Talk:محمد بن عبد الله

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Contents 1 Inaccuracy in caption 2 User-altered Islamic Depictions of Muhammad 3 Mahomet, David et Salomon 4 William Blake NOT William Black

[edit] Inaccuracy in caption

Elonka, you describe this image "with the face blanked out per Islamic custom"[1] To the best of my knowledge, there is no Islamic custom of altering depictions of Muhammad in this manner. The custom is rather 1) to depict him with his face veiled to begin with - in such cases the face is whitespaced, not painted over or 2) not to depict him at all or 3) to depict him naturalistically, but for private not public display. Unlike the fig leaves of European prudery, there is no custom at all of defacing existing images.Proabivouac 20:06, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Constructive suggestions, please. What do you think would be better wording? --Elonka 20:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Avoiding careless misinformation is very constructive.

An accurate description would be, "…with his face painted over by a contributor to Wikimedia commons using (whatever program he used)."Proabivouac 20:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Like if he used Photoshop, say, "with his face painted over via Photoshop"? --Elonka 23:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, that works.Proabivouac 23:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Fine by me. Check with User:Looi and find out what he used. --Elonka 00:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I've asked him. We also should make it clear that this is not a historic image, but was altered by a contributor to the Commons.Proabivouac 01:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

(copied from another page) I see you're placing this same image in multiple places. We can certainly centralize the discussion, though, as the same considerations apply in all three instances, since if we crop this particular image to show only the Kaaba or the Black Stone, nothing useful will be left. For the other galleries, a more productive enterprise would be to identify those images which might be usefully cropped in this manner to give editors the option of using only the portion in question; for example this one might be altered to highlight the Kaaba. Cropping and zooming is a legitimate display decision just as defacement is not.Proabivouac 20:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, if you want to provide cropped images, go ahead. I see nothing wrong with providing both the original version, and also cropped versions. As for whether or not anyone would actually use it, I dunno. --Elonka 23:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User-altered Islamic Depictions of Muhammad

I've created a new gallery to accommodate user-altered traditional images.

Also, the current organization, dividing images between those which show Muhammad's face and ones which don't, seems rather arbitrary to me. Wouldn't a more orthodox approach be to arrange them by period or by nation of origin?Proabivouac 05:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally think we should rearrange the page so that the more common depiction of Muhammad section (face veiled) is at the top, and then the "face shown" section is lower on the page. As for re-sorting by date, I could see that being useful, but rather than trying to make one page do all things, how about just making a separate gallery? So we have one that's sorted by type, and another that's sorted by date. --Elonka 06:36, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Seperation by "veiled vs. unveiled" is not a very orthodox curational decision, but one that only makes sense in the context of the very recentist "depictions debate." These are historical images, and should not be arranged according to these debates, which are completely irrelevant to the scholarly enterprise.Proabivouac 06:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Proabivouac. --TcfkaPanairjdde 22:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

definitely. the images should be sorted by artist / source / period. What, though, is the point of showing "user-altered traditional images"? What conceivable use does a censored version of the 14th century image have? Dbachmann 18:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mahomet, David et Salomon

Please add Image:Mahomet, David et Salomon-Mîr Haydar, Mirâdj nâmeh-1436.jpg to the gallery. Thanks. 62.147.38.36 11:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

الاءسماعيلي

[edit] William Blake NOT William Black

Painting by William Black depicting Dante and Virgil meet Muhammad and his son-in-law, Ali in Hell. should be replaced by: Painting by William Blake depicting Dante and Virgil meet Muhammad and his son-in-law, Ali in Hell.