Talk:Muhammad/images: Difference between revisions

:::Tanivir2 is correct in adhering to Wikipedia norms. [[WP:Images]] states "Images are primarily meant to inform readers by providing visual information. Consequently, images should look like what they are meant to illustrate, even if they are not provably authentic images."

:::Calligraphy of a name is informative as to calligraphy of a name. Only to those who are inclined to give it religious meaning can it be more informative of any meaning other than calligraphy of a name. But we can not assume readers are so inclined. [[User:Alanscottwalker|Alanscottwalker]] ([[User talk:Alanscottwalker|talk]]) 00:35, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

::::Quranic inscriptions have a more direct link to Muhammad than a Persian or Ottoman miniature. In many of these miniatures, every human figure looks much like the next, reflecting drawing styles more than they do the historic personage. That's quite different from an antique bust of Caesar or Cicero, because these actually ''looked'' like the person they represented. A Quranic inscription has the virtue of representing words that Muhammad ''actually spoke'' at some point in time. There is a reality-based link to his person. It's not as good as a voice recording, but as good as you'll get for something that happened nearly 1500 years ago.--'''<font color="#0000FF">[[User:Jayen466|J]]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">[[User_Talk:Jayen466|N]]</font><font color="#0000FF">[[Special:Contributions/Jayen466|466]]</font>''' 02:07, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

::::#Since we have no verifiably accurate depictions of Muhammad, then we ask: "How is Muhammad conventionally depicted?" And of course, Muhammad is conventionally depicted in abstract form (veiled, as a flame, in calligraphy).

::::The point is (though Hans put it more eloquently above) that we choose images either because they are factually accurate or culturally typical, not because they look like ''what we think'' the thing ought to look like. We are not illustrating simple physical properties - this is not some children's picture book where we have to show a picture of a human being so that our readers will understand what a human being is - we are illustrating the founder of one of the world's major religions, and in the absence of of faithful reproductions ought to stick with typical presentations. Figurative illustrations are ''not'' typical. --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|<span style="color:darkblue;font-weight:bold">Ludwigs</span><span style="color:green;font-weight:bold">2</span>]] 02:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)