Comments on: Jordan: Wikipedia and Prophet Muhammad

By: MeowKun

MeowKun — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 23:43:50 +0000

i guess they can keep the picture, but no in the same as exactly the Prophet Prophet page, but rather like “the prophet Muhmmad in the history” like the “the historical jesus”.

By: Civiblog Central

Civiblog Central — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:35:09 +0000

Jordan: Wikipedia and Prophet Muhammad…

Another storm is brewing in the Arab world regarding the depiction of Prophet Muhammad in drawings after Wikipedia refused the demands of more than 180,000 people who called for the illustrations to be removed….

By: Taran Rampersad

Taran Rampersad — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:45:15 +0000

I suppose, Jan, that you would never find Muslims a part of a modern society unless they agree with you. Who’s next?

By: Jan Reznik

Jan Reznik — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 23:46:51 +0000

What a fantastic idea Patricia! Then maybe, we (non muslims, infidels, what have you) can enjoy the encyclopedia without Muslims, yet again, trying to impose their backward outdated views on the rest of society. I applaud your solution!

By: Taran Rampersad

Taran Rampersad — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 20:03:59 +0000

I’d like to point something out here, as I have elsewhere: There were alternatives dismissed by Wikipedia administrators that would not have been censorship. Things such as hiding the images and making them viewable by those that wished to see them, for example, were dismissed by Wikipedia admin. None of the people who wanted the images ‘removed’ actually seemed to have a problem with that – Wikipedia admin did.

This was not always a ‘black and white’ issue. But poor coverage of what happened has portrayed it as very Boolean. It is this sort of disconnect that causes problems – this could have been solved in a more amicable manner had Wikipedia admin decided to be amicable and tolerant of the beliefs of some.

And as far as 180,000 signatures – that is interesting. Has anyone actually looked at the internet penetration figures for the Middle East recently? How many people are not able to participate in this discussion? Food for thought.

And why does my captcha below have ‘have missiles’? Is that how far this has gone? :-)

By: Patricia Skinner

Patricia Skinner — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 19:23:58 +0000

The best thing to do is boycott Wikipedia. They’re not objective enough to be used as a proper encyclopedia anyway. The editors are pedantic and arrogant in many cases. I’ve long ceased to regard Wikipedia as an authority and I think all Muslims should definitely do the same now.

By: Interviste & co - Faccio Cose Vedo Gente

Interviste & co - Faccio Cose Vedo Gente — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 08:53:54 +0000

[...] Britannica ha una immagine di Maometto, perché nessuno si sconvolge? Maometto/2: su Global Voices Wikipedia and the Prophet Muhammad Psyc: da SL Weekly Wikipediots: Who are these devoted, even obsessive contributors to Wikipedia? [...]

By: Taran Rampersad

Taran Rampersad — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:05:02 +0000

Actually, I’ve got some discussion with a Wikipedia admin here:

http://www.knowprose.com/node/18431

And I have some discussion with the Pakistan bloggers who initiated the petition here:
http://www.knowprose.com/node/18427

Also, I have been tracking web responses to the issue around the world – and will be posting on it this weekend. I suppose writing about global things in a global context may not make much sense when discussing things within the geopolitical lines – but perhaps that is what is needed.