User:Hans Adler/Images arbitration

Images of God
Consider the somewhat parallel case of God (1 depiction) / God the Father (4 depictions + 3 in a gallery + 1 hiding God behind a cloud) and God the Father in Western art (6 depictions + 2 showing only his hand(s) + 1 replacing him by Jesus + a huge gallery).

God and God the Father are relatively abstract topics, so it's not surprising the articles are in pretty poor shape. I guess most editors are familiar with how uncommon depictions of God are in Christian culture and can see how the picture in God and the many pictures in God the Father could mislead readers into thinking otherwise.

Regular complaints from Muslim readers
Both on Talk:Muhammad and Talk:Muhammad/images. A lot of readers want the images removed or the honorific expression "p[eace] b[e] u[pon] h[im]" added behind Muhammad's name.

Regular miscommunications
On Talk:Muhammad miscommunication between relatively (often severely) clueless Christian or atheist editors and Muslims are a regular occurrence. The article's current state is often defended inappropriately against valid proposals by knowledgeable and constructive Muslim editors who are far from extremist. Examples:
 * Talk:Muhammad/Archive 24. The OP's point was valid, which is why it was then supported by Kavas, a regular editor from Turkey. It is not just that Muslims don't consider Muhammad the founder of Islam. As far as I can tell from books by serious scholars of Islamic studies (e.g. F. E. Peters' "Muhammad and the Origins of Islam", they don't refer to Muhammad in this way, presumably because Islam wasn't so much founded by anyone but rather emerged gradually, mostly after Muhammad's death. The chance to correct the article accordingly was missed. To this day, it claims that Muhammad was the "founder" of Islam, though with a footnote saying that Muslims see it differently. No hint that neutral experts might also see it differently.

Noformation's ANI report against Ludwigs2
The 3 November ANI report and the first half our of comments, all from involved editors. The context at the time was as follows.
 * Talk:Muhammad/images, starting with the seventh section ("Resolution on controversial images")