Commons-hosted Muhammad Images Options

[Tarc]

Just as I called it quite awhile ago, the status quo is upheld.

I think that never was there any doubt as to the outcome. Indeed given those who were likely to take part it was easy to foretell. What has been discussed in this thread is what ought to happen in a sensible world. That they are different says much about WP, no?

They aren't different at all, no. The "real world" of the West here doesn't defer to prehistoric religions either.

[Web Fred]

Just as I called it quite awhile ago, the status quo is upheld.

The 3 chords will have to suffice then.

Just as I called it quite awhile ago, the status quo is upheld.

I think that never was there any doubt as to the outcome. Indeed given those who were likely to take part it was easy to foretell. What has been discussed in this thread is what ought to happen in a sensible world. That they are different says much about WP, no?

They aren't different at all, no. The "real world" of the West here doesn't defer to prehistoric religions either.

The "real world" of the West here doesn't defer to different prehistoric religions either.

There, sorted it for you.

[GlassBeadGame]

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Muhammad images (T-H-L-K-D)

After closely examining the arguments put forth in each section, we have concluded that the status quo of the Muhammad article should largely be retained. For proposal 1, we found there to be no consensus to put any type of hatnote in the article. In the discussion of question 2, we found that there was the strongest consensus to put a calligraphic depiction of Muhammad in the infobox. With regards to the placement of other figurative images, we found that the current status quo -- of using figurative images of the highest encyclopedic value to illustrate important events in the subject’s life -- had the most support. This was accompanied by a general sentiment that figurative images were not necessary before the “Life” section, but would certainly be necessary after that point. However, editors should remember that calligraphic representations are the most common, and should not add images, especially figurative ones, without a clear encyclopedic reason to do so. Furthermore, there was a clear consensus to avoid any quota of figurative or calligraphic image, and to let the text of the article dictate the images used. There was no consensus for how the principle of least astonishment should apply to Muhammad.

Just as I called it quite awhile ago, the status quo is upheld.

A nice, shiny



to Somey and AssBeadGame. Better luck next time, fuckwits.

I'm crushed. I was certain that enlightened Wikipedians, who always represent the best in all human endeavors, would do the right thing. How could this happen? It is enough to shake my faith in Wikipedia and goodness of nerds.

[Web Fred]

I was certain that enlightened Wikipedians, who always represent the best in all human endeavors, would do the right thing.

Poor, poor deluded GBG. Don't you understand? They did do the right thing.

Now toddle off, to whatever it is non-nerds do..

[Selina]

(Moderrration [should we really have to?])

Ok, a tonne of complaints received over this stuff, and it's really hard to work out where to break it off, since some comments that are nothing but insults are mixed in with actual comments over the issues, but yeah. Train of tit-for-tat insults moved to here, try keep at least vaguely on topic!

[Text]

Ok, a tonne of complaints received over this stuff, and it's really hard to work out where to break it off, since some comments that are nothing but insults are mixed in with actual comments over the issues, but yeah. Train of tit-for-tat insults moved to here, try keep at least vaguely on topic!

What we are seeing on the web on a general level is that ZuckerBorg's creation is effectively contributing to the closure of small independent forums, resulting in the creation of a big ocean, many thousands of kilometres wide but only one millimeter deep, and with many problems with data security.

[Tarc]

I declare myself the thread-winner.

/pats self on back

[Fusion]

I declare myself the thread-winner.

/pats self on back

If that makes you feel smug and clever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

(Moderrration [should we really have to?])

Ok, a tonne of complaints received over this stuff, and it's really hard to work out where to break it off, since some comments that are nothing but insults are mixed in with actual comments over the issues, but yeah. Train of tit-for-tat insults moved to here, try keep at least vaguely on topic!

The sooner we have more moderators the better.

This post has been edited by Fusion: Thu 7th June 2012, 11:39am

[Tarc]

I declare myself the thread-winner.

/pats self on back

If that makes you feel smug and lcever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

Nah, I was feeling smug and clever way before then.

[GlassBeadGame]

I declare myself the thread-winner.

/pats self on back

If that makes you feel smug and lcever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

Nah, I was feeling smug and clever way before then.

If it wears off drink some more and pick on some poor immigrant. You'll be your old self in no time.

[Fusion]

If that makes you feel smug and clever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

Nah, I was feeling smug and clever way before then.

I doubt it not. But to say that you now feel smug is surely not to deny that you have felt thus for many years.

[Tarc]

I declare myself the thread-winner.

/pats self on back

If that makes you feel smug and lcever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

Nah, I was feeling smug and clever way before then.

If it wears off drink some more and pick on some poor immigrant. You'll be your old self in no time.

GBG, I love immigrants. As long as they come in the front door. You're not one of those limp-wristed amnesty-for-illegals types, are you?

If that makes you feel smug and clever, then no doubt you now feel smug and clever.

Nah, I was feeling smug and clever way before then.

I doubt it not. But to say that you now feel smug is surely not to deny that you have felt thus for many years.

Isn't that what I just said?

[SB_Johnny]

GBG, I love immigrants. As long as they come in the front door. You're not one of those limp-wristed amnesty-for-illegals types, are you?

I dunno about GBG, but I support amnesty. I'm also a "son of the revolution", so presumably my opinion matters much more than yours does.

[GlassBeadGame]

GBG, I love immigrants. As long as they come in the front door. You're not one of those limp-wristed amnesty-for-illegals types, are you?

I dunno about GBG, but I support amnesty. I'm also a "son of the revolution", so presumably my opinion matters much more than yours does.

You're a low-life scab last time I checked.

[SB_Johnny]

GBG, I love immigrants. As long as they come in the front door. You're not one of those limp-wristed amnesty-for-illegals types, are you?

I dunno about GBG, but I support amnesty. I'm also a "son of the revolution", so presumably my opinion matters much more than yours does.

You're a low-life scab last time I checked.

I can't be both?

[Jay]

Is this an attempt to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?

[-DS-]

Is this an attempt to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?

I question the 'an attempt' part.

[Fusion]

Is this an attempt to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?

I question the 'an attempt' part.

So you say that Jay should say "Is this to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?" As I understand it that would be a future construction. Yet surely it is already the stupidest!

[-DS-]

Is this an attempt to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?

I question the 'an attempt' part.

So you say that Jay should say "Is this to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?" As I understand it that would be a future construction. Yet surely it is already the stupidest!

I'm sure you're enjoying this, but my meaning was clear.

[Web Fred]

Is this an attempt to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?

I question the 'an attempt' part.

So you say that Jay should say "Is this to be the stupidest thread in WR's history?" As I understand it that would be a future construction. Yet surely it is already the stupidest!

In fact, shouldn't it be "most stupid"?