first steps of an information architecture project is to identify, organize and label relevant chunks of information. When creating labels, the goal is to communicate efficiently, and without taking up too much space. Labels should be written in a language that's familiar to the users, and in a way that they will detect new and recognize similar concepts. In an information environment, labels occur in 2 formats – textual and iconic: Textual labels Contextual links are hyperlinks to chunks of information on other pages or another location on the same page and need to draw meaning from their surrounding text. Headings: Labels are often used as headings to present subsequent information and create a hierarchy within contents. A hierarchical relationship between headings is established visually through consistent use of numbering, font size, color and styles, white spaces, indentation, or a combination of these items. Navigation system choices: There is no standard for a navigation system but common categories might be: Main, Main Page, Home Search, Find, Browse, Search/Browse Site Map, Contents, Table of contents, Index Contact, Contact Us Help, FAQ, News, News and events, News and announcements, Announcements About, About us, About, Who we are. Index terms are often referred to as keywords, tags, descriptive metadata, taxonomies, controlled vocabularies, and thesauri. Such labelling systems can describe any type of content such as sites, subsites, pages, or content chunks. Iconic labels Icons can serve as a substitute for text to represent information. Iconic labels are used as navigation systems, especially in mobile apps, where screen space is constrained. Labelling in argumentation In context of argumentation and debate, labelling a debater or position is often (whether consciously or unconsciously) used as a "red herring" to divert or dismiss the argument, instead of valid argumentation. Often in the form of ad hominem association fallacy aiming at accrediting or discrediting the argument or the debater by associating them with an emotionally charged label. Typically negatively; labelling it as ridiculous or despicable, though it can also go the other way round; attempting to gain sympathy for example by promoting the debater or position as authoritative, or by appealing to pity. Using labelling in argumentation this way constitute an informal fallacy. For example: The guy believed that it can be done with the right technology. The guy is a perverted pansy. (ie. Therefore it can never be done.) The witness claim to have seen something that