Talk:Alikhan (village)

Image of non-enhancing sign
@User6000000 Can you explain why you want an image of a sign only saying "Alikhan"? This does not improve the article at all, as the name of this village is already known by the page title and the infobox header. We do not need any "icon" on the page; can you explain what you mean insisting we do need one? Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 12:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)


 * simply because an icon looks better than an empty one, especially when searching on the web User6000000 (talk) 12:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:ICON, Icons should serve an encyclopedic purpose and not merely be decorative. They should provide additional useful information on the article subject, serve as visual cues that aid the reader's comprehension, or improve navigation. A sign that just says the name of the settlement, again, does not enhance the article and thus should not be in the article, even if you think it "looks better". It's completely fine not to have any icon. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 12:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * and is there an issue regarding having an icon? aside from decreasing the bytes User6000000 (talk) 15:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The issue is what I said, that we don't need it at all and icons should not be there just for decorative purposes. Why are you so insistent on having an icon? It does not improve the experience for the reader or (searcher) in any way by merely having an image of a sign saying the name of the settlement. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 15:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * so the problem isnt even the bytes? then why are you insistent on removing it if it absolutely changes nothing? User6000000 (talk) 15:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not insistent on removing it, you're just not adequately explaining why you want the image at all. Bytes and space is almost never a problem, you're just not giving an answer why we should have the image at all when it conveys no information not already given by simply reading the page. Again, we do not use icons for solely decorative purposes. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 15:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * how about alis wikipedia, it literally just shows an icon of the name ali written in arabic calligraphy User6000000 (talk) 15:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I see that, but that is different as it conveys more information than just the word "Alikhan" and its Kurdish form, as that is a calligraphic panel rather than just a sign. Ali is also a person, and the infobox for people usually shows an image of that person, and the calligraphic panel is in a way an image of the person, while infoboxes for settlements usually show, if images are present, notable or historic monuments and places in the city, while a sign of the name of the settlement is neither notable nor special. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 15:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * a notable place in the village is a flat giant rock cut in middle by a lightning bolt around 100-200 years ago, is that good enough? User6000000 (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * by giant rock i mean like 20m wide and 12 ish meters tall maybe more User6000000 (talk) 12:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)