Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Gesluierd3.jpg
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Image:Gesluierd3.jpg[edit]
Quel intérêt d'avoir une femme nue pour montrer un chador ?? Alecs.y (disc. - contr.) 18:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep at least there are no personality rights issues! --Simonxag 19:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete If a simple teddybear called Mohammed arouses a political scandal in the sudan, this useless and only provocative montage could harm any user coming from islamic countrys. Next time someone would argue that a "naked nun" could be useful in the italian wikipedia. --Herrick 07:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep strongly:
- Commons is neutral, therefore not guided by any religion, so it doesn't have to follow any religious rules. Representing a woman with such clothing is no more scandalous than any nude, even if it can be considered forbidden by some people (in that case Muslims, especially extremists). Banning this picture will be an unbearable censorship, a bit like the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. We mustn't forbid what's forbidden in some religions because it wouldn't be neutral. Banning this photo might mean we agree with those people, which is not everyone's case. Actually, does the Koran say the chador is a "sacred" clothing that non-Muslims can't wear as they want? Is it really a chador or just any piece of clothing? Is the woman really Muslim? If she isn't, why couldn't she pose like that?
- This picture actually has an encyclopedic value: it illustrates the difficult "relation" between religion and nudity/sexuality, and maybe religious censorship. It may also be an illustration of blasphemy (or equivalent), just as this picture for Catholics.
- --TwoWings 16:22, 10 December 2007 (UTC) PS: I've recently asked to be blocked in order to concentrate for a while on my studies so I'm posting this under IP. Send me an e-mail if you want me to confirm this wasn't posted by someone else. Thanks for your comprehension.
Comment The author of the photography is apparently a quite famous Dutch artist called Peter Klashorst. Therefore, the potential of this picture is also to illustrate his work. I hope some people will understand that! --86.67.47.175 20:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)- Keep No reason to delete. "Wikimedia Commons is a freely licensed media file repository (similar to stock photography archives) targeted at other Wikimedia projects.". Also, please keep in mind that Commons is used to feed Wikimedia projects, not only Wikipedia. I can easily imagine how these images could be used on the photography wikibook. Rama 09:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete. --Marcela 14:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
