Still getting the hang of Wikipedia.
Anything in nature, technology or mythology that can be represented with an image can be put on a shield, and probably has been; and the Wikipedia article “Charge (heraldry)” is bloated with examples. Is anyone wiser for knowing that an aloe plant appears in the arms of the North-Eastern Transvaal Tennis Association?
There seemed to be a tacit consensus that “show don’t tell” was not the best policy here, so beginning on June 14 I took a chainsaw to it, my guiding principle being that the layman is more interested in knowing what charges occur frequently, and thus contribute to heraldic style, than in either an exhaustive catalog of exotica or the minutiae of blazon. When I stopped for breath on June 17, the article was a quarter of its former size, and I had added some brief passages on general principles.
Alas, I had not examined the article’s recent history. The bloat did not happen by accident, and much of it, apparently, is the diligent work of one person. Today he reverted the article to his version of June 13, with the note “rv [revert] a lot of what is in essence vandalism”.