Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

edit

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gkleiman.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

kind and usses of thise

edit

This page does not really apply to the "as distinguished from petroglyphs" meaning, so either that should be at the top of the page, or there should be a separate "pictograph" page for the "rock painting" definition, since the definition on the main page includes both forms of rock art.Mk421 (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Public toilets

edit

Is the "Pictogram for public toilets" used internationally? Hyacinth 08:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)Reply

yes.

Is the "pictogram for public toilets" actually a pictogram? Whilst the signs represents a man / woman - they aren't used to actually mean "man" / "woman", but rather male-toilet / female-toilet - which makes them ideograms rather than pictograms --Davémon 11:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

And I think 'yes' should probably be qualified. Uncited, I may go as far as "it's generally accepted as an 'internationally recognized' symbol", but I can think of a few places in the world where the representation of a woman in a short dress would be bordering on pornographic to local norms. Thoughts/Examples? Fracture98 15:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)it is a great tupe of gramReply

Traffic signs as pictograms

edit

In countries or regions where two or more languages are used, the typical traffic sign is very often a symbol with no writing on it. This is the case for much of Europe and several parts of Canada. Many of these signs, however, offer an abstract symbol instead of a picture, and they cannot be considered true pictograms.

ideogram v. pictogram

edit

Please see my recent post at Talk:Chinese_character_classification#Ideogram_vs._Pictogram.

Self-Promotion

edit

I'm about to delete the section promoting the Book of the Ground wiki, for obvious reasons. Not that it isn't interesting. Tdimhcs (talk) 00:46, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Historical

edit

The historical facts are referenced without citation. The first paragraph presents several specific ideas and is completely without citations.

Modern Uses

edit

There should be a link or citation to the London map referenced Gkleiman (talk) 14:56, 12 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkleiman (talkcontribs) 03:02, 12 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:20, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Relation to emojis and hieroglyphs

edit

It would be good if the article stated the relation to emojis and hieroglyphs. Bjornte (talk) 10:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

The medical nurse did not inform the FM team of the incident.

edit

The medical nurse did not inform the FM team of the incident. 15.248.4.127 (talk) 04:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)Reply