This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#In_sports.2C_flag_.3D_intl._allegiance.2C_not_necessarily_nationality see this discussion for the basics of this suggestion . I think we need a sports peoples section. See below
Their is widespread usage of flags in squads(what do Americans call them?) and listed of results . however flags should only be used where that person can (is?) represent their national team. So flag usage such as Everton_F.C.#Everton_Giants ( [1]) are correct however using a national flag for Formula One teams and driver is incorrect
The use of flags should only show the national team the player is/was/can play for not where they where born
Comments/Suggestions? Gnevin ( talk) 09:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I would add that this goes beyond F1, and represents the majority of international motorsport. Nearly all results or entry lists for events include nationalities of racing drivers (based on their Licensing), and cars used in most form of motorsport carry the flag of the nation they represent. Podium ceremonies also include the display of the driver or team's national flag, and even sometimes their national anthem. You do not have to "represent" a nation for your nationality to be considered important to the sport itself as well as its fans, the ones who read Wikipedia.
I feel the fact of the matter is that, when you do not involve the sports-related WikiProjects in this discussion, especially when you specifically single out a singular sport which has its own Wikiproject, then you do not have consensus to begin with. The359 ( talk) 16:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the section per the above suggestion from its creator. The statement " Flags should be replaced by links to national teams" is simply not going to work for the Football squad templates. The flags are a very useful way of showing players' nationality and I can't see why it needs to change. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 15:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I've not problem scanning that list or User:Gnevin/sandbox2 do you truly have difficulty with it ? Gnevin ( talk) 19:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
There is widespread usage of flags in squads and lists of results. However flags should only be used where that person is representing a national team or country such as the Olympic games. Flag usage such as Delray Beach International Tennis Championships [2] or using a national flag for Golf players at the US Open as they are not representing a nation.
In sports where the national team in the highest level of competition such as Soccer or Rugby Union, flags are commonly used on club pages to indicate the players' national team. However this can be confusing as readers may assume the flag indicates the player was born in that country or has ties to it, sports such as Rugby league and players like Matt Gafa have loose requirement and so can declare for a chosen nation where there may be little prior ties. Flags should be replaced by links to national associations/federations such as Malta on clubs pages to indicate the national associations/federations associated with [3].
This isn't a vote its a discussion, please stop voting its not helpful . Nothing wrong you claim . So a IP looks up some sports sports clubs pages on wiki
Don't know about you but I'm confused . So this is the current guideline : Flags are the players nationality , expect when they are playing for a other country , expect when the national team spans two countries then its the national bodys made up flag, never mind the if country didn't exist use the flag anyway expect when you don't and you use a de facto flag and if all else fails use no flag. Gnevin ( talk) 19:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
or
? Gnevin ( talk) 23:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
At the risk of me being way wrong, could the national team affiliation column header be labelled something like FIFA or IFAB as they are the governing bodies that define player elligibility for play with national squads? Or Nat'l team? Represents? Affiliation?
Or use two flags by default in team/birthplace order?
Two columns would be needed to use two flags in my opinion. I like the IRB, FIFA idea alright example4 Gnevin ( talk) 07:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion
The last two peaces of text in italic is part of the MOS already
*= to be used if the MOS is to be ignored and non sporting nationality is to be include
Gnevin (
talk) 09:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Progress is being made trying to find common ground here, i don't think we are that far from it .
Comments? Gnevin ( talk) 20:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnevin ( talk • contribs)
If you feel we really need a "formal guideline" here, I'd suggest the following:
In roster lists:
Agree with point 1 , point 2 is vague see sports line Rugby union and league , point 3 is just basic nationality in my opinion and should be covered by 2 if we can clarify it Gnevin ( talk) 10:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
What about the use of flags next to sports businessmen such as owners and GM? (Coaches as well, but coaches can coach national teams, so they are closer to players.) This is common in football/soccer and ice hockey article, I've noticed. Should this be encouraged? Standardized? Should flags be used for teams with owned by a holding company? – flamurai ( t) 07:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Should the sport governing body's current or historic flag be used? Gnevin ( talk) 13:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The following is the proposed to be added to the mos. Comments welcome
I am requesting an outside third opinion for a content dispute at Edelbrock on a flagicon and a state seal located in the infobox. Thanks in advance for any help. Aspects ( talk) 17:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Can flags be used like this? I thought it wasnt allowed but i see so much of it. -- Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:21, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats of Arms to support coat-of-arms images in flagicon-like size. I have replied there to my opposition to such an idea, but am also posting here to solicit more discussion as I don't think that WikiProject is on too many watchlists. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 04:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Ptcamn has recently created flag templates for Tlatelolco and Tenochtitlan. Before I barge forward and nominate them for TfD or something, I'd like to get some opinions here if these are compliant with the MOS. Specifically, are they non-flag stand-ins? Right now, they are only used in two articles: Tenochtitlan – Tlatelolco relations (which has a broken infobox anyway because of a missing image) and Battle of Tlatelolco. I don't think they are really helpful in either of those articles. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 16:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
We seem to be inconsistent in our choice of which w:Category:First-level administrative country subdivisions deserve flag icons and which ones do not. I think one NPOV grouping could be the nations represented by United Nations member states#Current_members, the United Nations General Assembly observers, and the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories#The list. Another one could be the previous list plus the First-level administrative country subdivisions, but right now we basically the former plus a few overseas colonies of the EU and the US, the provinces of Canada, and the home countries of the UK. The community seems reluctant to exclude the home countries, so it would seem NPOV to make room for all of the other First-level administrative country subdivisions or items of ISO 3166-2. One bone of contention might be the Antarctic Territorial claims frozen by the Antarctic Treaty. A discussion on this topic may be found at WT:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats_of_Arms & Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats_of_Arms_.28Continued.29. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 11:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
flag}}
and {{
flagicon}}
-based template system, but still remain for editor convenience and/or backwards compatibility. They include (almost) every
ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country code, and
FIFA codes, and
IOC codes where there is no conflict. These codes are familiar with people, so if you are going to choose an abbreviation for a template name, you might as well choose abbreviations that many editors will recognize. Personally, I prefer using the underlying {{
flag}}
template directly, as it results in more usable wikicode. For example, I've seen this sort of thing in the past: {{BTN}} <!-- Bhutan -->
. Well, if you need to add a wiki-comment, why not write self-documenting markup directly, as {{flag|Bhutan}}
? That's why I so strongly object to creating several hundred more "shortcut" templates for the state/province/etc. flags that we already have. Do we really need {{
