Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Archive 19

message: Why do we have Pictures of People! The Pennsylvania Dutch plain folk don't allow for pictures of people. So please respect Amish Ordnung and not be Amishophobic. You're freedom of speech must respect our right not to be insulted by your graven images! Just Kidding. long live free speech and the right to critique. Afterall, if the media is going to follow Islamic law, it must also follow the Ordnung. Stetlerj 01:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stetlerj was being facetious.  Also Amish practice regarding photos is not universal http://www.amishnews.com/amisharticles/amishand%20photos.htm just as Muslim practice regarding aniconism is not either. Schizombie 21:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, i got that thanks :P WookMuff 23:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Should we remove images of women with their faces uncovered?  Women with their heads uncovered?  Women with their arms and legs exposed?  User:Zoe|(talk) 03:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Wikipedia, Respect Amish Ordnung 

message: :"Throughout history, believers from a multitude of faiths have called for boycott, arrest, censorship or even murder of critics, artists and commentators whose works they considered blasphemous. Some of these have been jailed, censored or killed, others walked free. There are also many examples of conflicts where a group of people have been offended, but did not resort to violence and resolved the matter with discussion."
Does this seem to have POV undertones to anyone else, particularly the last sentence? Like it's saying some people managed to resolve the matter in a civilised manner, whereas the Muslims didn't? --Nathan (Talk) 02:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the paragraph is a bit editorializing. I happen to think it is perfectly true, but that doesn't make it NPOV, it just makes it MyPOV. Weregerbil 03:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed, the last sentence stinks. I'll remove it. Azate 13:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparable incidents... POV? 

message: I've removed the inclusion of the full text of this minor internet petition. First of all, if it belonged anywhere, it would belong in the opinions article, not the main article. Secondly, characterizing it as the "Danish reaction" is totally disingenuous. Thirdly, a small website launched with a couple thousand alleged signatures probably doesn't warrant mention at all, and certainly doesn't warrant inclusion of full text of what is written there. But if you want to try to push for a reference to it to be included, put it in the opinions article. Babajobu 03:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it isn't.  The Imams helped to spark the protests in the Muslim world.  The petition... well, it did not. gren グレン ? 03:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it is. There is no evidence at all that the imams did that, just a speculation. These gorups in Denmark force JP pull the cartoons back and apologize, as important. Resid Gulerdem 04:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Resid, you are the only one who has identified this little petition as being of such fundamental importance to the event as requiring inclusion in the main article. If you want to put it in the opinions article, it might survive here, but it will never make it in the main article. Babajobu 04:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: And everybody else think it shouldn't be there? Where and who are they? It looks you and I talking here... I am not sure that if you and Grenavitar are everybody... Resid Gulerdem 04:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Resid, it does not matter whether you, Gren, and I believe the small poll is notable. All that matters is that it is treated as notable by reliable sources. No such source has argued that the poll expresses a notable and important opinion, and so to include it in Wikipedia would amount to original research. And regardless, even if notable it is totally inappropriate in the MAIN ARTICLE. Push for it to be included in the OPINIONS article, where it would belong if notable. Babajobu 04:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The difference is that the news-media have covered the Imams going to the Middle East extensively... no major source has mentioned that petition (if the BBC, or NYT, or CNN mention it then do tell us).  Read about Wikipedia:Reliable sources gren グレン ? 04:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Do you need a source for it. The link is there I provided. Wouldn't you include this before main media? Resid Gulerdem 04:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You need a non-primary source to say that the poll is important.  That is why you need the BBC or CNN or someone to say "this poll is notable" otherwise it's like the millions of other petitions online.  Petitions are not inherently notable.  That is what I mean.  gren グレン ? 05:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Going to have to agree that your addition Resid, doesn't belong on the main page... I was thinking maybe in the 'Reconciliation' area... but the letter doesn't really seem to be about reconciliation. Going to have to agree the with others and suggest 'Opinions'.. Netscott 04:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Should it be mentioned Denmark's 3rd largest and one of the most influential parties is pure and clear Facist?--Ezeu 05:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hehe. Ultra-Extreme right-wing, Xenophobic and an insult to everyone: yes. Fascist? You may have to go and redefine fascism first.DanielDemaret 09:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text:  At the core of fascism is the idea that it the use of violence is legitimate. Danske Folkepartiet uses nasty words against those who use violence, so in this respect they could be termed anti-fascist. If you insist in giving the term "fascist" to any group in this controversy, you should attribute it to any group that has used violence. I would advice against attributing anyone of that term altogether in this discussion, since it seems irrelevant to me.DanielDemaret 10:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: No, this is not an article on the political parties of Denmark. I'm sure one exists and if you wish to note that the third largest party is fascist there, it would be on topic. It isn't here. Kyaa the Catlord 09:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dansk Folkeparti already has an article, see Danish People's Party, but calling them Fascist is completely off the mark. They are extremely nationalist but Fascist??? I am aware that particularly one member of the Swedish cabinet likes calling Danes bad names - which looks rather interesting when these messages are broadcasted here as well - but a remark like this is completely off the mark. I'll be monitoring that page, just in case. BTW, yes, Denmark has a small Nazi party. They too have a page, see National Socialist Movement of Denmark. They ran for the regional elections on Zealand, and got 0.1% of the votes. Nobody takes them seriously. --Valentinian 09:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nazism still exists?? I thought it doesn't exist after 1945. This is a party that is more of a joke. The Danish People's Party are not facist, they are nationalist. Moving the reaction to a sub-page is better, and a summary at the section. --Terence Ong (恭喜发财) 12:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree - I think the fascist groups are the ones who are violent.  In addition, look at the Wikipedia entry on fascism: Fascism is also typified by totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic.  You tell me which group wants to impose control over all aspects of life... Valtam 17:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Danish reaction

