in 1903.  It may not be an official government monument and the stone work may have just been done by a local stonemason, but in the coat of arms the kangaroo and emu have their bodies facing away from the shield, but their heads turned back towards it.  The scroll also contains the words "Advance Australia".  It's a very simple outline drawing.  MaxwellTJ (talk) 03:29, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different versions 

message: "The shield had a white background, with a red cross of Saint George, "
The linked to page then explains:
"The Cross of St. George should not be confused with St. George's Cross, the flag of England"
:I fixed the link. It's not really fair to say that the wording only refers to the decoration. JPD (talk) 11:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  cross of saint george 

message: Many website seems happy to reproduce the factoid that "kangaroos cannot walk backwards", however someone here disputes this: http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=11640.msg143314
In any event, it needs a credible reference stating they can't walk backwards (do they walk at all). It also needs a credible reference that that was a reason why they were chosen for the coat of arms. As for emus, can any birds walk backwards. Asa01 (talk) 08:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Can't Walk Backwards

message: A recent edit changed the name at the top of the infobox to The Arms of Her Majesty in Right of Australia. The official government site on the coat of arms doesn't anywhere use this phrase, however, and instead refers to the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. Is there a citation for the alternate name? --Delirium (talk) 06:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The argument that the Royal Arms of the UK are only the appropriate arms of HM in right if the UK , and the arms granted to a colony/dominion/state are the appropriate arms for HM in that right is made by groups such as the Canadian heraldry society. It was also made in parliamentary enquiry about the use of the British arms in NSW, and it would seem that the State Arms Act was passed at least partly on the basis of this argument. It seems reasonable, but I don't think it has ever been officially expressed either in Canada or Australia. In the Australian case, I also don't know that the name "Arms of Her Majesty in Right of Australia" has ever been used outside Wikipedia, and in any case, even if not original research, it would be silly to suggest that this is the best name to use for the arms. They were granted as arms of the Commonwealth, and usually referred to as such. JPD (talk) 00:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

text: More relevant for this article, though, is what term is actually used for the coat of arms. I am unable to find any sources that indicate that "The Arms of Her Majesty in Right of Australia" is a term that is actually in use, either by The Queen or Her Government. --Delirium (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Delirium makes the main point, but I will also point out that the Queen actually flies a banner of the arms defaced with her personal emblem, so it is not quite as simple as you suggest. JPD (talk) 23:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arms of Her Majesty 

message: I finally received a reply to an enquiry that I made on 28 October 2008:
Bolding added for emphasis. --AussieLegend (talk) 13:21, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thought I'd join in on this conversation. First of all, the letter above says the arms are not PD, but that conflicts with Australian licensing, so I'm not sure which to believe. Even then, the arms are being used in an educational way, instead of a commercial way, so they do not violate copyright anyway. Regarding the files themselves, I agree that the current SVG is not an acceptable representation, however I feel if in the future, an SVG can be created that greater matches the Arms in reality, then it could be used. I disagree with the person above in saying that using the SVG arms would be irresponsible. Most of the Arms files on here are SVG, and none are displayed in their full size, but in a size appropriate to the page, so that is not a problem. The only time the Arms are displayed at full size is when a user chooses to view them at such. Fry1989 (talk) 02:04, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure which post you're referring to when you mention "the person above in saying that using the SVG arms would be irresponsible", but the comment most likely referred to the previous svg version, which was vastly inferior to the current inferior version. I really don't know why we use svg anyway, it's a horrible format that only Wikipedia seems to use. --AussieLegend (talk) 05:47, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

text: The post directly above me is the one I mean. And saying SVG is a horrible format is rather silly. Some Coats of Arms on here in SVG are done beautifully and in great detail, while others are poor. It all depends on the quality. If a good enough SVG of the Aussie Arms can be made, I see no reason why they can't be used. Fry1989 (talk) 17:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a horrible format because it requires specialist knowledge in order to create svg images and it's an uncommon format that isn't easily viewed off Wikipedia. I fail to see any advantage for the average reader and I think the fact that two attempts have so far failed to replicate the Coat of Arms demonstrates that. --AussieLegend (talk) 18:10, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Just because not everyone can make good arms in SVG isn't a reason to scrap it. Take a look at my country's arms (Canada), or Britain's, or some others, that were made by experts. They show the true value of SVG. Fry1989 (talk) 18:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

text: This has been discussed at length with side by side copmparisons (see the section below titled Whats wrong with this svg image?) but, basically, the SVG version is a WP:OR interpretation of the Royal Warrant by a Wikipedia editor. It is NOT the version used by Australia in any way, shape or form. In an article specifically discussing the CoA, the official versions should be used, not a clearly home-made version. --AussieLegend (✉) 05:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Update

message: The initial coat of arms was granted in 1900 http://vrroom.naa.gov.au/records/?ID=25380 , and doesn't resemble any of the versions presented here. Is there any specific reason to eradicate the prior history of it? According to the patent in the link, it couldn't changed by degree of a King, and therefor represents an unlawful change to the powers given by the patent. As I don't want to start an edit war, I would be grateful to discuss the issue with any maintainer of this page. Lord Chao (talk) 14:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The link you've provided is to a copy of "Letters Patent constituting the office of Governor-General of Australia (UK)", not the warant regarding the coat of arms. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:57, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coat of Arms in 1900 

message: I am wondering whether this entry should be renamed from 'Coat of arms of Australia' to 'Commonwealth Coat of Arms (Australia)'. Reason being that I can find no official documentation referring to the arms as 'Coat of arms of Australia'. All official documentation, including the most recent style guide published by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet refers only to 'Commonwealth Coat of Arms':
http://www.dpmc.gov.au/guidelines/docs/CCoA_guidelines.pdf
Why is the entry title 'Coat of Arms of Australia' without any citation for where this unofficial title originates from?   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renlight2 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Article titles are determined according to Wikipedia:Article titles. We normally use the commonly recognised name, not official titles. --AussieLegend (✉) 04:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Title of Entry

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Coat of arms of Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928075301/http://dfat.gov.au/facts/coat_of_arms.html to http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/coat_of_arms.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080719191618/http://dpmc.gov.au/guidelines/docs/CCOA_general_points.pdf to http://www.dpmc.gov.au/guidelines/docs/CCOA_general_points.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Coat of arms of Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615050653/http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/coat-arms/index.cfm to http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/coat-arms/index.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: If you examine the coat of arms closely, you will see the swan is facing the right. In the table in the design section, the swan is facing the left. While the swan does face left on the current WA flag, it does not on the coat of arms.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.30.234.37 (talk) 04:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Design section - swan facing wrong way 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion