Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of country coats of arms (2nd nomination)

:{{la|Gallery of country coats of arms}} ([{{fullurl:Gallery of country coats of arms|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of country coats of arms (2nd nomination)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Some of these coats of arms may be non-free, and the page also violates WP:NOT as Wikipedia is not a gallery. ViperSnake151  Talk  13:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment - note that this is not recreation of deleted material. the article Gallery of sovereign state coats of arms was moved and redirected to here for naming consistency. Grandmartin11 (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

:*Keep - The non-free issues ought to be dealt with on a per-image basis. Given a cursory lookover, it would appear most of those images are public domain by way of the national laws of the respective countries. Furthermore, where in WP:NOT are you finding gallery? Grandmartin11 (talk) 21:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

:::How about WP:NOTREPOSITORY (item 4 in the section)? Image galleries belong on Commons (if they consist of free images). Deor (talk) 01:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep This is the kind of article you would find in a paper encyclopedia. That some images might be non-free is not grounds for deletion of the article. Edward321 (talk) 23:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC){{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of country coats of arms (2nd nomination)||}}

• Keep appropriate encyclopedia article. Pages devoted only to illustrations are common in all encyclopedias DGG (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
• If these are all free, the gallery should be on Commons. If they are not free, they can not be in a gallery here. So delete. --Bduke (Discussion) 08:49, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. A gallery that should be on commons. Rettetast (talk) 14:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. This nomination is yet another example of how image policy wonkery gets in the way of actually making an encyclopedia. Print encyclopedias routinely display exactly this kind of information as color plates --- i.e. "galleries" --- without apparent worry about monopoly franchises. It simply staggers belief that any country that adopts a coat of arms would object to the inclusion of its coat of arms in a gallery showing what it looked like. Any image policy that suggests that this article should not exist requires revision and likely demotion. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

: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.