Wikipedia:Peer review/Women in heraldry/archive1

Women in heraldry

I want to have the article peer reviewed so that I can get suggestions on how it can be improved. What could be done to improve the article's flow? Are there any inaccuracies in the article? (I don't think so!) Any major points missing? Thanks. Mb1000 03:22, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article needs to ease the reader into the topic a little more by a sentence explaining heraldry as a European monarchical institution that had differing traditions for men and women. Also many of the words that are linked on the heraldry page do not have links here. Otherwise it's a decent article, if a bit on the short side. Thanks. :) — RJH 15:10, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is far too short if you are thinking of making it a FA. I am sure the modern issues (with differences between the sexes in how the arms are displayed) must have been extensively debated. There must be historical complexities and cultural differences which should be touched upon, and you should be wary of anglocentrism; "heraldic heiress", for instance, is a concept which, as far as I know, only exists on the British Isles - but what about Spain and Portugal, with the Spanish practice of using both paternal and maternal surnames, for instance - doesn't that affect the use of arms as well? English-language heraldry handbooks seem mostly to ignore anything but English and Scottish heraldry, but Wikipedia should not. (When I saw the title I almost expected an article on women as depicted in heraldry, which would be a different but also interesting topic...) Uppland 11:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions. --Mb1000 16:18, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]