Misplaced Pages

Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:14, 1 June 2009 editRodhullandemu (talk | contribs)115,150 edits Protection: reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:36, 18 September 2024 edit undoAirshipJungleman29 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors43,234 edits assess 
(389 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{skiptotoctalk}} {{Skip to talk}}
<!--{{talkheader|noarchive=yes|search=no}}-->
{{OnThisDay|date1=2008-09-30|oldid1=242039474}}
{{tmbox|style=border-color:#b00000;|type=content
|text=<div>
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="text-align:left; border:2px solid #B22222; background-color:#FFDDDD;"
'''Notice''': Prior discussion has determined that '''''some images of Muhammad are allowed'''''.
|]
Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, must be posted to ]. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted. If you prefer not to see images of Muhammad, you can ].
|style="padding-left:10px"|'''Important notice''': Prior discussion has determined that '''<u>pictures of Muhammad will not be removed from this article</u>''', and removal of pictures without discussion at ] will be reverted. If you find these images offensive, it is possible to configure your browser not to display them; for instructions, see the ]. '''Discussion of images should be posted to the subpage ].'''
|}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Denmark|nested=yes|class=GA|importance=Mid}}
{{JournProjectArticles|nested=yes|class=GA}}
{{WikiProject Islam|nested=yes|class=GA|Islam and Controversy=yes}}
{{Comicsproj|nested=yes|class=GA|importance=mid|European-work-group=yes}}
}} }}
{{controversial}}
{{ArticleHistory
{{Censor}}
{{Article history
|action1=GAN |action1=GAN
|action1date=2006-02-04, 20:02:36 |action1date=2006-02-04, 20:02:36
Line 47: Line 43:
|action6link=Misplaced Pages:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 1#Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy |action6link=Misplaced Pages:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 1#Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
|action6result=listed |action6result=listed
|action6oldid=50556537 |action6oldid=50556537


|action7=PR |action7=PR
|action7date=2006-05-10, 11:42:48 |action7date=2006-05-10, 11:42:48
|action7link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/archive1 |action7link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/archive1
|action7oldid=52451520 |action7oldid=52451520
Line 58: Line 54:
|action8link=Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy#GA |action8link=Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy#GA
|action8result=listed |action8result=listed
|action8oldid=58748121 |action8oldid=58841025


|action9=GAR |action9=GAR
Line 101: Line 97:
|action15result=not promoted |action15result=not promoted
|action15oldid=266959653 |action15oldid=266959653

|action16=PR
|action16date=19:32, 7 December 2012
|action16link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/archive2
|action16result=reviewed
|action16oldid=526744152

|action17=PR
|action17date=20:41, 13 May 2013
|action17link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/archive3
|action17result=reviewed
|action17oldid= 554065450


|topic=Socsci |topic=Socsci
|currentstatus=GA
}}
{{controversial}}
{{Calm talk}}
{{censor}}


|action18=FAC
*'''Please divert comments having to do with the timeline of the incidents to ].'''
|action18date=10:02, 16 October 2013
|action18link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/archive3
|action18result=not promoted
|action18oldid=576255444
|otd1date=2008-09-30|otd1oldid=242039474
|otd2date=2009-09-30|otd2oldid=317057203
|otd3date=2010-09-30|otd3oldid=387954541
|otd4date=2012-09-30|otd4oldid=515336561
|otd5date=2015-09-30|otd5oldid=683133956
|otd6date=2017-09-30|otd6oldid=803049880


|action19 = GAR
*'''Please divert comments having to do with international reactions to ].'''
|action19date = 15:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
|action19link = Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/1
|action19result = delisted
|action19oldid = 1244414786
|currentstatus = DGA
}}


{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=c|1=
*'''Please divert comments having to do with various opinions on the controversy to ].'''
{{WikiProject Denmark|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Freedom of speech|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Low|Islam-and-Controversy=yes}}
{{WikiProject Comics|importance=Mid|European-work-group=yes}}
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject International relations |importance=High}}
}}
{{old move|date=30 May 2013|destination=Muhammad cartoons crisis|result=no consensus|link=Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy#Requested move}}
{{afd-merged-from|Muslim Action Committee|Muslim Action Committee|02 November 2012}}
{{merged-from|Economic and social consequences of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy|11 November 2012}}


