Talk:Half-arch (crown)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image copyright problem with Image:Greekcrown.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Greekcrown.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

Image:Louis15.jpgassistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Arch versus half-arch[edit]

Why was this terminology adopted? It makes no sense to me. In every standard reference work, in every major study of regalis (e.g., Lord Twinning's The Crown Jewels of Europe), every official guide book describing the regalia in European palaces, etc., an arch is used to describe a semi-circular strip of metal that extends from one side of a circlet to its opposite, even if that metal strip is bowed down in the center, like the St. Edward's Crown. The fact that this strip of metal intersects another at a right-angle or three others at corresponding angles doesn't effect the terms used for it, i.e., it is still described as an arch, not a half-arch. A half-arch is a strip of metal that only extends from one side of the circlet to the center where it turns back on itself, in a sort of S-shape and does not directly join its counterpart on the opposite side of the circlet, as in the Crown of India, the Queen Consort crowns of Mary of Teck and Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, both the king's and the queen's crowns of Bavaia, etc. In short, why doesn't Wikipedia use the same language in describing regalia as everyone else?

Arch versus half-arch[edit]

Why was this terminology adopted? In every standard reference work, every major study of regalia (e.g., Lord Twinning's The Crown Jewels of Europe), every official guidebook for the royal collections of regalia, etc., I have ever seen an arch is a semi-circular strip of metal that extends from one side of a circlet to the other, even when it is slightly bowed down in the center as in the St. Edward's Crown. Even when that strip of metal intersects another at a right-angle or three others at 45 degree angles at its center it is still described as an arch, not a half-arch. A half-arch is a strip of metal that extends from one side of a circlet and turns back on itself in a sort of S-shape without making direct contact with the corresponding stripe of metal rising from the opposite side of the circlet, as in, e.g., the Imperial Crown of India, the Queen Consort Crowns of Mary of Teck and Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, both the Bavarian king's and queen's crowns, etc. In short, why has Wikipedia adopted a terminology for describing regalia that is at variance with the standard language for describing regalia and can only confuse the reader? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.239.152.174 (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]