Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahwazi Democratic Popular Front

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete Spartaz Humbug! 23:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ahwazi Democratic Popular Front

Ahwazi Democratic Popular Front (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)
  • Delete unencyclopedic propaganda/promotion/advertisement page for an unknown self proclaimed group Alborz Fallah (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Unencyclopedic Website with no academic references. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 18:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

is that your excuse?? that it is not legally recobnized??

Wikipedia's mission as an encyclopedia is to show the truth, both truth, you cant deny the fact that their are organizations trying to work for independance of the Ahwaz, and they have chosen this flag for them, and an article needs to be made to explain what the flag means...

and i am an arab nationalist, it is not a bad thing being an Arab, its actually pretty natural ;)

as for you my friend, your nationalism of being a persian is threatening Wikipedia, by deleting articles that you think are "imaginary".

the Ahwaz region is similar to other territories in the World that are trying to claim a free state for themselves, pretty much like Kosovo trying to gain independance, and serbia disapproving, but the Irani style is to just delete the name from the History...

these links prove that their is a liberation front calling for a free Ahwaz...

  • [alahwaz.org]
  • [www.alkarkha.com]
  • [1]
  • [2]

other Links in Wikipedia created to inform the reader of the Ahwaz:

  • Ahwazi Democratic Popular Front

the Ahwaz region articles have been vandalised by the previous members calling for a speedy deletion, removing categories in its articles...

they have also called for the speedy deletion for several articles that show the truth about Ahwaz's liberation movement...

i, along with the Arab World Wiki Project denounce the act, and call for Wikipedia to see the truth in this, and find that these persians are making Wikipedia into a political forum debate, which is something im pretty sure wikipedia is not...

thank you --Arab League User (talk) 17:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


  • Speedy Delete, without any mainstream reflection of its activities, it should be deleted. And dear "Arab League", I can not give any comments about your honor about being something, but using wikipedia for advertising your goals is a big NO and also watch for personal attacks. and it seems that your desire for broadcasting what you call "truth" is so high that you have also uploaded several pictures with bogus tags. I am afraid your contributions to this project is becoming distruptive.--Pejman47 (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Non-notable organisation regardless of the above rhetoric by the article's creator. Incidentally AfD is not the place to soapbox. --WebHamster 18:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. There seems to be plenty of notable information on this group:

"Two Iranian Arab separatist groups, the London-based Arab People’s Democratic Popular Front and the Canada-based Ahwaz Arab Renaissance Party, claimed responsibility for the bombings. However, the main foreign-based Ahwaxi separatist group, the Democratic Solidarity Party of Al-Ahwaz, condemned the bombings, arguing that many of those killed were Khuzestani Arabs." - Green Left [4]

MIPT Terrorism Database [5]

"These terrorists have been trained under the umbrella of the Americans in Iraq," he charged, and added that Iran suspected there were links between British troops across the border and the London-based Ahvaz Arab People's Democratic-Popular Front." - Asia Times [6]

"Observers said the statement is a reminder of similar tracts distributed by a group named the “Democratic Popular Front of Ahwazi Arabs” during large scale disturbances that erupted in the province last April, leaving scores of people killed in clashes with security forces that made more than 1000 arrests." Iran Press Service [7]

