This page falls within the scope of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, a collaborative effort focused on enhancing clarity, consistency, and cohesiveness across the Manual of Style (MoS) guidelines by addressing inconsistencies, refining language, and integrating guidance effectively.Manual of StyleWikipedia:WikiProject Manual of StyleTemplate:WikiProject Manual of StyleManual of Style
This page falls under the contentious topics procedure and is given additional attention, as it closely associated to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style, and the article titles policy. Both areas are subjects of debate. Contributors are urged to review the awareness criteria carefully and exercise caution when editing.
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.
Avoid flag icons in infoboxes
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]
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]
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]
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]
You want to make articles about instruments of death more fun and colorful to look at?
I don't see why lists of countries need to look fun and colorful in ways that lists of anything else don't. The lists are for information, not entertainment. The flags are a distraction. And most people don't know most flags, so they aren't going to serve as the primary means of identification for the countries, their names are. Largoplazo (talk) 13:23, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That’s no the motivation. There are people who actually do use them to navigate around articles. And most people actually do know flags. Tvx1 13:29, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide your data showing that the majority of people actually do know the flags of a couple hundred nations. Do most North Americans and Europeans, do you think, know the flags of Laos or Mozambique? Do you think the average reader, at least from outside of Africa, can differentiate among the flags from Benin, Cameroon, Ghana, Guinea, Mali, and Senegal? What percentage of the population would you imagine to be vexillophiles? I mean, I thought I was one when I was young; and I can recite close to all the independent nations in the world off the top of my head, along with what were at least at one time their capitals (as I got older I finally stopped keeping track). But, off the top of my head, do I know what the flags of Slovakia or Montenegro or Eritrea or Fiji look like? No. Largoplazo (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I actually can reel off the names of every independent country and almost every overseas dependency (I may miss a few uninhabited minor islands). I assume that most people do not put a priority on that kind of memorization. I also can recognize the flags of many countries (although not so much for African countries), but the size of the icons makes it difficult to tell many of them apart. I am opposed to the decorative use of flag icons in WP, I just don't see any utility that justifies their use. Donald Albury15:41, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'd meant to mention the size of the icons. It makes them extra undiscernible. Similarly, I look at the huge swath of facial expressions and other emoji that people use today in sizes that are way too small, especially on mobile devices, and wonder how anyone's supposed to be able to tell what emotion or idea is being represented. Largoplazo (talk) 15:55, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:INFOBOXFLAG specifically permits their use in this context: "Human geographic articles – for example, settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes."New York City, Manhattan (an article about one of the five Boroughs of New York City) and Montreal are all settlements and administrative subdivisions that are clearly covered by this portion of the Manual of Style. For Manhattan and New York City, the country is the United States and the first-level administrative subdivision is New York (state), while that would be Canada and Quebec for Montreal. See this edit, for an example of where flags were removed for city and borough, which are the second and third level subdivisions and are excluded by MOS:INFOBOXFLAG. In every case where I have added or removed such flags, I have always referenced the precise section of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons that explicitly permits their use for county and first-level subdivision only, along with a concise quotation of the MOS demonstrating that fact. Alansohn (talk) 15:38, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
However, it's not mandatory as seen by the use of the word may. In most cases the flag provides no encyclopedic content and is just decoration, worse on mobile devices. For example neither of the flags at Montreal link to the articles, Flag of Canada or Flag of Quebec. The template {{flagof}} links to the flags article as in Canada or Canada ({{flagof|size=23×15px|Canada}}) to match the plain {{flag}} template. Also the plain flag template violates Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#What generally should not be linked in that the country is linked so {{flagu}} as in Canada would be correct.
Any questions about removing flags from other cities around the world, mostly cities in Canada, Germany, Russia, etc. does not have flags at all. Absolutiva22:06, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The guidance is to generally deprecate flags and states: Flag icons should only be inserted in infoboxes in those cases where they convey information in addition to the text. The exception for Human geographic articles was added here in March 2012 following this discussion. The exception for military conflicts is clarified at MOS:MILFLAGS in respect to how they can be used to convey additional info. Where there are only two combatants in a conflict, there is no case for them conveying additional info and they should not be used. In the case of New York City, there is no additional information being conveyed either. The guidance tells us the name must appear next to the flag on first occurrence and, as a consequence, the flag is redundant (it conveys no additional information). MOS:NOICONS states: Icons should serve an encyclopedic purpose and not merely be decorative. This follows from the more general guidance for images at MOS:IMAGEREL: Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. Their use here is purely decorative. We should consider whether to retain this exception, given that it is at odds with the more general guidance herein and higher level guidance. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My argument, which I imagined to be the rationale for the exemption for human geographic articles in the first place, is that they illustrate the other flags that pertain to the subject of the article, so they are relevant. This is particularly true for entities that don't have their own flag. There are ongoing instances of posting the flag of France in infoboxes at Guadeloupe, French Guiana, etc., which lack flags of their own. That makes no sense, it isn't the "flag of Guadeloupe" or the "flag of French Guiana", but I can also see that it's useful to indicate its association with them via their parent entities even if only by way of the flag icons next to their name.