{{archives|auto=yes|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|age=90 days|index=/Archive index|search=yes|
*'''Please divert comments having to do with any aspect of displaying the cartoon images to ].'''
-----
* Polls: ], ], ], ]
-----
* ]
-----
* ]
-----<!-- line to separate the bot notice -->
}}<!-- end archive box --><!--


-->
'''Any irrelevant discussions can be removed without notice.''' ]<sup>]</sup> 00:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
{{Broken anchors|links=

* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#2011–present) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"2011–present","appear":{"revid":514686449,"parentid":514660091,"timestamp":"2012-09-26T18:44:08Z","replaced_anchors":{"2011-present":"2011–present"},"removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":641479735,"parentid":641479670,"timestamp":"2015-01-07T21:28:30Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"very_different":"8≥4","rename_to":"Janurary 2015 attack"} -->
{| class="infobox" width="120px"
}}
{| class=
! Please divert comments having to do with...
! ... to the page ...
|- |-
| the timeline of the incidents
!align="center" colspan="3"|]<br/>]
| ]
----
|- |-
| international reactions
|]
| ]
|]
|]
|- |-
| opinions
|]
| ]
|]
|]
|- |-
| any aspect of displaying the cartoon images
| ]
| ]
| ]
|}<!-- end "divert talk" table -->
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
| ]
|-
| ]
| ]
|-
|align="center" colspan="3"|]
|-
|align="center" colspan="3"|]
----
|-
|align="center" colspan="3"|]
|}<!--Template:Archivebox-->


{{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 33
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Archive %(counter)d
}}


{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
== Useless map ==
|target=Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Archive index

|mask=Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Archive <#>
This map is nonsensical, since it measures printings in absolute value rather than scaled value. For example, 500,000 printings is huge in Switzerland but tiny in the US. So, the map should be redrawn, scaling the total printings by the total population of each country.
|leading_zeros=0
As for the "intensity of the protests", how in the world was this measured? By number of people in the streets? Then again, it must be scaled. Don't tell me that scaling both data would amount to scaling none, as it's not true in this case. Let's take one example of the map being uninformative. In the US, only one obscure newspaper published ONE cartoon (the least offensive one), while the mainstream newspapers in the EU countries (except the UK) published ALL cartoons. So the map should take this into account. It should go by number of cartoons published. Example: 100,000 copies of one paper published 2 cartoons --> 200,000. But 100,000 copies of one paper published 12 cartoons --> 1,200,000. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
|indexhere=yes
:Actually, I think it is much worse than that. As far as I can tell, it is completely ], not citing a single ] for its information. I have removed the image from the article for now - it is still in the article source, but commented out using the <nowiki><!-- and --></nowiki> stuff. If anybody can source it all, go ahead and do so and put the image back in the article. -<span id="Lilac Soul" class="plainlinks" style="color:#002bb8">] <sup>(] <small>•</small> ] <small>•</small> )</span></sup> 19:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
}}
::I think we give sources for much of the data shown in some of our anciliary articles/lists. I've added links to these on the image page. But I think that combining data on republication and protests in one map makes this original research, so I agree it should probably be deleted. -- ] (]) 01:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

==Change title==


== Proposal of removing an inappropriate content ==
I think the title should be changed to "Muhammad cartoons" to make it easier for people to find it, but can't see a "Move" tab at the top of the page, where it normally is. What happened to the Move tab?


Hello,
(Although I've just found that it redirects from "Mohammad cartoons", I must admit.)
I wish you are fine,
guys this article contains some images that are disrespectful for us,
Please I really would like you to be comprehensive and delete them
Thank you for being comprehensive and kind
Sincerely ] (]) 22:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)


:See the template at the top of the page, which links to previous discussions of this issue. You can also configure your browser not to show the images.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 22:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
] (]) 09:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
:Also read ]. ] (]) 23:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
:No. ] (]) 05:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)


== Another point of view ==
:There would need to be a ] on changing the title, see ]. "Muhammad cartoons" is not quite as descriptive as the current title, and the redirect mentioned is enough for people to find the page easily.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 09:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


