From watching AN/I recently, probably many are aware of this petition which has now gardnered more than 18,000 signatures:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-o...-from-wikipediaThe issue is whether the painting of Muhammad should be included in Wikipedia's Muhammad's article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MuhammadIt seems that there is significant unity of opinion among Muslims that the image should not be included because it is a taboo in Islam to show their prophet's face. Those arguing for include tend to be non-Muslims or, like Matt57, those who can be classified as anti-Muslims.
Some are claiming that this is an issue of censorship, but I can't believe it is that as the painting of Muhammad isn't a likeness but rather just non-realistic depiction. The argument around this image seems to be more about whether or not removing the image will set a precedent that will result in all depictions of Muhammad being removed from Wikipedia.
My opinion is that this particular image makes no significant contribution to the article, but that it does serve as a rallying point for a contrived conflict between anti-Muslim editors (who camouflage their incitement under the banner of "anti-censorship") and Muslim editors.
Although, I do think that the images of Muhammad should be kept in Wikipedia in general and especially with regards to the Danish cartoon controversy. To remove all images of Muhammad from Wikipedia is wrong but we should cover the topic with modicum of sensitivity. Thus I do strongly favor keeping this separate article and its images (and its name should be enough to warn any pious Muslim as to what he/she should expect):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depictions_of_MuhammadBut keeping one solitary and non-depictive painting of Muhammad in the Muhammad article merely to aggrevate Muslims for the pleasure of anti-Muslim editors seems to be unnecessary, in fact, it seems to be purposely "trollish."
This post has been edited by SenseMaker: 
Illustration of Muhammad, Censorship or respect for diversity?