message: Just got some info from a source in Malaysia that the Sarawak Tribune, the paper that re-printed one of the cartoons, and running since 1945 is now gone.  Their license has been revoked, and it looks like their websites are no longer active.
Koguma 04:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sarawak Tribune Update 

message: In one of Wookmuff's recent edits to this talkpage he inadvertantly (I assume) deleted a very lengthy section of talk. Wookmuff (or someone else) please restore it. Babajobu 04:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just did, before I saw your call. gidonb 05:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  it wasn't inadvertant, but in hindsight it was a mistake... thanks, but i will readd my poll choices WookMuff 22:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wookmuff's edit

message: I think this information should be added to the article. 
"Issue Invades Canadian Universities"
The international furore over Danish newspaper cartoons lampooning the prohet Muhammad has flared at two Canadian Universities, where officials say public safety fears are forcing them to crack down on efforts to publicize the drawings.
In Charlottetown yesterday, security guards raided the offices of the University of Prince Edward Island student newspaper in an effort to confiscate 2,000 copies of The Cadre before they could be distributed.
At Saint Mary's University in Halifax, a philosophy professor is vowing to fight a university order issued Tuesday that forced him to take down the copies of the cartoons posted on his office door.
Dr. Peter March has filed a grievance with his teaching union, saying his academic freedom is under threat. 
Ottawa Citizen.  Tuesday, February 9,2006.  Accountable Government 05:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: wow. sounds pretty noteworthy.--Alhutch 07:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Is there an online edition of this? That SHOULD be included, but probably in the international response article. Kyaa the Catlord 07:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One professor lost her job in in Saudi for similar reasons ... MX44 09:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The entry in the timeline article was changed by me, because it had no citation. After checking multiple publications I changed the entry so that it matched the information that was consistently reported; none of them actually reported the seizures having occurred, or the other details now seen. I've updated the timeline article with the details given above now, along with the articles as appropriate citations. — digitaleon • talk @ 21:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Event: Campus Police SEIZE Papers With Cartoons 

message: Does anyone think that this should be added? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:44, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not exactly the The Times. Can anyone corroborate that this is a solid publication? And is the contents little more than just speculation? DanielDemaret 08:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a subscription to the online NY post but the start of it is here at the Post. Also I'm not at home so I can't sign up for the free subcription. Here's the full version Canada's National Post. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Amir Taheri]]

message: Here is one comic book, 24 pages. Published 2001.
These guys have obvious issues with POV. You have been warned.
:http://islamcomicbook.com
The publisher appears to be Davidson Press
:http://davidsonpress.com/islam/
MX44 09:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooookay, but what do we do with this? --Kizor 08:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure yet. Perhaps we could show that all of this is really a conspiracy of the christian race against the muslim race. (joking) Seriously I wonder how Muhammad's Believe It or Else have managed to stay unnoticed for so long. It blatantly redicules Islam on every single page, but I have yet to hear any protests. MX44 01:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the authors seem to be 1. Christian and 2. not exactly NPOV so it's not particularly balanced. By the way, I think most religious scriptures could be made to look exactly as evil and ridiculous by taking citations out of their context. 惑乱 分からん 19:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Believe It or Else 

message: The editor of Jyllands-Posten, the newspaper which first published the cartoons, is sent on leave for an indefinite period, as the editor of a Norwegian magazine that reprinted them apologises.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4699716.stm
:'The editorial staff has told Flemming Rose that he ought to go on holiday. No one can imagine the incredible amount of pressure he has been under,' said Jyllands-Posten's editor-in-chief Carsten Juste.' http://www.jp.dk/english_news/artikel:aid=3549984/ MX44 12:59, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  tidbit to include to article 

message: Why is this not mentioned?  JeffBurdges 14:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who is this David Warren fellow? Does the article add NPOV content?DanielDemaret 14:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Err, no, his article should not be linked!  But much of its content is sourceable and should be mentioned. i.e. that the comics many protesters saw is much worse than the content actually printed.  JeffBurdges 21:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with JeffBurdges. By the way: our article isn't NPOV either, I'm afraid. I'm sure the arabic article, which should also be NPOV, and which I am unable to read (can't even do OR :-) on that) describes the whole controversy rather differently. And a hypothecical NPOV article written by muslims living in Denmark/Europe would differ in many other areas, I suppose. --Sir48 21:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors 