US-MA}}
, {{
DE-SN}}
, or {{
BR-MG}}
when {{
flag|Massachusetts}}
, {{
flag|Saxony}}
, and {{
flag|Minas Gerais}}
work perfectly well as is? You'd require editors to "decode" a lot of non-obvious codes, when the full template name matches the main article for each state/province/etc. and is therefore much easier to remember.{{
BC}}
). If it's consistency you want, I'd prefer we replace and deleted those 13 templates instead of making several hundred new ones!{{
flag|US-MA}}
, {{
flag|DE-SN}}
, {{
flag|BR-MG}}
, etc.? It would be clearer and shorter when certain names are repeated, e.g., each "
Distrito Federal" of
Argentina,
Brazil,
Mexico, and
Venezuela. :)--
Thecurran (
talk) 14:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
ENG}}
et. al. exist. The home nations competed independently in many different international competitions, so those templates have usage on thousands of articles. There is a balance between utility & convenience and pedantic "correctness". I see very little benefit in replacing thousands of instances of {{
ENG}}
to {{
flag|England}}
so that FIFA codes are removed from that category. Also note that some of the ISO codes are much less well-known than their FIFA/IOC equivalents, such as DEU versus GER, so there are other good reasons for keeping the FIFA/IOC codes in "shortcut template" form. Look, at this point, I think your requests are better suited for
WP:Templates for discussion, so if you feel strongly about removing certain templates from
Category:Flag templates, put the tfd tag on them and start the discussion. As for your last suggestion, I can't imagine any reason why you'd want to see
US-MA anywhere instead of
Massachusetts. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 15:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC){{
flag|Germany}}
. I think you have noted how common they are among the IOC. Besides, during transwikification, information is not confused along the way as the codes are panlingual, so to speak.{{
flag|IT-FI}}
could display and follow with "Florence, Italy" on
Provinces of Italy or pages that involve Italian history. You seem to contend that a pivotal turn in world history, like the
Rennaisance, is less important than a sport, like
FIFA. :)--
Thecurran (
talk)I am requesting an outside third opinion for a content dispute at Slovene language on flagicons located in the infobox. Thanks in advance for any help. -- Eleassar my talk 13:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
This is a survey/straw poll. It is not binding. In response to divergent interpretation of WP:FLAG on Talk:Slovene language#Flagicons in the infobox, I propose for a period of three months starting after a fortnight of discussion here either:
This proposal is only meant to be temporary and should not be enforced beyond its originally intended period, which would violate WP:NPSD, as this is merely an experiment, as per WP:BOLD, to gather consensus, as per WP:CON. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 17:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there a way to show multiple flags for a single player in a team template? Take the case of Ben Gordon and Template:Chicago Bulls roster. The template currently shows Gordon's nationality as British. He was born in England, and is on the shortlist for Britain's 2012 Olympic Basketball team, so I understand the reasoning. However, Gordon moved to the US when he was a child and has American citizenship. He represented the US at the 2003 Pan American Games and currently plays in the American NBA. In addition, he has said that he would probably play for the US in the 2012 Olympics if Team USA invites him.
I don't think it's fair to only associate Gordon with a British flag. Is there any way of displaying a British flag and an American flag? Zagalejo ^^^ 00:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
fb}}
and {{
fb-rt}}
to left-align and right-align the images) so that they help readers browsing that page. For example, it is slightly easier to scan a linear list of match reports looking for the results of a specific national team by using the flag images. That usage is entirely consistent with this MOS page. Why exactly is this an RfC now? Is it because this current-event article is being edited by folks who have never looked at any other
WP:FOOTY articles before now? I hope we don't go through the same debate when the Olympics are the flavor of the month for August. There is very longstanding consensus for those usage instances. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 18:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest to restore flagicons in weapon infoboxes. They serve a purpose to make the infobox more strait forward. The flag icons allow the reader to simply look at the flag rather than read the name of the country saving time and allowing the reader to concentrate on the rest of the article. Regards. - SuperTank17 ( talk) 10:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Have you found an article with a large number of unnecessary flags that would take ages to remove? Would you like to do it yourself but are too busy? If so, list it in this section. Maybe someone more zealous than you would enjoy the work. If you are such a zealous person, please remove the article from the list when you've finished. Cop 663 ( talk) 22:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
{{
flag}}
template than there is for those "shortcut" templates, mostly because the templates like {{
USA}}
only exist for the nations that have ISO 3166 country codes. Many of those articles also use flags for individual US states, French regions, etc. so the generic flag
template is used for them (e.g. {{
flag|California}}
or {{
flag|Brittany}}
. There are over a thousand of those flag templates. Even worse, there are thousands of instances where editors used MediaWiki image syntax directly, instead of using a flag template, so you need additional AWB strings to search for those.... Every few months I go on a run converting flag icons to use the templates, but there are a lot left. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 00:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)See this edit that is adding the flag of the sister city, in addition to the flag of the country that the sister city belongs to. That means 22 different addicional flag icons added to this article. This same IP is doing the same changes on other articles, like this one.
I'd go and revert all those changes before other editors see them and decide to imitate him, but first I would like confirmation that this is really flagcruft and it's wrong to overload the list with so many useless flags (the city flags don't help at finding entries, since cities are already easy to find using the country flags, and the city flag adds nothing), and that I'm not being overjealous. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 00:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, there are already editors copying the behaviour [7] -- Enric Naval ( talk) 02:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I removed all those flags as flagcruft, and I linked to this thread on the edit summary -- Enric Naval ( talk) 22:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Check out the table near the bottom of Patriarchy. What do people think about it? I'll also ask on the talk page and ask what all the flags were actually inserted for there. -- John ( talk) 01:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi people, it's nice to see at least someone's taking the time to remove pointless decoration from articles. But I'm here because John kindly pointed me in this direction. I'm the guilty party with regard to the Patriarchy article. However, I think the flags do add something to the list in that context. Speaking for myself only, while I was researching the table, I didn't know who 80% of these tribes were. I was desparately looking for any handles that helped make these peoples real to me, and gave my poor brain a hook to putting them in context.
There is a summary table above the list with the flags, in that table I could keep track of things by identifying a continent. However, in the endless list of detailed quotes from ethnographers, there is no information regarding location of the tribes, other than the flag (or fortuitous reference in the quotes). Without the flags, a reader would have to navigate away from the text to know where in the world the text is refering to.
Regarding Boffob's excellent point regarding possible anachronism with regard to the flags. All societies listed are current except Chatalhoyuk (prehistoric) and Yegali (fabricated). In fact, I researched each society to ensure I knew the current relevant political boundaries. Where ethnic groups are found in more than one jurisdiction, I have supplied all applicable flags. If the whole article is examined closely it will be observed that it is only in recent times that matriarchies have been hypothesised to exist, and the list is a list of many of those alleged matriarchies. When one reads what the academic community considers to be the best sources, though, it is clear that these societies do not show evidence of women dominating social affairs at all.
The historical impression Boffob (imo correctly) picked up is due to the best academic sources going back many years in some cases. This helps eliminate any bias from western influences after contact. However, the point of the table is reliable verification (and falsification). Theories of matriarchy have been falsified by the evidence listed, the evidence can still be reproduced by contemporary anthropologists working in the jurisdictions flagged. In fact, in the case of the Nakhi, one such anthropologist living with these people has confirmed the results while contributing at Wikipedia.
Sorry for the long explanation, feel free to savage it, I won't take it personally, as long as you won't take any counter proposals personally. ;) Alastair Haines ( talk) 06:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
During the recent, successful FAC for New York State Route 32, this policy was cited as a reason to remove most of the highway shield images from article's infobox and junction box. We did, and it made FA, and was on the Main Page last week.
Now some of the WP:USRD editors decided that the problem was that we needed standards covering the use of shields, and created them on the project's talk page. I wasn't notified of this discussion, which began a couple of days ago, until after it had concluded.
I am concerned that the standards created, under which an explicit condition of featuring the article was recently reverted, and I was warned not to remove them again or the article might get taken to FARC, do not in any way address the underlying issues, namely whether the shield images, as used in the infobox and junction box in addition to a road's name, are truly useful or just decorative. I also don't feel that the U.S. Roads talk page, where one editor believes MOSFLAG "doesn't 100% apply" to USRD despite the explicit statement that the policy concerns "flag icons and similar images".
Is there any input on this here? Daniel Case ( talk) 06:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
My take on it, is that shields are not just decoration. Most places in the United states have at least 3 systems of numbered highways in place, some more. Most "non- roadgeeks" are confused and colloquially refer to a highway as "Highway 40" or just "The 40" regardless of weather it is Interstate 40, U.S. Route 40 or New Jersey Route 40.
However, once I add shields.
Most people are still confused, but at least know that that the one on the left is definitely a freeway and the one on the right is probably a two lane road. So I say the shields do add value and are not just for decoration like country flags used for identification. I second Scott's point that virtually all maps uses shields and not text labels. I believe for this very reason. Dave ( talk) 20:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
This guideline was obviously meant to apply to very different topics with very distinct (political) issues involved, compared to road articles and their accompanying context. Even ignoring this, this guideline was created to combat off-topic and politicized use, neither of which are a factor in the road articles. Even disregarding that, the first two sections of "Avoiding flag problems" seem to indicate that the use in the road article is the appropriate use. Taken together, I can hardly fathom how someone would consider the shield icon usage in the road article to be problematic according to this guideline. Vassyana ( talk) 05:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The article about the G8 incorporates a wikitable and flags are posted as a quick graphic device to distinguish amongst the 34 summits which have been held since 1975. This use of the flagicom-template is helpful; but I do not know whether it will be perceived as consistent with the guidelines for flags. If not, why not? If the flags are used in some non-standard or arguable disputable manner in this article, what is the process for avoiding any future problems before they arise? -- Tenmei ( talk) 23:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
At present, there are 36 articles about serial G8 summits. The most recent was 34th G8 summit. As new information becomes available about the prospective events, additional material is posted about the 35th G8 summit next year in Italy and about the 36th G8 summit two years from now in Canada.
Flagicon-templates are used in the succession boxes at the bottom of each of these pages. I don't see any specific guideline which would inform me that this use has been considered one way or another. They are literally useful for navigation. If there is a guideline which is conventionally construed in a way that suggests a problem I didn't recognize, this posting may help to avoid a complaint in the future. Do you see a potential problem?
FYI: I think I recall that there is a Wiki-group which focuses on succession boxes; and in that venue, I plan to post a general query like this one. In my view, it seems better to try to grapple with any difficulties in advance, if possible.-- Tenmei ( talk) 00:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I recognize that the flag on this page is part of one of the userpage templates listed there, but it seems inappropriate for it to be displayed on a project page. Any thoughts? – SJL 01:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea what the general consensus is on the use of the Olympic Flag, , within athlete pages. Fabio Casartelli, for example, won a gold medal, and his list of wins uses this image. Which of the three would be most acceptable for athlete profiles? :
Does anyon know if this 'Four Provinces Flag' is a legitimate symbol for the whole island of Ireland, or is it just something made up by Wikipedians? Cop 663 ( talk) 01:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Is there any received opinion on the (currently pretty widespread) use of flags in the location/headquarters parameter of Infobox Company? Many users (myself included) remove flags from these infoboxes, but since there are others who add them in just as zealously it might be a good idea to establish a consensus view as a reference point. Gr1st ( talk) 22:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Copied from this talk page ...
Third Party Comment - I have also been looking into this action with concern, since it at least initially appeared to be disruptive, perhaps to a wp:point (not accusing ... just wondering). I found some points that may have triggered the opinion that flag icons should be removed from infoboxes. Some excerpts...
Note that the last point does not justify outright removal of a flag icon from an infobox. In any case, would like to see justification and reasoning for bulk removals. Thanks! -- T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 14:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I would not object to the removal of flag icons from company infoboxes, once the issue is further discussed here and once the Manual of Style is modified to discourage their use in such situations. They do seem to me to be more decorative than anything. Every company has its headquarters in one particular country, of course, but many if not most large companies today are really international, if not multinational entities... Take a company like Aflac, for example. It's headquartered south of Atlanta, Georgia, but two-thirds of its revenue comes from its business in Japan. Nearly half of Apple's revenue comes from outside the United States. These aren't exceptions. They're mostly the rule. Listing the headquarters, with a city and state (and country) is obvious. Tacking on a flag is decorative, even if well meaning: the country is already listed, and the flag provides no additional context in almost any case. user:j (aka justen) 14:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment / Disagree: I don't spend much of my time on Manual of Style issues and at first glance this does not seem to be the most critical issue of all time but I do spend a fair amount of my time on comapnies and infoboxes and this seems to be a major change in the approach taken to infoboxes. Infoboxes are supposed to provide a quick snapshot of the company, person, etc. Nationality / headquarters are important items and the purpose of including flags in those places is to provide the reader with an instant visual identification, same as with a logo or picture. If the flag in an infobox is purely for decoration, then I cannot imagine a place where it is more justified including the "appropriate uses". I came across this whole movement when some of the companies and infoboxes I have worked on were edited. I only add infoboxes for informational purposes and this is just one element of it. I would agree that excessive flag usage is probably something that needs to be curtailed in infoboxes (i.e. I don't need to know a company is headquartered in the UK, serves the UK market, was founded by Britons, etc. but a single flag next to the company's headquarters seems perfectly appropriate to me at least.
