Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of coats of arms of the United Kingdom and dependencies

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. Seems to be a clear consensus. (non-admin closure) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 13:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery of coats of arms of the United Kingdom and dependencies

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log

)

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

• Keep
  editing policy, not by deletion. The topic has a clear and coherent theme and so is quite proper. Warden (talk) 20:18, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep. Not all useful things on Wikipedia should be deleted, and not all galleries are bad. For example,
  good gallery (although that did not keep nominator for also nominating that gallery for deletion). That gallery is indeed extremely useful as a navigational aid. Assisting navigation is one of the stated purposes of lists, and galleries can also serve that purpose, in particular for items whose primary representation is visual. As it is, for many people the primary representation of the topic of this gallery is also visual, and it serves a navigational purpose.  --Lambiam 23:08, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The coats of arms listed here each have their own article. This is a
  WP:NOTGALLERY would have to be rewritten to allow such obviously encyclopedic lists.) Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:17, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy keep - per just about all the rest of this shotgunned set of AfD nominations. Somebody fetch the
  WP:TROUT, please. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy Keep For the same reasons that have been given for all of these articles the nominator has AFD'd with the same incorrect rationale.
  WP:NOTGALLERY is not violated and the subject matter is notable. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 08:54, 12 October 2011 (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.