Wikipedia talk:Icons in military articles

"It is not uncommon to see unit images displayed in the infobox of the unit they represent, this has not been controversial nor drawn substantial discussion." - I had assumed this had zero discussion because these are images (icons, insignia?) relating to the unit. And there are specific fields in the MilUnit Infobox that can take them. It would be better to state that this is not an issue. What wouldn't necessarily be correct under NoIcons would be icons next to the parent unit or branch. Though ships in their infoboxes manage to carry it off Flags to denote their allegience rather well. GraemeLeggett (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Good thought. Reworded. —Ed!^(talk) 19:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for putting this together so fast. The discussion on rank here seems to centre on the use of non free images, rather than the appropriateness of rank icons. Is that right? I suspect that if rank and unit icons are used for biogs, then national allegiance flags will routinely be added also. Span (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Non free use is another point worth raising as that counts for more than the guidelines on Flag and Icons. Probably use the word precedence - even if there was an agreement between editors that the dinky little icon was more appropriate than not, if the image is Non-free a suitable rationale would be hard to deliver. GraemeLeggett (talk) 11:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)