As many others have already stated these pictures are not only disrespectful to more than 1.6 billion muslims all over the world, but are also a sign of hatred against all of us. It hurts us a lot, so many of us asked for considiration of our feelings, because the article will still be informative even without the picture and it would be a way to show the cohesion and respect between different nations, beliefs and cultures. And not showing pictures due to respect is something, we do on a daily basis. E. g. if an accident happens and people die, most of the countries in this world would show no pictures of the dead people, because it is very impious. So every culture etc. has something they want to protect or respect. We muslims also want that and with 1.6 billion people worldwide it is also a number of people whos feelings deserve to be heared and respected. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 08:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== "In popular culture" ==
:See the ] template at the top of this page. ] (]) 11:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
::Thank you. I know the rules for censorship. In general, certain content needs to be censored and others can be censored. In particular, the things that can be censored include distasteful content. For 1.6 billion people, these cartoons are beyond distasteful. You also have to distinguish between censorship and simple reporting. The main theme of the article is not conveyed through these images themselves, but through the pain that the mockery causes in us Muslims. The pictures do not have to be shown for this. Just as little as pictures of victims of a massacre have to be shown to show the pain of the relatives. So with all due respect to the right of free speech, freedom of the press and other fundamental rights: Please delete these images from the article, because if the fundamental rights just mentioned can be restricted by acts that are generally considered distasteful, then this should not be an exception because the distaste just affects Muslims. ] (]) 12:10, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
:::Sorry, but religious beliefs don't get to dictate what happens on Misplaced Pages. Please follow ] for a guide on how to hide images. ] (]) 23:18, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
::::Thank you for the answer. I imagined that our beliefs will not be the guideline for the decisions about the content on Misplaced Pages. This is why so many of us just asked for it and not commanded it or anything. We have shared our feelings about this with you and it is up to you to either respect our feelings about this or not. I thank all the none-muslims supporters for their attepmt to help us in this matter. It shows to me what a peaceful world would look like. ] (]) 11:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
:::::Why do even dare to speak for all Muslims by using the collective term "we"?? You speak for your own, with your own mind, point of view and religious beliefs.
:::::Secondly, if Muslims are so scared about showing the image of Muhammad, why is that name the most common surname in the muslim world and male adults are growing their beards such as he allegedly did? Isn`t that some sort of taking an image?
:::::Thirdly, freedom of speech is superior to islamic beliefs. You can build your own islamic state and then forbid such cartoons but wikipedia is a western invention or company and here people can express their points of view. ] (]) 01:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
::::::1. I'm pretty sure all muslims would say that a cartoon that disrespects and paints another image to muslims is not freedom of speech
::::::2. We are not scared of showing the prohpets face (pbuh) rather its forbidden, and doing his practices are not taking an image and how is using someones name taking an image??
::::::3.i don't disagree that you can't express your point of view but I don't think what your doing is freedom of speech rather your just disrespecting, but do as you wish
::::::4. You mentioned something about Iraq and Afghanistan having ties with 9/11 which is just wrong, and its been pretty much proven that it was a setup and now people have painted this bad image of Islam
::::::5. And i would like to say neither christians nor muslims would say its "freedom of speech" if someone did the same thing with jesus(pbuh)
::::::6. I highly doubt that people who bought the cartoons in muslim countries, bought it for entertainment or teaching, i think it was too see what was in it ] (]) 06:30, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::Hi @], all peace and respect to you and your feelings. But the image on this page is necessary to allow us to understand what the issues are. Nobody is going to find this page by accident and be triggered by images they hadn't expected. On the contrary, anyone reading here is actively wanting to know about these images, and you can't form an opinion of them without seeing them. The image is of such low resolution that there is not much pleasure in looking at it and it can't be used for any other purpose than forming a basic judgment.
:::::::You mentioned that Christians would feel the same way if it were their religion being depicted. The point is, though, there are many disrespectful cartoons about Jesus on the internet, but they have little impact and aren't widely distributed, because Christians show their contempt by ignoring them. There will always be trolls who want to provoke you, but it's your choice if you give them success by getting angry and trying to silence them. The majority of people do not want to troll your religion and would not be interested in these cartoons, but the minute you say we are not allowed to see them, we want to see them. You yourself said that some people in Muslim countries bought the cartoons. They would never have heard of this provincial little Danish newspaper if devout Muslims had not brought it to their attention. This is called the ]. Quite simply, the best way to deny the cartoonists their success is to turn your back and walk quietly away. ] (]) 09:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)


== GA concerns ==
Is the ] section in the article entirely necessary? It feels rather awkward and reads just like an excuse to put a South Park reference in an article. Was the South Park reaction that significant from all the others that it warrants an inclusion? —— ] (]) 18:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
:Oh, there ere numerous pop culture ones, but south park was pretty tame. I mean you can link http://www.mohammeddance.com if you want.
::"In popular culture" can be a lazy excuse for adding ] ] in general. Such additions at least should be sourced, and also shown to be relevant to an understanding of the topic of the article, per ] (specifically "an indiscriminate collection of information"). Too many articles tend to be dustbins for all sorts of this nonsense. ]] 23:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


