Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mohammad Helal Ali امامزاده هلال ابن علی 04.jpg

< Commons:Featured picture candidates

File:Mohammad Helal Ali امامزاده هلال ابن علی 04.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 20:25:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:20, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I do not feel comfortable voting for a picture of a child abuser. Saeed Toosi has the main role in this picture and all these people are listening to him, so his presence in the picture cannot be considered small and minor. I do not even need to look at Wikimedia policies, everything related to child sexual abuse is a red line. --IamMM (talk) 07:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support @W.carter: Thank you very much for your great effort to rescue the photo from the CAs! – I understand and respect IamMM’s reservations, but for my simple European eyes this is mainly a photo of the illuminated mosque and of the praying congregation, so (in all respect) I think it is venial to promote the photo even from an ethical point of view. --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Aristeas: I do not insist that others agree with this, and I also confirm that this image has no other problem to be chosen than the presence of Mr. Toosi himself. But at the same time, I still can not accept that having technical standards is a good/enough reason to consciously place a photo of a famous child sexual abuser on the main page of Commons. In response to your argument , if my Persian eyes saw a eye-catching and impressive photograph of a historic European church in which a priest accused of similar acts was lecturing, I would still strongly oppose it regardless of cultural or geographical differences.--IamMM (talk) 09:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The main point of FPs is not to place them on the main page of Commons, that is a side-effect for very few FPs. There are always FPs not chosen for POTD on the main page for a number of reasons. Massmurderers, other offenders and their doings seldom make it to POTD. FPs exist so that we can get good pictures for all the different parts of the WikiProjects. Neutral Wikipedias are striving to be as good encyclopedias as possible, and it would look rather strange if only articles of pleasant things had good photos, while offensive stuff had bad or no pictures at all. I have supported many images of things I don't like or agree with here, simply for the sake of the encyclopedic value of them. If you have an ethical problem with any image, I think it would be better if you voiced your concern at POTD instead. --Cart (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added some English to the photo's description. Perhaps someone speaking Arabic can tweak it for the better. I also noted that Mr. Toosi is present in the photo. Information like that is helpful if you want to state why a photo might not be appropriate for POTD. --Cart (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That works too. There are descriptions in both Arabic and Farsi on the file page. You can see that if you open the 'edit' window. I just picked the language that was entered first. --Cart (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @IamMM: I completely understand and respect your point of view! I am so sorry, my “European eyes” was liable to be misunderstood. I did not want to assert any cultural or geographical differences regarding crime, justice, or ethics – child sexual abuse is a terrible crime, period, and should be regarded and prosecuted everywhere on the world regardless of cultural or geographical differences. What I wanted to say was just that simple people like me who are not familar with the distinctive features of Islamic prayer and especially not with the sophisticated practice of Qur’an recitation, do not even see that this photo emphasizes or features any special person -- all I see are many persons praying together in an illuminated, beautiful mosque. But I get the feeling that the more I write the more I am getting in trouble. I just wanted to review a photo, I did not want to harm anybody, I did not want to defend child sexual abuse or any other crime, and it’s probably best that I stop to write anything here before I get blocked or prosecucted. Should I leave Commons? Sorry to all of you and all the best to all of you. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • FYI. I hope you are satisfied now. --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC) Thank you, IamMM, for your clarification (answered there) and sorry to all of you for the confusion. Probably this was a series of entangled misunderstandings. Sorry again and all the best. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The story of how Saeed Toosi was acquitted and the role of the Iranian leader in preventing the trial is one of the reasons for the sensitivity of the case.[1][2] Following the Iranian judiciary's refusal to hear the case, the families of the child victims went to the Turkish judiciary to pursue their complaint, and legal action is ongoing (according to MP Mahmoud Sadeghi). The English Wiki article is inaccurate in this regard.--IamMM (talk) 11:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 06:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC))[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Mohammad_Helal_Ali_امامزاده_هلال_ابن_علی_04.jpg&oldid=616838267"