Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons

Shortcut

MOS:SOVEREIGNFLAG for Hong Kong

[edit]

For Hong Kong, should China or Hong Kong be used? (example of context: List of tallest buildings) a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 10:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The column says "Country", so people might be funny about it either way. What I would do for maximum flexibility and minimum clutter is change the column to "Polity" and use Hong Kong. Remsense诉 11:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about Macau and Taiwan @Remsense. 77.77.218.177 (talk) 08:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about them? Remsense ‥ 论 10:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are they Territories of China 77.77.218.177 (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the answer is "of course" but then the follow-on question is "which China", PRC or ROK? IMO the right option is to use the PRC flag for these locales based on administrative exercise of sovereignty. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think whether flags should be used depends entirely on context, though there is a clear paradigm difference between HK/MO and Taiwan, which reliable sources overwhelmingly treat as its own country. Remsense ‥ 论 20:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just re-read what I wrote, and I disagree! Probably I was thinking of Macau and Hong Kong, which should show the PRC flag. Taiwan, like Remsense says, can be treated as a de facto sovereign with its own ROK flag. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DECOR discussion at Template:Sidebar person

[edit]

I've proposed the removal of the signature and seal fields from Template:Sidebar person at Template talk:Sidebar person#Signatures and seals vs. MOS:DECOR. Watchers of this page are invited to comment. Ed [talk] [OMT] 23:41, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid flag icons in infoboxes

[edit]

Why is this a rule when it is so common on other Wikipedias? "they could be unnecessarily distracting and might give undue prominence to one field among many" who ever claimed this? I find it very useful to be able to scan with my eyes and recongnize nationality quickly over actually reading the names, which can blend in with all the other text and become undiscernible. Blockhaj (talk) 19:46, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flags also makes the infobox way more colorful and fun to look at.--Blockhaj (talk) 19:47, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to get a consensus of editors to change it. I do recall way back when one person added it. There was no conversation or debate... it was simply thrown in by an editor. Since it didn't get challenged till months later it was somehow a done deal. It was quite strange. But it's not necessarily a bad thing. Some infoboxes get flooded with flags and it can be quite distracting. There are exceptions for military and sports that use the icon in most sourcing. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mainly wanna use it for articles regarding weapoons, vehicles and such. Can such be grouped with military? Blockhaj (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd discuss it at Wikiproject Military as I'm not up with all the protocols they have for infoboxes. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:20, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blockhaj, as far as I remember the convention is battles yes, ships yes, weapons and other vehicles no. The logic is that armies fight (or maybe fought) battles under a flag, and represent nations or other entities that have a flag. Ships fly a flag. Weapons are often associated with many countries and the flags become distracting clutter. Fyunck(click), that isn't quite how I remember it. I thought it was a very long series of conversations to achieve the consensus we have on flags in infoboxes. I'm not sure how long you've been around but I can remember when our article on U2 (the band) had a little Irish flag and folk used to argue about it because two of the band were from England. Something like that. Flags seem to bring out the worst in people and it's a whole area of strife we used to have that I don't miss. Apologies for the long reply, and apologies if I've misremembered events from 15 years ago. John (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Fyunck(click) just making sure you get the ping. Mistyped your name. Sorry again. John (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible. But I've been here twenty years and when it was added I didn't notice for like three months. No one could point me to the conversation that added "they could be unnecessarily distracting and might give undue prominence to one field among many." It simply got added with no rfc at all. I didn't even see a discussion amongst wikipedia editors... perhaps on someones talk page among five people. That is what I recall. And they also tried soon thereafter to remove the flags for international sports events, but Tennis project, Auto Racing project, etc... raised a major stink about it and that discussion led to international sports being protected. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was forwarded to MOS:MILFLAGS (god English wiki is cluttered), and it doesnt have a proper answer to my question. Do i want flags cuz they are decorative? Yes. But i also want them cuz i have ADHD (or whatever they call it this week), meaning i see details first and the full picture later. In short, flags help my eyes navigate and find useful information much faster. Blockhaj (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps that should be brought up under Wikipedia Accessibility issues? Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lead the way. Blockhaj (talk) 00:59, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Accessibility. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But you should definitely read the 19 pages of archived discussion linked from the top of this page first. John (talk) 09:01, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ye no. Blockhaj (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at WT:NFL § Flag icons for international games

[edit]

 You are invited to join the discussion at WT:NFL § Flag icons for international games. Left guide (talk) 01:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:INFOBOXFLAG and Palestine Action

[edit]

Is it appropriate to use a flag icon in the infobox of the article about Palestine Action? I removed it per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG, but it was reinstated by Genabab with this edit. Khiikiat (talk) 22:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Khiikiat I would argue it is, since most terrorist groups feature a flag in their "designated by" section Genabab (talk) 09:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Genabab: What is the point of the flag icon? How does it help the reader? In the examples you have cited, multiple countries are listed. In the case of Palestine Action, there is only one country. MOS:INFOBOXFLAG provides a link to MOS:MILFLAGS, and I think the guidance given there is helpful: Do the icons convey useful information to the reader, or are they merely decorative? Icons that differentiate among several parties (for example, icons used to indicate commander allegiance in Battle of the Atlantic) are likely to be useful, while icons that convey irrelevant or redundant information are usually not. Khiikiat (talk) 15:31, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
> What is the point of the flag icon?
I suppose it would be the same point as using a flag in any other context like this.
I would point out that with RAF, only Germany considered them terrorists. Just one country there, and the flag was used. So there is precedence for this. Genabab (talk) 21:10, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That "other stuff exists" is not a good argument. I also do not see a good reason for including the flag icon. It appears to me to be purely decorative. Donald Albury 23:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Donald Albury Could I ask what would make it not decorative? Genabab (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Decorative" in this case that it does not serve any purpose other than adding a bit of color to the page. The label "United Kingdom" does a much better job of conveying the name of the country than a miniature union jack does. The flag icon is superfluous, and therefore decorative. Donald Albury 00:38, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]