message: I tried to figure out what country :Image:Dm product.jpg is from.  I'm moderately sure that the "al-Tamemi Markets" mentioned at the image talk are the al-Tamimi Markets of Saudi Arabia.  Thoughts? - BanyanTree 15:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems logical to me. Arabic has only three vowels, A, I, and U, and translitteration regarding "E"s differ. I think it is a pretty safe match. (If somebody has some red hot insider information on this issue, feel free to correct me.) --Valentinian 22:07, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a note on the original image at Commons.  Thanks, BanyanTree 03:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  supermarket photo 

message: How big is this Newspaper? 
From what i read it has somewhere around 50.000 made each day. And it's an extreme right-wing paper, that brings very controversial stuff. And besides that I also read (on politiken.dk, cant find the article now), that the paper CRITISIZED Jyllands-posten in the article when they brought the pictures alongside.(Cloud02 16:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: that's what the article says: "Six of the cartoons were reprinted in the Egyptian newspaper El Fagr in October 2005[21][22][23] along with a highly-critical article". As of "right wing" I don't know, and it doesnt matter anyway. All I gather from various souces is that it is not state owned, or owned by the governement party or their affiliates, which, in an Egyptian context, is a rarity and qualifies it as an opposition newspaper. Azate 17:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

text: In the political context of the Arab world, the word "right-wing" is absolutely meaningless. Tells you nothing at all. Babajobu 18:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, the division is rather between "vocal" and "silent"  Ruby 22:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  El Fagr 

message: --Greasysteve13 04:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all don't call other people idiots, it's unecessary and it violates Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy, secondly it's brought up more than a few times that Muslims are not a race. JtkieferT | C | @  ---- 05:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry. The fact that it's brought up more than a few times that Muslims are not a race is the reason I snapped.--Greasysteve13 05:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Message to [[Idiot]]s: muslims are not a race! 

message: Check  this link: The Wikipedia Muhammad Cartoons Debate: A War Of Ideas.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is funny. Pretty soon we will have to make an article about this talk page, or rather these pages. The link to the PDF files is here , but there is nothing in them, other what can already be found here in the archives, plus the short introduction written by John Simmons of the Iraq Museum International. Twthmoses 08:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Hey, I'm in a book! :-) --Kizor 08:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I, too, am in a book... sadly i am probably mostly in the book typoing and making an arse of myself with "witty" comments... damn, i started my poll discussion too late! WookMuff 08:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Yup, having thoroughly and rather egomaniacally searched both pdfs purely for instances of my own nick, i have to agree i come off both as a provocateur and a smartarse... OUCH. But on the upside, i do have my poll discussion in there so thats good. Also, someone called me sarcastic. Hitler DID make the trains run on time, its why he had such good supply lines and part of how he managed to consolidate his holdings following blitzkreig. Call me sarcastic, will you 70.49.166.186... WookMuff 09:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, I think that's really awesome. Babajobu 11:58, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Got my awesome vote too. Kyaa the Catlord 13:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Nope. I checked. Their copyright notice and accompanying text is exactly what is spelled out in the GNU GFDL. We couldn't ask for better compliance (although they did take some liberties with our cherished logo that we all worked so hard on :-|).12.16.126.34 15:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ebook about this article? 

message: I was looking around for my last comment, and it seems as though it got archived here , but there is no corresponding archive that got created at that time.  Is there a hidden archive 11 somewhere?--Rayc 06:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's there now. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Archive?

message: As of the writing of this entry the Arabic Wikipedia Entry on Jyllands-Posten Cartoon controversy has added the El Fagr image:
As well as The serbian version. It would be good to have this image spread around.... to highlight this previous publication, so if there are other wikipedia editors who edit in other languages maybe you could help add it to the other language controversy pages as well?
Netscott 10:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: El Fagr word is spreading!

message: Does anyone think this requires serious consideration: internationalist world govern conspiracy theory? Yeah, I thought so. Weregerbil 10:16, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most certainly some of the riots in e.g. Lebanon involve radical groups that want to take power undemocratically (ie conspire themselves to power). However, I doubt that conspiracy theories really suit this article now...--HJV 20:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conspiracy theory

message: Gunter Grass opinion --Chaos 13:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, fpp is in no way a useful source: it's David Irving's holocaust denial outfit. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 19:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guenter Grass's Interview in Die Welt 

message: The layout, as it is right now, it awful: There is a gaping white hole right at the top of the page, apparently because the introduction has been split and a new section "Background" inserted, probably with the laudable intention to move the table of contents upward. I propose the following: 1) Re-merge "Backgroud" (which is a bad name to begin with) back with the introduction 2) Have the Table of contents at the side of the introduction. It should be at the top, really. 3) (I hardly dare say that, after all the fuss) Move the 12 cartoons down to "publication of the drawings",because ther is not enough space for both the picture and the TOC. Azate 19:33, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I fixed the big space? -- getcrunkjuicecontribs 19:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dunno, maybe it's got to do with screen resolution and font size and whatever. For me, 1/4th of the width is the TOC, 1/2 is blank white space, 1/4th is the pic. There must be a better solution. I'm no good at this xml-layout thing, so I won't touch it. Azate 20:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout