You know, with all the controversy surrounding the Muhammad images right now, it is kind of insensitive to link to an image of Muhammad from the main page of Wikipedia.
Yet, Did you know ... #2 does just that. [[Muhammad in Mecca]]
So please, reassure me that this was just stupidity, and not just insensitivity.
Danny
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duf... 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
On Feb 19, 2008 8:38 PM, daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
You know, with all the controversy surrounding the Muhammad images right now, it is kind of insensitive to link to an image of Muhammad from the main page of Wikipedia.
We used to have an article on a special part of Jesus on the Wikipedia main page.
Mathias
PS: præputium sanctum
On 19/02/2008, daniwo59@aol.com daniwo59@aol.com wrote:
You know, with all the controversy surrounding the Muhammad images right now, it is kind of insensitive to link to an image of Muhammad from the main page of Wikipedia.
Yet, Did you know ... #2 does just that. [[Muhammad in Mecca]]
So please, reassure me that this was just stupidity, and not just insensitivity.
We have no policy against such links, and I very much doubt there is a consensus for such a policy, so why shouldn't someone put such a link on the main page? You can't expect people to act differently in order to accommodate the views of a certain group unless there is an actual policy (or, at least, consensus for one, depending on your definition of "policy") telling them to.