QUOTE(Mister Die @ Mon 26th March 2012, 4:14am)
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.
Quite. That's why you get people who can't tell the difference between sunnis and shiites, and who would interpret a reference to the Quran's light verse to mean that there must be a section with limericks in it, earnestly and passionately contributing to the debate.