Perhaps the article needs expansion to prove its notability and to make it more encyclopaedic.--Conjoiner (talk) 18:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Per User:WebHamster, wikipedia is not the place to promote non-notable fringe political advocacy groups, please see soapbox. ----07fan (talk) 19:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Fails WP:WEB among other problems. Khorshid (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. WP:WEB only applies to articles about web-specific content; it doesn't apply to other subjects just because they happen to have a web site. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm not sure how this organisation fails WP:WEB. They seem to have attracted a reasonable amount of attention from external sources, such as this one from Al Jazeera, and this from the BBC. Yes, the organisation has a strong bias towards Ahwazi independence, and may be a front group, but those aren't criteria for deletion. Some (but not all) exiled political groups deserve articles, and I feel this falls well within the criteria for inclusion. There's notability and verifiability. Mostlyharmless (talk) 05:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Just a few mentions in the media, does not make a a tiny fringe organization with no constituency, notable enough to warrant an article. --07fan (talk) 21:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. If the Iranian government has accused it of terrorist attacks on behalf of Western governments, then it warrants an article.--Conjoiner (talk) 22:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. The Iranian goverment has never acknowledged or named such self-proclaimed fringe groups. --07fan (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Not according to this[8]: "These terrorists have been trained under the umbrella of the Americans in Iraq" he (top national security official Ali Agha Mohammadi) charged, adding that Iran suspected British troops across the border might also have links to the separatist group -- the London-based Ahvaz Arab People's Democratic-Popular Front."--Conjoiner (talk) 01:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
* That's not a direct quote in quotation marks, it's speculation by the journalist that the official is speaking about this group, since this fringe group had claimed responsibility for the Ahwaz bomb attacks. --07fan (talk) 01:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • If a group is involved in insurgent attacks in Iran, then doesn't it deserve an article in Wikipedia? If the BBC, Al-Jazeera and numerous other media organisations are associating this group with bomb attacks then an article is required.--Conjoiner (talk) 02:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
The bombing has its own article: [9]. The question is the notability of the particular group, which is not notable and a webpage is not sufficient. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 04:21, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, this party or political group exist and was involved in some activities (terrorism or whatever acticvities) then I think it is notable enough to be kept --Aziz1005 (talk) 14:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Regardless of being good or evil, this group exists and is based in London [10].Heja Helweda (talk) 16:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. No references provided, no independent verification of notability of the party--Larno Man (talk) 17:45, 27 January 2008 (UTC).
  • Delete per nom. Advertisment for a non notable political group. Far from encyclopedic.Farmanesh (talk) 23:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • delete while there are undeniable separatist movements in the Iranian province of Khuzistan aiming to ethnically cleanse the province from its Persian, Luri, Bakhtiari and Qashqai Turkic residence and to deliver it as a Arab homeland to the Arabs, these articles are partisan. They fail to describe the external ties of the separatists, and the extent of support under population. In addition they do not show that all these oragnizations are different names of the same and they only refer to their own pan-Arabist propaganda websites as "sources". Waht is more disturbing is that they call the province Khuzistan as Al-Ahwaz, while Ahvaz is only the name of its capital and the region has never been called as such by any one else than the pan-Arabists.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 12:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Comment. Isn't that an editorial issue, rather than a reason to delete these articles? If you think there is a bias, then you should get involved in editing the articles rather than advocate their deletion. Having an article on a group accused of terrorism does not mean supporting its actions or its ideology. As it has been mentioned by the BBC, Al-Jazeera, Asia Times, Iran Press Service, the MIPT Terrorism Database and various other media, it obviously has notability, even if it is notorious for ethnic unrest and terrorist attacks.--Conjoiner (talk) 13:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Basically you are right but the biggest problem is its fictious nature. I think these names could be mentioned in a general article dealing with terrorism and ethnic separatism in Khuzistan, in that sense we can give a fair description of them without examining whether all these organizations are the same or not. I must say that I have seen this problem in other movements too in which there might be a great overlap with other (fictious organisations). That would be one option and the other is editing these articles and describing their possible fictious character and overlap with other names under which they operate as well as mentioning their "terrorist" actions. --Babakexorramdin (talk) 14:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
On what basis can you say this organisation is fictitious when it is mentioned in a range of reliable sources, which also quote the leaders? I'm not trying to condone their actions, but clearly the group exists and it is regarded by Iran as responsible for terrorism and ethnic unrest. And, from the looks of it, there is an international dimension as the group is based in Britain and accused of killing scores of people.--Conjoiner (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The arab separatists truely exist but it is not clear who is who. UNPO for example claims that Democratic Solidarity Party of Ahwaz (DSPA) is the representative of nation of al-Ahwaz (Arabistan) in UNPO. http://unpo.org/member_profile.php?id=6

