Hi all... I was directed to this discussion by WilyD.. so here are some of
my thoughts..
It is indeed important that we encourage moderation and a sensible
presentation of a sensitive issue. Despite the demands, I think what irks
most people is the way the article currently presents the depictions (were
it just a case of the presence of depictions on Wikipedia, we would be
seeing much higher levels of vandalism on [[Depictions of Muhammad]]).
The depictions represented are, naturally, of historical value and represent
how some Muslims represented him in venerative fashion. However, an issue
that must be considered is that depictions of Muhammad did not prevail as an
art form. While there was indeed plenty of veneration of Muhammad, it
occured in alternative forms, such as calligraphy or poetic
description/visualisation, and so on.
I also think most people understand that we aren't necessarily trying to
depict Muhammad himself, but we are just representing how he has sometimes
been represented in tradition.
While we should indeed represent this depictional tradition to some extent,
the current presentation in the article (as of writing this) is terribly
unbalanced. By having four depictions of Muhammad on show, all prominently
positioned in the top third of the article, there is undue and excessive
focus on what was/is - as a matter of fact - a minority tradition. Myself
and some other editors in good standing believe this poses a
neutrality/WP:UNDUE problem through overstating this tradition - which also
has an effect of misleading the reader in suggesting a stronger historical
prevalence than reality affords. I had previously raised the issue here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/images/Archive#Overkill
I did later propose alternative versions which I believe are consistent with
WP:UNDUE and WP:NOT#CENSORED, which received generally positive but rather
minimal feedback, and which I believe will go a long way towards easing the
perception of calculated image-spamming or some sort of deliberate campaign
to offend ( the proposals may be seen here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/images/Archive#Tweaks). It's
essential that we are sensible and balanced in how we present such
depictions.
Regards,
Itaqallah
On 18/02/2008, Voice of All <jschulz_4587(a)msn.com> wrote:
Right. I'd always been against the image per [[User:Voice of All/Image
concerns]].
It a) Adds practically nothing and is not informative, b) Is extremely
inflammatory. There is just no serious reason to keep it. I take pragmatic
criteria on this sort of stuff. I don't care what the Koran or Hadith say,
so reducto ad absurdem arguments about "ban all images of people" are
beside
the point.
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
> What is relevant is what offends people here and now. This one image in
> question obviously does. It's a pity we don't have any representatives
of
> those offended here on this list to mediate a
compromise -- it seems to
> me
> that both the people suggesting compromises in this thread and the
people
refuting
them have very little understanding of what is actually
necessary
to answer the objections of the moderate petitioners.
I agree very much with Tim. The Wikipedia way has always been to
attempt to find a common ground which is widely satisfactory to all but
the most unreasonable people.
Here are two unreasonable positions:
1. Anything which offends me (or offends anyone) has to be removed from
Wikipedia completely.
2. Offensiveness is completely irrelevant to all editorial
decisionmaking and in fact anyone who mentions finding something
offensive should be mocked, and we should try to find even more
offensive things to put in Wikipedia just to show them.
Fortunately, both are straw-men positions not advocated by anyone.
So here we are in the middle trying to find a way to educate and inform
in a mature, responsible way.
It is a shame that in this thread we do not have any representatives who
might be able to find a compromise which would be satisfactory to the
moderate petitioners, while at the same time fulfilling our general
desire to not censor Wikipedia.
--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/%22I-want-to-at-least-kill-the-responsible-person.%22…
Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l