This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I think the original date that was on the seal was 1664, which the city then decided to change sometime in the 70s. The original date of 1664 was when New Amsterdam became New York. The 1625 date is like it has in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.44.116 ( talk) 04:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC) This is my own photo of the seal from a few months ago. That particular seal had the old date still on it. I think it was on an NYC high school. I licensed this creative commons, so feel free to stick this in the article if anyone wants to. http://www.flickr.com/photos/nyer82/4744298421/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.44.116 ( talk) 15:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Switched to colorized seal because it's just downright prettier, and you can actually see all the elements described in the text. Thirdgen 08:07, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
With all the various seels shown, couldn't the colorized one be shown too, and labeled as speculative? It would indeed be prettier and make it easier to see all the elements. WordwizardW ( talk) 17:33, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
What is the colonist holding? Is it a plumb-bob or perhaps a small thurible? -- Bossi ( talk • gallery • contrib) 00:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
These are NOT the names of the figures. They simply mean (seal's) right and (seal's) left. They are vexological terms. As currently worded, the article incorrectly implies they are the names of the figures. Mjj237 ( talk) 17:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
"This date, however, was chosen for somewhat unknown reasons and most historians believe no significant event actually occurred that year." I don't know if that is true, but the page on Fort Amsterdam states that "(t)he construction of the fort marked the official founding date of New York City as recognized by the Seal of New York City." -- Lakonislate ( talk) 19:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi - I've just posted a major revision to this article and wanted to leave an explanation. Basically, I was doing some research for a project and found a lot of info that is freely available that was not included in the Wiki article, so, to save others some Google searching or trips to the library, I figured I'd revise the article. I reorganized it in the same basic manner as other articles about seals or coats of arms. I added an infobox so that the description of the seal is no longer in the References section, added new sections on design, uses, and history, as well as subsections, so that info is easier to find, and I also uploaded some public domain images to illustrate the text. I deleted some text and one image that struck me as superfluous and otherwise tried to include the rest, revising for grammar or style as needed.
I tried to use what I could find in terms of sources, but this is a niche subject and really the Pine book is the most comprehensive source available. But if you know of other sources and think they should be incorporated, please feel free. Likewise, if you disagree with my changes or reasoning, feel free to proceed as you see fit. Thanks. IbIANTiA ( talk) 14:41, 10 January 2020 (UTC)