In case anyone considers my view of other uses of flag icons relevant, I consider them ordinarily to be a decorative uninformative addition. Alternatively, to the extent that they can be considered informative, they're a digression. If Japan, Indonesia, and Laos appear in a list and flags appear next to them, to me it reads as "These countries include Japan (and, by the way, here's what its flag looks like), Indonesia (and, by the way, here's what its flag looks like), and Laos (and, by the way, here's what its flag looks like)." So I agree with the general rule, and if it were up to me it would apply even outside of infoboxes, but I also agree with exemption for the reasons I stated above.
Finally, since they're permitted, I don't know what reason would justify anyone removing them in general or in particular cases. Largoplazo (talk) 23:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As long as the verb is "may", whether or not flagicons appear in the infobox is subject to consensus. As of now there are two of us objecting and only you supporting their presence in the infobox. As three is not much of a sample, I am willing to wait a while to see if other editors wish to express an opinion.Donald Albury00:10, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't usually add them when describing settlements. I see the flag icons needed only for battles and sports-related events. – The Grid (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I've had this doubt for a while and maybe I just missed something in the guidelines, but I wanted to ask about this.
For pages about streaming services like Disney+, SkyShowtime or HBO Max, is it required that their international release lists don't use flags?
Personally, I feel like flags make the pages look a bit more “alive” and probably a little striking to some people, but I get that it’s not really essential since the pages are supposed to be straightforward.
it is just a doubt though, because I remember these pages used to have some of them but now they don't. CG372 (talk) 11:50, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how lists of countries need to look alive more than lists of anything else need to. If there's a list of releases in China, South Korea, and France, I get from those names which countries are being referred to—which many people will not get from the flags because few people know all the flags in the world. Adding flags is a digression. It's like saying "Here's the release information for China (date, streaming service, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like), South Korea (date, streaming service, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like), and France (date, streaming service, and, by the way, this is what its flag looks like). Countries have flags, but what their flags are is irrelevant in most circumstances. Largoplazo (talk) 13:17, 7 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Largoplazo Don't worry, I get it, it was just a doubt (I had for some reason).
On several articles listing recipients of film awards I recently removed the flag icons (for example here on "Silver Bear for Best Director"), which was promptly reverted (for example here) by Martineden83 (talk·contribs). Obviously at least one of us has misunderstood MOS:FLAGS. My question is, could we make this Manual of Style more clear? Or is it already sufficiently clear what the guideline recommends in cases like these? Gabbe (talk) 09:15, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the articles have had flag icons for a long time does not prove that this is in accordance with the guidelines. It could just be that the editors simply haven't heard of the guidelines and are unaware of what they recommend. See WP:CONTENTAGE for more on this.
Let me expand on why I think the flag icons are not in agreement with the guidelines. The purpose of these articles is to list the individuals who have received the award. For that reason, the name of the person who won, the year they won, and the work for which they won, these are all directly relevant. Other biographical details about them are not directly relevant. Their gender, birthyear, citizenship status, sexual orientation, religion. These are some of the things we could chose to place an icon of next to their names. But, according to the guidelines, we shouldn't. Adding a flag next to the names in the article "Silver Bear for Best Director" seems to me like a pretty clear example of MOS:FLAGCRUFT. The nationality of these people is not more relevant than, for example, their gender, birthyear, religion, etc.
Which gets me back to my original question: Since it is clear to me what these guidelines recommend, but a disagreement has nevertheless arisen, is there some way to clarify the guidelines further? Gabbe (talk) 05:34, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it does prove the point, multiple editors have been contributing in the pages and this discussion was never raised.
You know its crazy comparing a flag with gender or sexual orientation.
Note that the flags were added only in INDIVIDUAL festival award pages, such as Best Screenplay or Acting categories.
Again, note that main festival award pages, e.g.: Palme d'Or, Grand Prix or third places awards, do not have flags, because following MOS: FLAGS its an unfair use of nationality tools in the "Production Country" section of the tables.
And, you have to show sources that the awards actually use the flags in their lists of winners. It has to be used in sources and pertinent info. I don't see the Berlin Festival using flags. I don't see sources like Variety Magazine or Hollywood Reporter even mentioning the country let alone the flags. Many articles at Wikipedia wrongly use flag icons. Those flags must also be used in sources. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:27, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That was funny, why would Variety and THR determine any of our decisions here? Festival official pages always pointed out nationalities. If many articles use "wrongly flag icons", while multiple editors agreeing in its use, maybe the problem is not the flag or the articles.
We use them because they are also legitimate sources and we try to use those rather than primary sources. We look at all the sources. Can you provide the ones that show flags for the winners? That would help your case. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
