On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:42:34 +0100, wikien-l-request@lists.wikime wrote:
Eugene van der Pijll schrieb:
Daniel R. Tobias schreef:
Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran: http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-236/0802179464180019.htm
Note that this is unrelated to the online petition discussed in the other thread; this is about the Danish Muhammad cartoons at [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]], where there is no question if the image is encyclopedic or not.
Is that a reliable reference for adding Wikipedia's [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]] to the list of [[Islamophobia]] incidences? They don't even write about how many Muslims have been blocked from editing Wikipedia, because they removed the cartoons from [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]].
I wouldn't think so, given that "Islamophobia" is an inherently POV designation, and is Original Research when applied to a situation where the word wasn't actually used directly in the original source. The link is probably a reliable reference for an assertion that some officials claiming to speak for some Muslims are still critical of Wikipedia for the cartoon controversy issue (in addition to the current flap over Muhammad images), but that's still a long stretch from declaring Wikipedia to be "Islamophobic".
Incidentally, the set of Muslims who are disturbed at Wikipedia including the cartoon images and the set of Muslims disturbed at Wikipedia including the Muhammad images are different sets; the Iranians apparently don't mind depictions of Muhammad (if tasteful and respectful), since they have some such images in their own museums.
http://harryzzz.blogspot.com/2007/08/in-teheran-unsuspected-cartoon- of.html