Scott Stevenson wrote:
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
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.