I am concerned that this article no longer meets the ]. Some of my concerns are listed below:
:Agreed, see . Unless there is substantial media coverage, "in popular culture" sections soon become a dumping ground for non-notable bloat.--'''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 06:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)


*There is a "neutrality disputed" orange banner since 2019. This should be resolved.
== Archive please? ==
*The lead, at 6 paragraphs, is longer than the recommended length at ]
*The article relies on a lot of block quotes. I think these can be summaried instead of using these quotes.
*There is uncited text throughout the article.


Most of these threads are very stale, some have been dead for 3 months, could someone please archive this? I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure how. --] (]) 23:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC) Is anyone interested in addressing these concerns, or should this go to ]? ] (]) 05:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
:{{done}} moved to ] ]] 23:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


==Protection== ==GA Reassessment==
{{Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/1}}
Shouldn't this article be protected? --] (]) 11:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
:Vandalism is not really serious enough to warrant protection at present, but the article is watched by admins who will apply protection if necessary. ]] 14:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:36, 18 September 2024

Skip to table of contents

Notice: Prior discussion has determined that some images of Muhammad are allowed.

Discussion of images, and of edits regarding images, must be posted to the images subpage. Removal of pictures without discussion will be reverted. If you prefer not to see images of Muhammad, you can configure your browser or use your personal Misplaced Pages settings not to display them.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Censorship warningMisplaced Pages is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.
Former good articleJyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 4, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
April 22, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
April 25, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 25, 2006Good article nomineeListed
April 26, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
April 28, 2006Good article reassessmentListed
May 10, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
June 15, 2006Good article nomineeListed
June 16, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 26, 2006Good article nomineeListed
June 27, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 2, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 7, 2006Good article nomineeListed
October 8, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
January 30, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 7, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
May 13, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
October 16, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 18, 2024Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 30, 2008, September 30, 2009, September 30, 2010, September 30, 2012, September 30, 2015, and September 30, 2017.
Current status: Delisted good article
This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
WikiProject iconDenmark Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconJournalism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFreedom of speech Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconIslam: Islam and Controversy Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Islam and Controversy task force.
WikiProject iconComics: European Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Misplaced Pages. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by European comics work group.
WikiProject iconReligion Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconInternational relations High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
On 30 May 2013, it was proposed that this article be moved to Muhammad cartoons crisis. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
Muslim Action Committee was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 02 November 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
The contents of the Economic and social consequences of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy page were merged into Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy on 11 November 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Archives
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33






This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors
Please divert comments having to do with... ... to the page ...
the timeline of the incidents Talk:Timeline of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
international reactions Talk:International reactions to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
opinions Talk:Opinions on the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
any aspect of displaying the cartoon images Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Arguments/Image-Display


Proposal of removing an inappropriate content

Hello, I wish you are fine, guys this article contains some images that are disrespectful for us, Please I really would like you to be comprehensive and delete them Thank you for being comprehensive and kind Sincerely Usernetme (talk) 22:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

See the template at the top of the page, which links to previous discussions of this issue. You can also configure your browser not to show the images.--♦IanMacM♦ 22:38, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Also read WP:NOTCENSORED. Some1 (talk) 23:12, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
No. 106.128.97.210 (talk) 05:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Another point of view

As many others have already stated these pictures are not only disrespectful to more than 1.6 billion muslims all over the world, but are also a sign of hatred against all of us. It hurts us a lot, so many of us asked for considiration of our feelings, because the article will still be informative even without the picture and it would be a way to show the cohesion and respect between different nations, beliefs and cultures. And not showing pictures due to respect is something, we do on a daily basis. E. g. if an accident happens and people die, most of the countries in this world would show no pictures of the dead people, because it is very impious. So every culture etc. has something they want to protect or respect. We muslims also want that and with 1.6 billion people worldwide it is also a number of people whos feelings deserve to be heared and respected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:F5:D700:BE6C:D021:83A7:AA42:6314 (talk) 08:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

