Talk:Eve

We find these naked pictures of honorable religious figure highly offensive. Clothes are a symbol of modesty and these highly honorable figures must not be depicted in such vulgar portraits. When I open Adam (AS) in Islam article or this Eve(AS) article especially, the naked pictures are highly offensive.religious figures must be shown respect. The portraits should not be visible in article for any of the religious figures especially Prophets ('Alaihimus Salam) and their families as it is quite disrespectful. It hurts our sentiments. I request for the removal of these pictures. I also request writers to please take care of these things. 182.191.139.212 (talk) 16:19, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

For the fourth time: Wikipedia is not censored. Content is not excluded merely because it is offensive. There's nothing else to discuss here, unfortunately. Remsense 🌈 论 16:21, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

First of all, there's nothing inherently sexual or offensive in nudity. It's simply the way humans naturally are. The painters didn't paint Eve nude for sexual gratification, it is quite literally stated in the Bible that she was nude all of the time until that apple. Second, as mentioned above, Wikipedia is not censored. jolielover♥talk 17:26, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Eve is also a noble figure in Islam. We in Islam believe that Adam and Eve (AS) were both clothed before they ate the forbidden.Content should not hurt the sentiments of any person and should be neutral. If you think christians wpuld be ok with such content, then I as a muslim is not. 103.174.5.144 (talk) 13:02, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I understand why you believe that this article does not conform with the standards of Islam, but Wikipedia has never been intended to conform to the rules of any religion. I would suggest you read Wikipedia:Offensive material for further information, but as has been stated several times, there will not be a change of the image merely because any number of religious people do not like it. Furthermore, note that the image in the section for Islam is quite a bit more of what you might consider modest. You are, however, free to suggest an alternative image from Wikimedia Commons.

On Wikipedia, we try hard to stay neutral and reasonably respectful while stating relevant facts accompanied by illustrations that are considered to be valuable for the content. It is a big deal in itself that we manage to keep religious insults off this website almost all the time, despite efforts by vandals; these efforts do indeed include policing content that is intended to insult Muslims. However, Wikipedia is neutral and agnostic; it's a space for the collection of relevant information for the construction of a free encyclopedia. While people from all backgrounds, religions, and political affiliations are welcome to help us, this means that we hope that all these editors can agree to put their differences aside and focus on the purpose of Wikipedia. More frankly, anyone who disagrees with the purposes and policies of Wikipedia has the freedom not to read our encyclopedia; in fact, you or anyone else can install MediaWiki on a server in order to create a wiki where other rules apply.

I sincerely wish that people reading this statement feel respected by me and other Wikipedians, and that you can in turn respect the great leap in the advancement of human knowledge that this free, uncensored, neutral and open encyclopedia and its contributors have brought to the world. BlockArranger (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm actually not quite so sure that this particular painting isn't meant to be sexual in nature. The actual title is Eve (Temptation), and going by the description at Pantaleon Szyndler it seems it was fairly controversial at the time. I'm not sure what the ideal MOS:LEADIMAGE should be (artistic themes that span cultures are always a challenge), but it might not be this one. Pharos (talk) 01:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

"We find" Royal we? Who exactly do you think you are, and what gives you authority to command editors? Dimadick (talk) 07:50, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Alternative portrait ideas

While I disagree with the above notion that there should be no nude depiction of Eve here, the Pantaleon Szyndler painting does seem a bit suboptimal as it's not from a particularly representative or famous or influential artwork. Maybe instead something like the panel from the Adam and Eve (Dürer) painting, which seems to fulfill these criteria? We might also use a depiction that is particularly ancient, but I couldn't find any that seemed suitable.--Pharos (talk) 23:07, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2025 and 15 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Quillspire (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Quillspire (talk) 00:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)