Eddy K Size Chart Infographic with Line Chart Best Practices

Data visualization infographic titled "Line Chart Best Practices" using a PIE / DONUT (composition) as the dominant visual element to show the contrast between recommended and poor line-chart design choices. Main central donut chart with clear segment labels in English and precise percentage annotations, plus a clean side legend. Use realistic illustrative composition values such as: "Clear labeling" 24%, "Honest scale" 20%, "Readable color contrast" 18%, "Minimal clutter" 16%, "Direct annotations" 12%, "Poor practices" 10%. Include sharp axis labels and tick marks in English by adding a small secondary comparison panel beside or below the donut: two miniature line charts labeled "Good Example" and "Bad Example" with visible x-axis "Time", y-axis "Value", honest tick marks, and one bad example showing truncated axis and clutter crossed subtly to reinforce the contrast. Add 4 key insight callouts with small icons: "24%" — "Clear labels improve scanability" with tag icon; "20%" — "Honest scales prevent distortion" with ruler icon; "18%" — "Color contrast helps separate series" with palette icon; "10%" — "Poor practices quickly reduce trust" with warning icon. Add a small source / data-note strip at the bottom reading "Data note: Illustrative example for design best practices; figures are illustrative, not sourced." Visual style: minimal flat, rainbow categorical palette, lots of white space, crisp geometry, subtle editorial hierarchy, clean legends, modern sans-serif typography, balanced contrast, calm analytical mood. Include editorial data journalism illustration, FT / Bloomberg-grade chart aesthetics, vector-clean infographic layout. All text MUST be written in English (array). Every heading, label, caption, legend and metric name in the image must be in English — not English. Spell each English word correctly using English characters and diacritics. Numbers stay as digits, no fake authoritative sources cited, no watermarks Numbers labeled "illustrative" unless the user supplied specific sourced data. No fake authoritative sources cited (do not invent "Source: Reuters 2025" — use "Illustrative example" instead). No misleading axis truncation or scale manipulation.