This template is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
The infobox does not need images, or icons, added for the people listed. The relevant policy is Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons, in particular WP:ICONDECORATION: icons (as that is what they are - they are too small to be visible) should have some other purpose than decoration, as one editor's decorative improvement is clutter to another editor. These are too small to be seen, and even if they were larger most readers will not recognise them so they do not help navigation.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:20, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And once more. Please stop adding images without good reason – so far no reason has been given for adding them.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:40, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"The infobox does not need images, or icons, added for the people listed."
this is a personal matter , not a wikipedia rule, thats why in several templates you often see images.
"And once more. Please stop adding images without good reason – so far no reason has been given for adding them."
There are a reason and it's because more didactical and easily to associate names when you got a image besides this wasn't the only edit , some names weren't linked and i did it in alfabetical order as well. Please dont start a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_warring(Thepalerider2012 (talk) 16:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC))[reply]
I linked to the relevant wikipedia rule. Here it is again: WP:ICONDECORATION. As for "didactical" navigation boxes are for navigation, not for educational content. But even if the purpose was to help readers learn what the people looked like it fails as the images are far too small. For the same reason they do nothing to aid navigation, as well as the fact that almost all readers will recognise at most one of them (Einstein).--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:53, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The images are too small anyway. So I think it wouldn't hurt to leave them out. I like the list by Thepalerider2012 however (with full name and alphabetically sorted) so please come to a compromise and keep that. --Patrick87 (talk) 17:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you think so you can change them to 25px or 30px not too big. Btw im not rejecting editions from others users but reverting without a good conversation about its morality wrong. Feel free to do it(Thepalerider2012 (talk) 18:04, 11 May 2013 (UTC))[reply]
(edit conflict)I've removed the images, but left the names as they were, fixing some mis-capitalisations and adding one pipe to bypass redirects and removing other unnecessary formatting. I did not notice the names had been changed when the images were added.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:13, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
