Talk:76th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)

76th Infantry Division (United Kingdom) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 28, 2015	Peer review	Reviewed
September 9, 2015	Good article nominee	Listed
November 20, 2015	WikiProject A-class review	Approved

Current status: Good article

Military history: British / European / World War II A‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

A

This article has been rated as A-class on the project's quality scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	World War II task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

Division Patch

I've come across this before (80th division page) where a photo of the patch is replaced with a drawing of one. This was described as policy.
1) Where can I find this policy?
2) Why the preference for a representation one more stage removed from reality (usually accurate, though the 59th Div's is wrongly proportioned) over a photo of an original article?
If it's real and reasonable, I'll shut up.

Usedtoknowthat (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that practically every divisional insignia O have seen, for various nations across the wiki, are SVG files based off actual works. As for policy: per Wikipedia:Image use policy, generally "Drawings, icons, logos, maps, flags and other such images are preferably uploaded in SVG format as vector images."EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA

Nicely done Enigma; thanks for the opportunity to work "bogus" into the article too. ;O))Keith-264 (talk) 09:35, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and your welcome! EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 13:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]