I think the proponents of removal would (and this is only my opinion) (i) be in a minority of wikipedians overall who are probably not even aware of this discussion and (ii) be wasting a lot of their own time that could be better used in other areas of the project. Most importantly they have not discussed any of this with the people who spend their time on companies and on infoboxes. If those people are brought into the discussion, I would think that they would have a less doctrinaire approach. I would encourage those editors that have gone and made some of these changes already to be more cautious before they start dramatically changing infoboxes everywhere as you have not yet gotten the buy in of enough people to make such wholesale changes.|► ϋrbanяenewaℓ • TALK ◄| 15:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I can't believe that I forgot to mention this here, but I started a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) to clarify whether or not flag icons should be allowed in lists of bands. Please discuss here: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#WP:FLAG and lists of bands. Thanks! Wyatt Riot ( talk) 02:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Per a number of past discussions, I move to clarify how flag icons should be used in lists, especially lists of bands or in other artistic contexts. Something like, "Flags should never be used in lists or tables to indicate the nationality or origin of an artistic group (such as a band or art movement) unless they act on behalf of or are officially recognized by that nation. When flags are used in a table or list, it should clearly indicate that the flags represent their official status, not legal nationality or place of origin. They should always be accompanied by their country names at least once." I personally think that this is already what the guidelines point to, but the additional text would make it crystal clear. Ideas? Wyatt Riot ( talk) 18:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I doubt that this has actually consensus outside the editors of this page (if it even has it here). The issue is more complex than WP:FLAG currently addresses. WP:FLAG appears to be thinking in terms of footballers and others who play for teams in other countries, while in the world of sports more generally this is a rather uncommon thing. I don't have any particular replacement wording to suggest, I just know that, for example, the editors in WP:SNOOKER would scoff at this. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 15:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Use of nobel icons, debates in various places about the use of Olympic medal icons, and above about various things like heraldic symbols. The advice in this guideline needs to be generalized more broadly - "==Similar icons== While this guideline focuses on flags, the advice in it generally pertains to all such icons, such as of medals and awards, heraldic symbols, highway signage, and the like..." Actually I wrote such a section, maybe as long as a year ago. Who deleted it, and why? — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I plan to move Wikipedia:Manual of Style (flags) to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons) to include the kind of material being discussed at the main talk page regarding the use of nobel icons and other awards. Any thoughts on this proposed move? « Diligent Terrier [talk] 18:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm about to move the page, as discussed here and at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. « Diligent Terrier [talk] 21:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to consider being bold again on this and move the page. I've waited several days and no one has provided a good reason to keep the current title. The information will fit in the new title, and there is no other place to put the new information. « Diligent Terrier [talk] 20:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Quite a bit of time has passed. Will someone consider moving the page? « Diligent Terrier [talk] 15:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The edits, post-move, to genericize this to icons generally, not just flags, looks very good so far, from a structural standpoint. I do wish, however, that edit preview would be used more before saving, as the number of typographical, grammatical and other errors was quite high, and the small bits of new material added were not worded very clearly. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Moving on, I think we should specifically address road signage and medals/awards first, as the two most common non-flag issues brought here. And addressed with sensitivity to various viewpoints on the topic, including previous mediation, XfDs, etc. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I've seen flags such as from the Commons:Project Nuvola 2.0+ pop up in some places. Should the MOS say anything about them? With their "prettiness", editors will be tempted to use them when making colourful tables of sports results et cetera (sort of violating the MOS, though it seems to be tolerated with the regular flags). I fear that things may end up looking ugly and inconsistent, templates will not be useful and there won't be the historic flags necessary to replace the current set of flags for quite some time, if ever. / Coffeeshivers ( talk) 20:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola or non standard stylized flags should never be used in the article main space. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#Help_the_reader_rather_than_decorate Gnevin ( talk) 21:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a lot of debate here about the use of flag icons, so i though id add to it. Ive recently been adding flag icons to all the German armor of WWII. Only have to have them all undone later on and it made me think which is the correct way of setting out the info box?
We need a set of guide lines on which way of using flags is best. What do people think either example 1, 2 or something in between?
or
I personally lean towards example 1 as been the better approach. I feel it looks better and makes the article more complete, although obviously some people don't agree. There seems to be a lot of variation in this though, with some articles having the flags and others not. And also then you find different wars or weapons have flags and another war none. e.g. Germany not having flag icons for any of its units where France has them for all theirs. I feel in the interest of making the Wikipedia better we need to agree on how to set them out and make it a standard. So there isn't such huge variations.
Let me know your Thoughts. Wonx2150 ( talk) 12:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Much of this guideline is written with respect to the context of flag icon usage (e.g. don't use them for birth & death locations), but in my opinion, the biggest reason for—and against—flag icon usage is the human interface. For example, I have always maintained that a solitary flag icon used to mark a country name in an infobox, such as the location of a company's head office, origin of a musical group, or manufacturer of military hardware, is just a gratuitous decoration and doesn't offer much value. However, any list (or table column) of countries is often more easily navigated with the flag icons. That certainly holds true in lists that have no other markers between items, such as an infobox list that does not use bullet characters but separates each item with <br/>
. Going back to the
Panzer I example, if the icon was only attached to the "Place of origin" field, I would say delete it. But I think it is useful to have them on the "Used by" list, so I would keep them for that article. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 16:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Talking to people about it a lot of them agree that the flags make it look better, and they feel it helps them to read the article more easy. Its also handy to distinguish the country's. Wonx2150 ( talk) 04:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to ask for comments regarding the usage of flagicons in the {{ Slovenian elections}} and similar templates. My opinion is these flags are purely decorational and do not help with navigation, while another user claims they are useful (see also my talk page). -- Eleassar my talk 10:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
image
or imageleft
parameters of {{
navbox}}
, as described on that template's documentation page. Those examples are clearly superior than using a 22 pixel icon in the title bar. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 14:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)MOS:FLAGS says "Flag icons may be appropriate as a visual navigational aid in tables, infoboxes or lists provided that citizenship, nationality or jurisdiction is intimately tied to the topic at hand". They are currently in use at NBA All-Rookie Team, a listing of NBA players selected each year for a placement on the NBA All-Rookie Team. Are flags appropriate on this page? It is currently nominated at WP:Featured list candidates, the nominators say that "Because of the numbers of foreign players, the nationality column and the flags can provided additional info to the readers."
Can somebody who patrols this guideline please comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA All-Rookie Team, the page's listing at FLC, for clarification. Thank you, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 06:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
What do you think of User:Gnevin/sandbox1 Gnevin ( talk) 07:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)?
