To me the problems arise when people aren't putting the photo in because it's a portrayal of Muhammad, but because they want to show how "uncensored" Wikipedia is. It's a bit like how so many articles on sexual issues have unnecessarily graphic photographs, often more than one. Ditto with some medical articles.
In these cases it isn't about encyclopedic quality (not like Wikipedia actually has that), but demonstrating how "free" Wikipedia is to annoy others.
|