See the Misplaced Pages is not censored template at the top of this page. Some1 (talk) 11:12, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I know the rules for censorship. In general, certain content needs to be censored and others can be censored. In particular, the things that can be censored include distasteful content. For 1.6 billion people, these cartoons are beyond distasteful. You also have to distinguish between censorship and simple reporting. The main theme of the article is not conveyed through these images themselves, but through the pain that the mockery causes in us Muslims. The pictures do not have to be shown for this. Just as little as pictures of victims of a massacre have to be shown to show the pain of the relatives. So with all due respect to the right of free speech, freedom of the press and other fundamental rights: Please delete these images from the article, because if the fundamental rights just mentioned can be restricted by acts that are generally considered distasteful, then this should not be an exception because the distaste just affects Muslims. 2003:F5:D700:BE08:ACFD:3B5B:BEFF:B6C (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, but religious beliefs don't get to dictate what happens on Misplaced Pages. Please follow HELP:NOIMAGE for a guide on how to hide images. Some1 (talk) 23:18, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for the answer. I imagined that our beliefs will not be the guideline for the decisions about the content on Misplaced Pages. This is why so many of us just asked for it and not commanded it or anything. We have shared our feelings about this with you and it is up to you to either respect our feelings about this or not. I thank all the none-muslims supporters for their attepmt to help us in this matter. It shows to me what a peaceful world would look like. 2003:F5:D700:BE98:55F5:CF67:1625:ED3A (talk) 11:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Why do even dare to speak for all Muslims by using the collective term "we"?? You speak for your own, with your own mind, point of view and religious beliefs.
Secondly, if Muslims are so scared about showing the image of Muhammad, why is that name the most common surname in the muslim world and male adults are growing their beards such as he allegedly did? Isn`t that some sort of taking an image?
Thirdly, freedom of speech is superior to islamic beliefs. You can build your own islamic state and then forbid such cartoons but wikipedia is a western invention or company and here people can express their points of view. 62.226.91.97 (talk) 01:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
1. I'm pretty sure all muslims would say that a cartoon that disrespects and paints another image to muslims is not freedom of speech
2. We are not scared of showing the prohpets face (pbuh) rather its forbidden, and doing his practices are not taking an image and how is using someones name taking an image??
3.i don't disagree that you can't express your point of view but I don't think what your doing is freedom of speech rather your just disrespecting, but do as you wish
4. You mentioned something about Iraq and Afghanistan having ties with 9/11 which is just wrong, and its been pretty much proven that it was a setup and now people have painted this bad image of Islam
5. And i would like to say neither christians nor muslims would say its "freedom of speech" if someone did the same thing with jesus(pbuh)
6. I highly doubt that people who bought the cartoons in muslim countries, bought it for entertainment or teaching, i think it was too see what was in it Omar mohammed el-prince (talk) 06:30, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Omar mohammed el-prince, all peace and respect to you and your feelings. But the image on this page is necessary to allow us to understand what the issues are. Nobody is going to find this page by accident and be triggered by images they hadn't expected. On the contrary, anyone reading here is actively wanting to know about these images, and you can't form an opinion of them without seeing them. The image is of such low resolution that there is not much pleasure in looking at it and it can't be used for any other purpose than forming a basic judgment.
You mentioned that Christians would feel the same way if it were their religion being depicted. The point is, though, there are many disrespectful cartoons about Jesus on the internet, but they have little impact and aren't widely distributed, because Christians show their contempt by ignoring them. There will always be trolls who want to provoke you, but it's your choice if you give them success by getting angry and trying to silence them. The majority of people do not want to troll your religion and would not be interested in these cartoons, but the minute you say we are not allowed to see them, we want to see them. You yourself said that some people in Muslim countries bought the cartoons. They would never have heard of this provincial little Danish newspaper if devout Muslims had not brought it to their attention. This is called the Streisand effect. Quite simply, the best way to deny the cartoonists their success is to turn your back and walk quietly away. Doric Loon (talk) 09:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

  • There is a "neutrality disputed" orange banner since 2019. This should be resolved.
  • The lead, at 6 paragraphs, is longer than the recommended length at WP:LEADLENGTH
  • The article relies on a lot of block quotes. I think these can be summaried instead of using these quotes.
  • There is uncited text throughout the article.

Is anyone interested in addressing these concerns, or should this go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history· Article talk (edit | history· WatchWatch article reassessment page • GAN review not found
Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a "neutrality disputed" orange banner since 2019 that needs to be resolved. The article also has lots of uncited text and quoted text. Z1720 (talk) 20:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Categories: