- This news story is archived and is closed to comments now -

Wtf! the Islamic people have no right trying to control what information is posted on the internet! Geez. It's not like the entire world is Islamic or something so they should not have any say so over what is on wikipedia. It's an encyclopedia of the people, not a certain people.

Wow thats all i got to say.

The issues of religions are sensitive nowadays!!!

I favor not removing the image from wikipedia. Do they also want the original manuscript from which the image was jpeg'd destroyed as well? I'd be curious to know that.

The image is a "15th century illustration in a copy of a manuscript by Al-Bīrūnī, depicting Muhammad preaching the Qur'ān in Mecca."

Tricky situation...

On one side you have a respect for the religious thingamajig that says there can be no images of Muhammad out of respect (if you know what Muslims says after they say his name, you'll know where i'm coming from) and ask/petition/riot when one surfaces.

On the other side you have the Church of Scientology which uses its own banhammer of lawyers on any person who publishes its books or uses its symbols without permission.

Which one sounds more ridiculous?

Omega Fury i will kick your ass with 5 Metre long stick. You are an asshole .

Islam is best religion in World. >>>

Lol. I am a neutral person. If the Christians tried to remove pictures of Jesus on wikipedia, I'd be as equally angry.

Everyone has a right to disagree and request removal of content from the Internet. It's called Free Speech.

Anthony(if you do return): But then 'free speech' can lead to 'censorship' (irony anyone? I want some!). I read the discussion of the image on wikipedia and its basically free speech and respect for Islam vs free speech, anti-censorship and the neutrality of wikipedia.

Wiki is neutral (that's what they say at least) and it does so in other ways by presenting other pictures and articles considered unfavourable by interest groups (a website has a link to each article that has a picture of a penis in wikipedia, but in this case its to show how 'gay the admins are ') It is sticking by its neutrality by not giving in to the constant complaints made.

Wiki community is saying that it will not 'censor' the image, while the Muslims are saying that it is offensive to the +1 billion people to have an image of Muhammad and it should not be there.

In my opinion, out of respect it should be taken down (they really really do respect the guy after all). The claim of censorship is a bit... weird. There is something stupid about it, but i just can't put my finger on it... Since censorship is usually affiliated with keeping secrets or to dumb down (or keep dumb) our fellow neighbours, it just doesn't seem right to claim it to be censorship if it really isn't a secret.

IMO the discussion on the website is filled of random flaming and people impersonating Muslims and people saying 'we're not going to do it cos its free speech and censorship' and its going no where and fast. Claims like 'muslims don't need to see it' 'muslims can avoid it' just don't seem right. I'm sure that if western society were founded on the idea that there was to be no depiction of Jesus of Nazareth or of God, things would be different.

i have no problem, i'm, not Islamic anyway but i don't think that wikipedia will remove the images...and so what if it doesn't? the problem will remain either way, if it's not wikipedia, it will be something else, no matter what the Islams do, they can't control people nor can they forbid them from uploading anything they want sheesh...
just remember that the world doesn't consist of only you nor does it cycle around you, accept it and live with it or don't accept and live your lives with hate and distrust
i said what i believe

Well i have studied islam, and they do have a strong right not to show their prophets face.

I definitely believe in free speech, but in this case I think taking the picture down would be a good idea. My rationale being that the image doesn't really add any anything to the article -- it doesn't really impart any information and can't really be said to be an accurate depiction of the Muhammad anyways -- so it should just be taken down out respect for all the Muslims out there.

Sure they have the right to have it on on wikipedia, but I don't think anyone would miss the picture, and the 100,000+ people on the petition would appreciate it being removed.

I am not religious, and I am a fan of free speech like much of you. However, I also believe such freedoms must be practiced carefully... as such, it is my opinion that Wikipedia SHOULD remove that image. If the Wiki article on that subject would just mention the tidbit on not showing Muhammad's face, it should be enough. Don't need a picture.

I agree with kspiess that it may as well be taken down because it does not add any thing to the article but I also agree with the neutrality of wiki and that picture should be kept there. This is a pretty difficult situation and I'm glad I'm not in the middle of it.

It can be taken down, sure. But also if the Islamists want to MAKE wiki remove it, they'd have to Go to court or Modify the Constitution. Wiki is American based, and as such, is subject only to Americas laws. I.E. Free speech can and will be used, regardless oh what some Arabs say in Afghanistan.

it is forbidden in Islam. You must u ppl never find us doing smth like tht to jesus

OMG Can't Believe It

Religious Idiots......sigh.....

Many countries, religious groups, etc. request that information and pictures which offend them be removed from whereever they were posted - and they usaually end up being removed? While this is a horrible practice which is done by the modern fascists in Germany and in the Islamic world (and if I tried I could find probably a hundred more groups which have done this), but what makes these Muslims different? If we are going to subject ourselves to fascism and over zealous censorship for no reason other than to spare some whiny group's feelings in some cases, why not this one?

- This news story is archived and is closed to new comments now -