Scott Stevenson wrote:
Raphael1, Seeing as you are the only editor who truly is pushing for a change regarding the display of the cartoons, the lines you are citing in WP:NBD do not apply. Where is this supposed change in consensus? I realize now how hypocritical you are and how much of an equivocator you are. You have yourself in these threads said that you'd be fine if the cartoons were on display in the "Islamophobia" article. Your equivocation is utterly illogical and borderline asinine. If you can not see this then there truly is no hope for you and it will not be long before you truly will have "exhausted the community's patience". How can you reconcile this difference? I can only imagine that you'd agree with displaying the cartoons on that articel for informational purposes. Why can you not get it through your mind that the same logic applies on the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy article, that they are displayed there as they are for informational purposes? The display of the cartoons there is not a moral affront by Wikipedia.
Well, if it's not meant as a moral affront, but readers still get offended by the way Wikipedia displays the cartoons, wouldn't it be reasonable to think about how to inform without offending people? I'd reckon the cartoons displayed on the Islamophobia article not to be an affront, because it would be clear, that "Wikipedia" considers the cartoons to be a sign for hatred towards Muslims.
Here's a quick lesson in logic about why Wikipedia doesn't insult muslims by displaying the cartoons:
Let's say that I were to tell Vkasdg that you were a complete idiot who wasted his time (and others) by constantly droning on about the display of the Jyllands-Posten cartoons on Wikpedia. So then Vkasdg goes and tells Rgulerdem that I said you were an idiot (even mimicing exactly the way that I said it). Rgulerdem subsequently comes to you and mimics what I said when explaining that he'd heard that I called you an idiot. Has Rgulerdem insulted you? Clearly not. This same logic applies to Wikipedia does it not?
No, Rgulerdem wouldn't have insulted me, but he would have denounced you. I know, that you particularly enjoy in relaying messages in order to divide people and to create discord, but I consider this a bad habit of yours.
Back to the cartoons: I guess you don't mind looking at the MC in the lower right corner: "A nervous caricaturist, shakily drawing Muhammad while looking over his shoulder". If the cartoon is funny, it is because of an exaggeration. Nobody really believes, that anyone would be afraid of drawing a Mohammed picture at home. The publication of the cartoons has been the offense and the 3rd sentence of our article "As the controversy grew, some or all of the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers in more than fifty other countries, which led to violent protests, particularly in the Muslim world." implies, that republications insulted even more.