knowing that UNPO.Org which harbours a number of terrorist organization claims that it only accepts peaceful members, it is likely that the latter one is just another version of the latter. there are so many websites all of which claim to be the official website of the Ahwazi separatist movement. It is also not clear why there are several versions of the separatist flags? One with the rep. Azerbaijan symbol on palestine flag, one the former flag plus Allaho Akbar is Saddam style hand writing (similar to the last Saddam flag) one is the one on Pan Arab clors plus one star encircled in green. Then their leader Mansouri was the leader of ARC " Al-Ahwaz Revolutionary Council " http://www.alahwaz-revolutionary-council.org/NL/0000-NL.htm. It is known that Ahwaz studies is a pseudo scientific proxy of the separatists and that the Ahwazi British and Ahwazi danish friendship society function as their links to the west, but it is not clear what is the relation between Abaistan organisation and Ahwazi liberation organization. While they talk good about mansouri and the ALO they also report from MONA an unknown organization with a militant coath of arms ::::::http://www.arabistan.org/images/000000000000.jpg Then you have ahwaz.org that claims to be the website of Ahwazi liberation organization and the al-ahwaz.org that say the same. All report the same things and are controlled by the clique around mansouri who apparently is the leader of democratic solidarity, popular front, Ahawzi Liberation organisation at the same time. This movement claims to be democratic and is baatist at the same time (http://arabistan.org/7_2008/sayed_almogal.htm) while getting support from the west most notably UK. According to Kayhan newspaper the British and Jordanianofficer in Jordan are training the Arab separatist terrorists and that they did the same with regard to the anti-revolutionary groups (MKO)http://www.kayhannews.ir/860418/2.htm#other208, this makes sense as the leaders of the Mujahedin Khalq also resides in Jordan. There is, thus, a conflation and overlap and it seems that all these groups with different colrs (democratic, popular, militant etc...) are in fact the same and one group around Mansouri clique. It will be ok if one mentiones these fact in Khuzestan page --Babakexorramdin (talk) 15:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't claim to be an expert on this and I don't know Arabic or Farsi, but I can't see anything you have quoted that suggests all these organisations are the same group. It is not our position to guess, but simply to report impartially from the verifiable sources available to us. Whether or not they are run by the same person is a matter for investigation that Wikipedia does not exist to conduct. They could all be bitter enemies, in the same way that Communist parties can bitterly hate each other for factional reasons. Clearly there is a big issue here and I can't see anything on Wikipedia that reflects the importance of Arab separatism in Iran, either as a political force or a geopolitical issue. If Iran is accusing foreign governments of inciting such unrest, then it is a major issue and such groups as this one deserve an article, no matter our personal opinions on whether it has a significant following among Al-Ahawzis or whether it is a terrorist group inspired by the West.--Conjoiner (talk) 15:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
What I prpose is to bring them all under the Arab separatism in Khuzistan to avoid short articles tagged because of their neutrality or factual accuracy. Just one article and we mention them all in their possible relationships --Babakexorramdin (talk) 16:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
That seems like a good compromise, since it would allow everyone to concentrate their minds. If there is any overlap - and I've seen nothing yet to suggest there is - then this would provide an opportunity to put this forward, provided there is no original research. I am a little confused, though. Is Al-Ahwaz a city, a people, a province or a nation? Is it another name for Kuzistan? What is the name for the Arab inhabitants? Are they one tribe or many? Are they the same as the marsh Arabs? This needs to be made clear, either in the article you are proposing or in an existing article on the area. I cannot find anything in the Ahwaz article or the article on Iranian Arabs. Given that there is a low-intensity international conflict over the region, it makes sense to expand such articles and create an article on separatism.--Conjoiner (talk) 17:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
yes you pointed to a good point which is another reason why this page under this name deserved to get deleted. Ahvaz is the name of a city the capital of province which is called Khuzistan. The Arab separatists call the whole region Al-Ahwaz. This they do just to claim the Khuzistan capital as theirs. Most of inhabitants of Khusitan and city f ahvaz are non-Arabs, by calling Khuzistan Al-Ahwaz they try to Arabicize the city (at least in the mind). Some 1/3 or more (but no the majority) of Khuzistanis are Arabic speaking they belong mostly to bani Torof and Bani Kaab tribes. They are most likely the Mandeans who are Islamicized and are ethnologically related to the marshland Arabs of southern Iraq. Their homeland is also the lower parts of Khuzsitan in the Western Khuzistani marshlands. Begining 20th century england tried to separate the province from Iran but was not successful. Then with the rise of Pan-Arabism some forein powers tried to create ethnic violence in the 0s. In the 70s Saddam's Baath party did the same. In the Iran-Iraq war the Khuzistani Arabs proved their loyalty to iran by fighting back the invading Iraqi baathists troops. Nowadays agin the foreighn powers are supporting them i order to establish the Bernard Lewis plan.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 10:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Interesting. It seems like the subject warrants an article of its own, incorporating the information on these Al-Ahwaz groups.--Conjoiner (talk) 12:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Is there a systematic effort going on here in propping up these "Ahwaz" articles all at once?--Zereshk (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there a systematic effort going on to nominate them for deletion? If the numbers mean anything, this won't survive AfD, but I do feel that the nomination and a number of the delete votes are to do with the subject of the article. Mostlyharmless (talk) 22:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, don't you think it's suspicious that all of a sudden three articles about a fringe nationalist group (with their flag included) pops up out of nowhere? Could very well be the actual group fishing for attention in order to further its agenda. The motivation could be self-promotion in order to gain support, or anything like that. Is the movement notable, it should of course be kept. So far it hasn't managed to establish notability. — EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 05:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I feel that it is no coincidence that the same people are voting for the deletion of the same articles!!!!! There may be a systematic effort to include these articles, but equally there appears to be a co-ordinated effort to delete them because some don't want the subject matter dealt with, for whatever reason.--Conjoiner (talk) 11:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I can only speak for myself that I followed the links and noticed all three articles were up for deletion. And I voted. I've been voting a lot of delete lately on most topics because I think articles that aren't important or interesting need to get deleted. As for this movement, I'm willing to vote keep if notability can be established. I still think it's suspicious though that all three articles were up on wiki at the same time. — EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 12:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete — Per Zereshk. Yes, these Ahwaz topics just came out of nowhere. — EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 03:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Unencyclopedic page. Farhoudk (talk) 07:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, real and notable org. This afd is narrow-minded nationalist vote-stacking. There should probably be rename. [11] gives the name الجبهة الديمقراطية الشعبية للشعب العربي في الأحواز ('Popular Democratic Front of the Arab People in Ahwaz). Note that the inclusion on the PFLP website denotes notability, PFLP is a highly notable org, and would not include messages from spoof organisations at its website. --Soman (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment, the inclusion on the PFLP website's Arabic section denotes notability how? PEFL is itself a minor Arab militant group, which is neither a reliable source, nor independent of the subject as required by notability guidelines. The threshold of inclusion in English Wikipedia is widespread independent mainstream media coverage in English that meets the requirements of WP:CORP. The notability guidelines explicitly states that "trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability.". --07fan (talk) 01:40, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.