Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad (no images)
Oh crap. I think there is a valid reason for this in that everyone in the world comes to Wikipedia to look up their favourite subjects; Muhammad will be an article of interest to Muslims; this site will give everyone on the globe the best NPOV overview of that person's life; and the only hangup is the issue of "depictions of the prophet" which is not an issue because it may offend people, it is an issue because it may ''keep people from reading the article at all''. People may not read this because of the very fact that it contains those offending images. It doesn't seem too tough to cut them out in a ''linked'' and identical article that makes it pretty easy to answer concerns with "click this link". I don't really see this as a big slippery slope, I think it's singular, a one-off, based on respect. Nothing is being lost here.  --  That said, I specifically noted I was being |bold, whosever god you pray to, lets pray this doesn't explode. I thought it was a good shot but I'll vote whichever way is quietest:) Take it as my honest attempt at compromise and be nice to each other
— User:Franamax, 15:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BOLD (Wikipedia:Be bold)