{{
cleanup-icons}}
...? —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 23:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#In_sports.2C_flag_.3D_intl._allegiance.2C_not_necessarily_nationality see this discussion for the basics of this suggestion . I think we need a sports peoples section. See below
Their is widespread usage of flags in squads(what do Americans call them?) and listed of results . however flags should only be used where that person can (is?) represent their national team. So flag usage such as Everton_F.C.#Everton_Giants ( [1]) are correct however using a national flag for Formula One teams and driver is incorrect
The use of flags should only show the national team the player is/was/can play for not where they where born
Comments/Suggestions? Gnevin ( talk) 09:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I would add that this goes beyond F1, and represents the majority of international motorsport. Nearly all results or entry lists for events include nationalities of racing drivers (based on their Licensing), and cars used in most form of motorsport carry the flag of the nation they represent. Podium ceremonies also include the display of the driver or team's national flag, and even sometimes their national anthem. You do not have to "represent" a nation for your nationality to be considered important to the sport itself as well as its fans, the ones who read Wikipedia.
I feel the fact of the matter is that, when you do not involve the sports-related WikiProjects in this discussion, especially when you specifically single out a singular sport which has its own Wikiproject, then you do not have consensus to begin with. The359 ( talk) 16:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the section per the above suggestion from its creator. The statement " Flags should be replaced by links to national teams" is simply not going to work for the Football squad templates. The flags are a very useful way of showing players' nationality and I can't see why it needs to change. пﮟოьεԻ 5 7 15:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I've not problem scanning that list or User:Gnevin/sandbox2 do you truly have difficulty with it ? Gnevin ( talk) 19:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
There is widespread usage of flags in squads and lists of results. However flags should only be used where that person is representing a national team or country such as the Olympic games. Flag usage such as Delray Beach International Tennis Championships [2] or using a national flag for Golf players at the US Open as they are not representing a nation.
In sports where the national team in the highest level of competition such as Soccer or Rugby Union, flags are commonly used on club pages to indicate the players' national team. However this can be confusing as readers may assume the flag indicates the player was born in that country or has ties to it, sports such as Rugby league and players like Matt Gafa have loose requirement and so can declare for a chosen nation where there may be little prior ties. Flags should be replaced by links to national associations/federations such as Malta on clubs pages to indicate the national associations/federations associated with [3].
This isn't a vote its a discussion, please stop voting its not helpful . Nothing wrong you claim . So a IP looks up some sports sports clubs pages on wiki
Don't know about you but I'm confused . So this is the current guideline : Flags are the players nationality , expect when they are playing for a other country , expect when the national team spans two countries then its the national bodys made up flag, never mind the if country didn't exist use the flag anyway expect when you don't and you use a de facto flag and if all else fails use no flag. Gnevin ( talk) 19:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
or
? Gnevin ( talk) 23:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
At the risk of me being way wrong, could the national team affiliation column header be labelled something like FIFA or IFAB as they are the governing bodies that define player elligibility for play with national squads? Or Nat'l team? Represents? Affiliation?
Or use two flags by default in team/birthplace order?
Two columns would be needed to use two flags in my opinion. I like the IRB, FIFA idea alright example4 Gnevin ( talk) 07:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Suggestion
The last two peaces of text in italic is part of the MOS already
*= to be used if the MOS is to be ignored and non sporting nationality is to be include
Gnevin (
talk) 09:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Progress is being made trying to find common ground here, i don't think we are that far from it .
Comments? Gnevin ( talk) 20:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnevin ( talk • contribs)
If you feel we really need a "formal guideline" here, I'd suggest the following:
In roster lists:
Agree with point 1 , point 2 is vague see sports line Rugby union and league , point 3 is just basic nationality in my opinion and should be covered by 2 if we can clarify it Gnevin ( talk) 10:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
What about the use of flags next to sports businessmen such as owners and GM? (Coaches as well, but coaches can coach national teams, so they are closer to players.) This is common in football/soccer and ice hockey article, I've noticed. Should this be encouraged? Standardized? Should flags be used for teams with owned by a holding company? – flamurai ( t) 07:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Should the sport governing body's current or historic flag be used? Gnevin ( talk) 13:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
The following is the proposed to be added to the mos. Comments welcome
I am requesting an outside third opinion for a content dispute at Edelbrock on a flagicon and a state seal located in the infobox. Thanks in advance for any help. Aspects ( talk) 17:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Can flags be used like this? I thought it wasnt allowed but i see so much of it. -- Realist2 ( Come Speak To Me) 04:21, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats of Arms to support coat-of-arms images in flagicon-like size. I have replied there to my opposition to such an idea, but am also posting here to solicit more discussion as I don't think that WikiProject is on too many watchlists. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 04:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
User:Ptcamn has recently created flag templates for Tlatelolco and Tenochtitlan. Before I barge forward and nominate them for TfD or something, I'd like to get some opinions here if these are compliant with the MOS. Specifically, are they non-flag stand-ins? Right now, they are only used in two articles: Tenochtitlan – Tlatelolco relations (which has a broken infobox anyway because of a missing image) and Battle of Tlatelolco. I don't think they are really helpful in either of those articles. — Andrwsc ( talk · contribs) 16:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
We seem to be inconsistent in our choice of which w:Category:First-level administrative country subdivisions deserve flag icons and which ones do not. I think one NPOV grouping could be the nations represented by United Nations member states#Current_members, the United Nations General Assembly observers, and the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories#The list. Another one could be the previous list plus the First-level administrative country subdivisions, but right now we basically the former plus a few overseas colonies of the EU and the US, the provinces of Canada, and the home countries of the UK. The community seems reluctant to exclude the home countries, so it would seem NPOV to make room for all of the other First-level administrative country subdivisions or items of ISO 3166-2. One bone of contention might be the Antarctic Territorial claims frozen by the Antarctic Treaty. A discussion on this topic may be found at WT:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats_of_Arms & Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template#Coats_of_Arms_.28Continued.29. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 11:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
flag}}
and {{
flagicon}}
-based template system, but still remain for editor convenience and/or backwards compatibility. They include (almost) every
ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 country code, and
FIFA codes, and
IOC codes where there is no conflict. These codes are familiar with people, so if you are going to choose an abbreviation for a template name, you might as well choose abbreviations that many editors will recognize. Personally, I prefer using the underlying {{
flag}}
template directly, as it results in more usable wikicode. For example, I've seen this sort of thing in the past: {{BTN}} <!-- Bhutan -->
. Well, if you need to add a wiki-comment, why not write self-documenting markup directly, as {{flag|Bhutan}}
? That's why I so strongly object to creating several hundred more "shortcut" templates for the state/province/etc. flags that we already have. Do we really need {{
US-MA}}
, {{
DE-SN}}
, or {{
BR-MG}}
when {{
flag|Massachusetts}}
, {{
flag|Saxony}}
, and {{
flag|Minas Gerais}}
work perfectly well as is? You'd require editors to "decode" a lot of non-obvious codes, when the full template name matches the main article for each state/province/etc. and is therefore much easier to remember.{{
BC}}
). If it's consistency you want, I'd prefer we replace and deleted those 13 templates instead of making several hundred new ones!{{
flag|US-MA}}
, {{
flag|DE-SN}}
, {{
flag|BR-MG}}
, etc.? It would be clearer and shorter when certain names are repeated, e.g., each "
Distrito Federal" of
Argentina,
Brazil,
Mexico, and
Venezuela. :)--
Thecurran (
talk) 14:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
ENG}}
et. al. exist. The home nations competed independently in many different international competitions, so those templates have usage on thousands of articles. There is a balance between utility & convenience and pedantic "correctness". I see very little benefit in replacing thousands of instances of {{
ENG}}
to {{
flag|England}}
so that FIFA codes are removed from that category. Also note that some of the ISO codes are much less well-known than their FIFA/IOC equivalents, such as DEU versus GER, so there are other good reasons for keeping the FIFA/IOC codes in "shortcut template" form. Look, at this point, I think your requests are better suited for
WP:Templates for discussion, so if you feel strongly about removing certain templates from
Category:Flag templates, put the tfd tag on them and start the discussion. As for your last suggestion, I can't imagine any reason why you'd want to see
US-MA anywhere instead of
Massachusetts. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 15:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC){{
flag|Germany}}
. I think you have noted how common they are among the IOC. Besides, during transwikification, information is not confused along the way as the codes are panlingual, so to speak.{{
flag|IT-FI}}
could display and follow with "Florence, Italy" on
Provinces of Italy or pages that involve Italian history. You seem to contend that a pivotal turn in world history, like the
Rennaisance, is less important than a sport, like
FIFA. :)--
Thecurran (
talk)I am requesting an outside third opinion for a content dispute at Slovene language on flagicons located in the infobox. Thanks in advance for any help. -- Eleassar my talk 13:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
This is a survey/straw poll. It is not binding. In response to divergent interpretation of WP:FLAG on Talk:Slovene language#Flagicons in the infobox, I propose for a period of three months starting after a fortnight of discussion here either:
This proposal is only meant to be temporary and should not be enforced beyond its originally intended period, which would violate WP:NPSD, as this is merely an experiment, as per WP:BOLD, to gather consensus, as per WP:CON. :)-- Thecurran ( talk) 17:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there a way to show multiple flags for a single player in a team template? Take the case of Ben Gordon and Template:Chicago Bulls roster. The template currently shows Gordon's nationality as British. He was born in England, and is on the shortlist for Britain's 2012 Olympic Basketball team, so I understand the reasoning. However, Gordon moved to the US when he was a child and has American citizenship. He represented the US at the 2003 Pan American Games and currently plays in the American NBA. In addition, he has said that he would probably play for the US in the 2012 Olympics if Team USA invites him.
I don't think it's fair to only associate Gordon with a British flag. Is there any way of displaying a British flag and an American flag? Zagalejo ^^^ 00:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
{{
fb}}
and {{
fb-rt}}
to left-align and right-align the images) so that they help readers browsing that page. For example, it is slightly easier to scan a linear list of match reports looking for the results of a specific national team by using the flag images. That usage is entirely consistent with this MOS page. Why exactly is this an RfC now? Is it because this current-event article is being edited by folks who have never looked at any other
WP:FOOTY articles before now? I hope we don't go through the same debate when the Olympics are the flavor of the month for August. There is very longstanding consensus for those usage instances. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 18:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to suggest to restore flagicons in weapon infoboxes. They serve a purpose to make the infobox more strait forward. The flag icons allow the reader to simply look at the flag rather than read the name of the country saving time and allowing the reader to concentrate on the rest of the article. Regards. - SuperTank17 ( talk) 10:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Have you found an article with a large number of unnecessary flags that would take ages to remove? Would you like to do it yourself but are too busy? If so, list it in this section. Maybe someone more zealous than you would enjoy the work. If you are such a zealous person, please remove the article from the list when you've finished. Cop 663 ( talk) 22:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
{{
flag}}
template than there is for those "shortcut" templates, mostly because the templates like {{
USA}}
only exist for the nations that have ISO 3166 country codes. Many of those articles also use flags for individual US states, French regions, etc. so the generic flag
template is used for them (e.g. {{
flag|California}}
or {{
flag|Brittany}}
. There are over a thousand of those flag templates. Even worse, there are thousands of instances where editors used MediaWiki image syntax directly, instead of using a flag template, so you need additional AWB strings to search for those.... Every few months I go on a run converting flag icons to use the templates, but there are a lot left. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 00:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)See this edit that is adding the flag of the sister city, in addition to the flag of the country that the sister city belongs to. That means 22 different addicional flag icons added to this article. This same IP is doing the same changes on other articles, like this one.
I'd go and revert all those changes before other editors see them and decide to imitate him, but first I would like confirmation that this is really flagcruft and it's wrong to overload the list with so many useless flags (the city flags don't help at finding entries, since cities are already easy to find using the country flags, and the city flag adds nothing), and that I'm not being overjealous. -- Enric Naval ( talk) 00:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, there are already editors copying the behaviour [7] -- Enric Naval ( talk) 02:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I removed all those flags as flagcruft, and I linked to this thread on the edit summary -- Enric Naval ( talk) 22:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Check out the table near the bottom of Patriarchy. What do people think about it? I'll also ask on the talk page and ask what all the flags were actually inserted for there. -- John ( talk) 01:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi people, it's nice to see at least someone's taking the time to remove pointless decoration from articles. But I'm here because John kindly pointed me in this direction. I'm the guilty party with regard to the Patriarchy article. However, I think the flags do add something to the list in that context. Speaking for myself only, while I was researching the table, I didn't know who 80% of these tribes were. I was desparately looking for any handles that helped make these peoples real to me, and gave my poor brain a hook to putting them in context.
There is a summary table above the list with the flags, in that table I could keep track of things by identifying a continent. However, in the endless list of detailed quotes from ethnographers, there is no information regarding location of the tribes, other than the flag (or fortuitous reference in the quotes). Without the flags, a reader would have to navigate away from the text to know where in the world the text is refering to.
Regarding Boffob's excellent point regarding possible anachronism with regard to the flags. All societies listed are current except Chatalhoyuk (prehistoric) and Yegali (fabricated). In fact, I researched each society to ensure I knew the current relevant political boundaries. Where ethnic groups are found in more than one jurisdiction, I have supplied all applicable flags. If the whole article is examined closely it will be observed that it is only in recent times that matriarchies have been hypothesised to exist, and the list is a list of many of those alleged matriarchies. When one reads what the academic community considers to be the best sources, though, it is clear that these societies do not show evidence of women dominating social affairs at all.
The historical impression Boffob (imo correctly) picked up is due to the best academic sources going back many years in some cases. This helps eliminate any bias from western influences after contact. However, the point of the table is reliable verification (and falsification). Theories of matriarchy have been falsified by the evidence listed, the evidence can still be reproduced by contemporary anthropologists working in the jurisdictions flagged. In fact, in the case of the Nakhi, one such anthropologist living with these people has confirmed the results while contributing at Wikipedia.
Sorry for the long explanation, feel free to savage it, I won't take it personally, as long as you won't take any counter proposals personally. ;) Alastair Haines ( talk) 06:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
During the recent, successful FAC for New York State Route 32, this policy was cited as a reason to remove most of the highway shield images from article's infobox and junction box. We did, and it made FA, and was on the Main Page last week.
Now some of the WP:USRD editors decided that the problem was that we needed standards covering the use of shields, and created them on the project's talk page. I wasn't notified of this discussion, which began a couple of days ago, until after it had concluded.
I am concerned that the standards created, under which an explicit condition of featuring the article was recently reverted, and I was warned not to remove them again or the article might get taken to FARC, do not in any way address the underlying issues, namely whether the shield images, as used in the infobox and junction box in addition to a road's name, are truly useful or just decorative. I also don't feel that the U.S. Roads talk page, where one editor believes MOSFLAG "doesn't 100% apply" to USRD despite the explicit statement that the policy concerns "flag icons and similar images".
Is there any input on this here? Daniel Case ( talk) 06:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
My take on it, is that shields are not just decoration. Most places in the United states have at least 3 systems of numbered highways in place, some more. Most "non- roadgeeks" are confused and colloquially refer to a highway as "Highway 40" or just "The 40" regardless of weather it is Interstate 40, U.S. Route 40 or New Jersey Route 40.
However, once I add shields.
Most people are still confused, but at least know that that the one on the left is definitely a freeway and the one on the right is probably a two lane road. So I say the shields do add value and are not just for decoration like country flags used for identification. I second Scott's point that virtually all maps uses shields and not text labels. I believe for this very reason. Dave ( talk) 20:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
This guideline was obviously meant to apply to very different topics with very distinct (political) issues involved, compared to road articles and their accompanying context. Even ignoring this, this guideline was created to combat off-topic and politicized use, neither of which are a factor in the road articles. Even disregarding that, the first two sections of "Avoiding flag problems" seem to indicate that the use in the road article is the appropriate use. Taken together, I can hardly fathom how someone would consider the shield icon usage in the road article to be problematic according to this guideline. Vassyana ( talk) 05:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
The article about the G8 incorporates a wikitable and flags are posted as a quick graphic device to distinguish amongst the 34 summits which have been held since 1975. This use of the flagicom-template is helpful; but I do not know whether it will be perceived as consistent with the guidelines for flags. If not, why not? If the flags are used in some non-standard or arguable disputable manner in this article, what is the process for avoiding any future problems before they arise? -- Tenmei ( talk) 23:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
At present, there are 36 articles about serial G8 summits. The most recent was 34th G8 summit. As new information becomes available about the prospective events, additional material is posted about the 35th G8 summit next year in Italy and about the 36th G8 summit two years from now in Canada.
Flagicon-templates are used in the succession boxes at the bottom of each of these pages. I don't see any specific guideline which would inform me that this use has been considered one way or another. They are literally useful for navigation. If there is a guideline which is conventionally construed in a way that suggests a problem I didn't recognize, this posting may help to avoid a complaint in the future. Do you see a potential problem?
FYI: I think I recall that there is a Wiki-group which focuses on succession boxes; and in that venue, I plan to post a general query like this one. In my view, it seems better to try to grapple with any difficulties in advance, if possible.-- Tenmei ( talk) 00:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I recognize that the flag on this page is part of one of the userpage templates listed there, but it seems inappropriate for it to be displayed on a project page. Any thoughts? – SJL 01:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea what the general consensus is on the use of the Olympic Flag, , within athlete pages. Fabio Casartelli, for example, won a gold medal, and his list of wins uses this image. Which of the three would be most acceptable for athlete profiles? :
Does anyon know if this 'Four Provinces Flag' is a legitimate symbol for the whole island of Ireland, or is it just something made up by Wikipedians? Cop 663 ( talk) 01:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Is there any received opinion on the (currently pretty widespread) use of flags in the location/headquarters parameter of Infobox Company? Many users (myself included) remove flags from these infoboxes, but since there are others who add them in just as zealously it might be a good idea to establish a consensus view as a reference point. Gr1st ( talk) 22:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Copied from this talk page ...
Third Party Comment - I have also been looking into this action with concern, since it at least initially appeared to be disruptive, perhaps to a wp:point (not accusing ... just wondering). I found some points that may have triggered the opinion that flag icons should be removed from infoboxes. Some excerpts...
Note that the last point does not justify outright removal of a flag icon from an infobox. In any case, would like to see justification and reasoning for bulk removals. Thanks! -- T-dot ( Talk/ contribs ) 14:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I would not object to the removal of flag icons from company infoboxes, once the issue is further discussed here and once the Manual of Style is modified to discourage their use in such situations. They do seem to me to be more decorative than anything. Every company has its headquarters in one particular country, of course, but many if not most large companies today are really international, if not multinational entities... Take a company like Aflac, for example. It's headquartered south of Atlanta, Georgia, but two-thirds of its revenue comes from its business in Japan. Nearly half of Apple's revenue comes from outside the United States. These aren't exceptions. They're mostly the rule. Listing the headquarters, with a city and state (and country) is obvious. Tacking on a flag is decorative, even if well meaning: the country is already listed, and the flag provides no additional context in almost any case. user:j (aka justen) 14:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment / Disagree: I don't spend much of my time on Manual of Style issues and at first glance this does not seem to be the most critical issue of all time but I do spend a fair amount of my time on comapnies and infoboxes and this seems to be a major change in the approach taken to infoboxes. Infoboxes are supposed to provide a quick snapshot of the company, person, etc. Nationality / headquarters are important items and the purpose of including flags in those places is to provide the reader with an instant visual identification, same as with a logo or picture. If the flag in an infobox is purely for decoration, then I cannot imagine a place where it is more justified including the "appropriate uses". I came across this whole movement when some of the companies and infoboxes I have worked on were edited. I only add infoboxes for informational purposes and this is just one element of it. I would agree that excessive flag usage is probably something that needs to be curtailed in infoboxes (i.e. I don't need to know a company is headquartered in the UK, serves the UK market, was founded by Britons, etc. but a single flag next to the company's headquarters seems perfectly appropriate to me at least.
I think the proponents of removal would (and this is only my opinion) (i) be in a minority of wikipedians overall who are probably not even aware of this discussion and (ii) be wasting a lot of their own time that could be better used in other areas of the project. Most importantly they have not discussed any of this with the people who spend their time on companies and on infoboxes. If those people are brought into the discussion, I would think that they would have a less doctrinaire approach. I would encourage those editors that have gone and made some of these changes already to be more cautious before they start dramatically changing infoboxes everywhere as you have not yet gotten the buy in of enough people to make such wholesale changes.|► ϋrbanяenewaℓ • TALK ◄| 15:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I can't believe that I forgot to mention this here, but I started a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) to clarify whether or not flag icons should be allowed in lists of bands. Please discuss here: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#WP:FLAG and lists of bands. Thanks! Wyatt Riot ( talk) 02:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Per a number of past discussions, I move to clarify how flag icons should be used in lists, especially lists of bands or in other artistic contexts. Something like, "Flags should never be used in lists or tables to indicate the nationality or origin of an artistic group (such as a band or art movement) unless they act on behalf of or are officially recognized by that nation. When flags are used in a table or list, it should clearly indicate that the flags represent their official status, not legal nationality or place of origin. They should always be accompanied by their country names at least once." I personally think that this is already what the guidelines point to, but the additional text would make it crystal clear. Ideas? Wyatt Riot ( talk) 18:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I doubt that this has actually consensus outside the editors of this page (if it even has it here). The issue is more complex than WP:FLAG currently addresses. WP:FLAG appears to be thinking in terms of footballers and others who play for teams in other countries, while in the world of sports more generally this is a rather uncommon thing. I don't have any particular replacement wording to suggest, I just know that, for example, the editors in WP:SNOOKER would scoff at this. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 15:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Use of nobel icons, debates in various places about the use of Olympic medal icons, and above about various things like heraldic symbols. The advice in this guideline needs to be generalized more broadly - "==Similar icons== While this guideline focuses on flags, the advice in it generally pertains to all such icons, such as of medals and awards, heraldic symbols, highway signage, and the like..." Actually I wrote such a section, maybe as long as a year ago. Who deleted it, and why? — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 00:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I plan to move Wikipedia:Manual of Style (flags) to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons) to include the kind of material being discussed at the main talk page regarding the use of nobel icons and other awards. Any thoughts on this proposed move? « Diligent Terrier [talk] 18:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm about to move the page, as discussed here and at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. « Diligent Terrier [talk] 21:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to consider being bold again on this and move the page. I've waited several days and no one has provided a good reason to keep the current title. The information will fit in the new title, and there is no other place to put the new information. « Diligent Terrier [talk] 20:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Quite a bit of time has passed. Will someone consider moving the page? « Diligent Terrier [talk] 15:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
The edits, post-move, to genericize this to icons generally, not just flags, looks very good so far, from a structural standpoint. I do wish, however, that edit preview would be used more before saving, as the number of typographical, grammatical and other errors was quite high, and the small bits of new material added were not worded very clearly. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Moving on, I think we should specifically address road signage and medals/awards first, as the two most common non-flag issues brought here. And addressed with sensitivity to various viewpoints on the topic, including previous mediation, XfDs, etc. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ cont] ‹(-¿-)› 23:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
I've seen flags such as from the Commons:Project Nuvola 2.0+ pop up in some places. Should the MOS say anything about them? With their "prettiness", editors will be tempted to use them when making colourful tables of sports results et cetera (sort of violating the MOS, though it seems to be tolerated with the regular flags). I fear that things may end up looking ugly and inconsistent, templates will not be useful and there won't be the historic flags necessary to replace the current set of flags for quite some time, if ever. / Coffeeshivers ( talk) 20:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola or non standard stylized flags should never be used in the article main space. See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(flags)#Help_the_reader_rather_than_decorate Gnevin ( talk) 21:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a lot of debate here about the use of flag icons, so i though id add to it. Ive recently been adding flag icons to all the German armor of WWII. Only have to have them all undone later on and it made me think which is the correct way of setting out the info box?
We need a set of guide lines on which way of using flags is best. What do people think either example 1, 2 or something in between?
or
I personally lean towards example 1 as been the better approach. I feel it looks better and makes the article more complete, although obviously some people don't agree. There seems to be a lot of variation in this though, with some articles having the flags and others not. And also then you find different wars or weapons have flags and another war none. e.g. Germany not having flag icons for any of its units where France has them for all theirs. I feel in the interest of making the Wikipedia better we need to agree on how to set them out and make it a standard. So there isn't such huge variations.
Let me know your Thoughts. Wonx2150 ( talk) 12:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Much of this guideline is written with respect to the context of flag icon usage (e.g. don't use them for birth & death locations), but in my opinion, the biggest reason for—and against—flag icon usage is the human interface. For example, I have always maintained that a solitary flag icon used to mark a country name in an infobox, such as the location of a company's head office, origin of a musical group, or manufacturer of military hardware, is just a gratuitous decoration and doesn't offer much value. However, any list (or table column) of countries is often more easily navigated with the flag icons. That certainly holds true in lists that have no other markers between items, such as an infobox list that does not use bullet characters but separates each item with <br/>
. Going back to the
Panzer I example, if the icon was only attached to the "Place of origin" field, I would say delete it. But I think it is useful to have them on the "Used by" list, so I would keep them for that article. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 16:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Talking to people about it a lot of them agree that the flags make it look better, and they feel it helps them to read the article more easy. Its also handy to distinguish the country's. Wonx2150 ( talk) 04:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to ask for comments regarding the usage of flagicons in the {{ Slovenian elections}} and similar templates. My opinion is these flags are purely decorational and do not help with navigation, while another user claims they are useful (see also my talk page). -- Eleassar my talk 10:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
image
or imageleft
parameters of {{
navbox}}
, as described on that template's documentation page. Those examples are clearly superior than using a 22 pixel icon in the title bar. —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 14:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)MOS:FLAGS says "Flag icons may be appropriate as a visual navigational aid in tables, infoboxes or lists provided that citizenship, nationality or jurisdiction is intimately tied to the topic at hand". They are currently in use at NBA All-Rookie Team, a listing of NBA players selected each year for a placement on the NBA All-Rookie Team. Are flags appropriate on this page? It is currently nominated at WP:Featured list candidates, the nominators say that "Because of the numbers of foreign players, the nationality column and the flags can provided additional info to the readers."
Can somebody who patrols this guideline please comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/NBA All-Rookie Team, the page's listing at FLC, for clarification. Thank you, Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 06:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
What do you think of User:Gnevin/sandbox1 Gnevin ( talk) 07:24, 7 October 2008 (UTC)?
{{
cleanup-icons}}
...? —
Andrwsc (
talk ·
contribs) 23:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)