Talk:Internet Archaeology

Terrible image and placement.

At the start of the section called Abstraction And Indexing, the very first sentence appears to ask a question. Then an image appears, which seems to answer the question. But it is a terrible image and totally unhelpful, so it does not answer any question. It should be removed on those grounds, but the placement of it is actually my main problem. We do not use pictures to answer rhetorical questions here.

I mean no blame on anyone, as the exact placement was probably done by the system. But that placement interrupts the article's flow, in such a way as to make it seem as if the image is a part of, and an answer to, an interrupted sentence. If that were really the case, the whole thing would be nonsensical, because of the image's content. The answer to the (seemed) question, is actually in a list that appears below the image.

The image has been inserted in the middle of a paragraph, a paragraph that consists mainly of a list. You have to see it to understand my meaning.

I have no idea how to move or delete this particular image because of its awkward placement. I think that if it's done wrong it could cause more problems, so I won't touch it myself. It's a bad image anyway that portrays exactly nothing, so someone should just remove it.

I realize that Wikipedia has a newish policy that encourages people to add images. Because of this encouragement we are being inundated by bad images, especially by truly terrible maps.

A lot of the images also have no identifying info, or have info that is in a foreign language, so what is being presented on Wikipedia is, in many cases, just a bunch of clutter. This happens very often, since the newish policy encourages people to choose images when there are often not any good images available to choose from. It seems no live person is moderating the uploaded images on Creative Commons. Bad images and/or inappropriate ones are not better than none. They are clutter, as in this case.

How do others feel the image here should be fixed? I say we should remove this particularly badly placed and unhelpful image, but I realize the importance of consensus.

There seem not to be any complete instructions on how to delete it without creating a larger problem. I'm obviously a newbie, and this one is beyond my miniscule abilities, so somebody please fix this. Cat Majiv (talk) 05:21, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The previous logo is part of the journal's identity, so is worth including as long as it's not at the expense of other images. I've moved it to the history section. Richard Nevell (talk) 06:44, 29 April 2026 (UTC)