Talk:Iran/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 1 |
Archive 2
| Archive 3 →


Contents

Vote on Zoroastrianiasm

There is a vote on Zoroastrianism in these pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Christianity_and_world_religions#Vote

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Christianity#New_Effort_at_Consensus

Picture of Majles

Folks,

I put in the picture of The Majles as I thought the Iran page desperately needs some images, similar to the front pages of The United States and Germany and Japan and Canada and other good quality pages.

As Gallileo said, "an image is worth a thousand words".

In order to present an optimal image of Iran, I think it is vital that we use as many images in all our pages as possible.

--Zereshk 04:10, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I just expanded the politics section. In the previous version, there was little if any mention of The Expediency Council, and The Judiciary, and the government organization and structure was not sufficiently clear.
I followed the format of the Germany page. It breaks down the politics section into various sub categories. I think this format adds to clarity.
Please feel free to further edit as you see necessary.--Zereshk 22:21, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Persia: inventor of ice cream and cookies!

Folks,

I put in some stuff I knew or found, on the ice cream and cookie page history section. As expected, some people didnt like what I had to say. (as usual, everything that's good must have been invented by the Americans or Europeans. Everybody else was too stupid I suppose.) If any of you know of any extra sources, especially Farsi ones (and hence unknown to the west), please help out and corroborate.--Zereshk 01:15, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • I heard a piece of trivia: that the "ice-cream cone" was invented during an American "World Fair", where a Middle Easterner? was selling his ice cream next to a guy selling pancakes. The Fair was held in the summer, and it was a really hot day. The ice cream was selling like crazy; but nobody was buying the pancakes (or, was it "waffles"?). Anyway, the two guys put their heads together, and started selling the ice cream, wrapped up in waffles! (I don't know what the guy selling ice cream got out of it. Perhaps his ice cream went further...) This supposedly is the "origin of the ice-cream cone"! There you have it. (I don't know what it has to do with Persia; but anyway, it's a related story.)

Military control

"Iran is the only state in which the executive branch does not control the armed forces." Hmm...how different is the Iranian structure than the that of China where the military commitee is theoretically seperate, and was still headed by a former president until very recently?

I'll clarify that.--Zereshk 00:25, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Head of State?

"The head of state is the president..." This directly conflicts with the explanation on the Supreme Leader page, which says that he is the head of state and the president is head of government. Which is it?

The leader is higher in position. The reason we run into such ambiguities in the text is that different people contribute to the article from different sources. My fault. Thanks for the heads up. I'll clarify that by quoting from the constitution.--Zereshk 00:29, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Demographics

Somebody (198.81.26.15) changed the demographics part. I think the new version is a bit problematic. Azeris are now down to 10% of the population, and the Bahais have been totally deleted as a minority.

Im not into demographics. Somebody please address this inaccuracy.--Zereshk 23:31, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Council of Guardians

I removed an anonymous edit which called the jurists on the Council of Guardians "unelected". While this is true, and I appreciate the point that the author was making, the method of appointment is discussed immediately after, so "unelected" is superflous and unneccesarily perjorative. Ddye 19:43, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

good deal.--Zereshk 00:23, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Turkic vandalism

Attention, someone just took out the entire section on the Safavis on the Persia page after my last revision.

I dont know how to revert back.

Someone please fix it.--Zereshk 02:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

He ( 62.139.122.71 ) also has destroyed the page on The Persian Encyclopedia, and pages about Iran on the Azerbaijan pages. See his record to track his vandalism down.--Zereshk 02:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The youth

Arnaud de Borchgrave wrote:

Seventy-five percent of Iran's population is younger than 25. It is the world's only country whose youth is pro-American. [1]

Interesting addition by Ed Poor, but not for the first paragraph and not really part of the article in the first place. The first part is maybe true and a factum but it would belong under demographics.The second sentence is not based on any reliable investigation and probably wishful thinking... Refdoc 22:58, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Okay, how about I put the first of the two deleted sentences back, in the demographics section? -- Uncle Ed (talk) 15:30, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

I would think ok, if you can find a more reliable source for it - i.e. census data, rather than an editorial comment Refdoc 16:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Latest Rollback info

  1. If youre gonna give the CIA as a reference, you must use their numbers correctly. 51% is hence correct, not 58%. Otherwise give your source.
  2. Any claims made on the demographics page must be accompanied by a reference source. Otherwise, the page will become an opinionated page, rather than encyclopedic. Hence the paragraph I took out.
  3. Reverted to Mani 1's first revision, to fix vandalism by 200.212.36.62 .
  4. I put Farsi in parentheses next to Persian in the box to settle the ongoing dispute. Arguments for both uses have points. Youre both right.

Keep cool ppl.--Zereshk 20:34, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Seriously, Farsi is an English name for the language, in somewhat common use. It is not "incorrect" or the "local name" for the language. Terminology flamewars are pointless; let's acknowledge that both are used and go on. --Prosfilaes 02:43, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Color

ei baba,...Why did User:Bletch take off the color? The color was put in for easier navigation in the page, and to give it ...color! Why does everything have to be a boring B&W? Are we trying to simulate the eye-stressing pages of a real encyclopedia?--Zereshk 21:49, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"حفت سين"  ???

Pardon my ignorance everyone (which may be the case here), but why is Haft Seen spelled with the wrong "H" (specifically ح ) on this page?

Perhaps Im missing something?--Zereshk 00:36, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On The Nuclear issue

  1. I dont think the Nuclear issue should be mentioned on the Iran main page at all. It isnt relevant. Do we see anything about The Kyoto Protocol or even The war in Iraq, on the front page of the United States?
  2. The Nuclear issue of Iran has its own page, which can be accessed by a link on the main page of Iran.
  3. Having the nuclear issue mentioned on the main page of Iran is a bad idea, because it will lead to POV wars (as we have been seeing in the last few posts). But if people insist on mentioning it, then I suggest we use the last edition by User:Refdoc.--Zereshk 21:21, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • This article is really mild. There is no mention of the many public displays and demonstrations of militancy by sometimes hundreds of thousands of people, which Iran should currently and recently be known for. These are typical of Iran. I recently saw a front-page picture of Iran displaying its missiles, for the world to see, in a military "parade". I think this picture should be put into the article, as well as at least one of the many public displays of crowds chanting, and with big posters saying, "Death to Israel! Death to the United States!" This article makes Iran appear to be a "peaceful" place. It is not. (Oct.)
    • Should there be pictures of protestors in front of the White House on the US page? Should we talk about the death of the non-violent demonstrators during the Vietnam War? This is a general page, let's keep it that way. Marzyeh

Source of terrorism in the world

Plz consider the fallowing passage:

"The women chosen by the BBC on its web page [2] are special people... the common Saudi women are living a life beyond our imagination... Under the global pressure, if the Saudi regime is opening the doors of freedom of thought, speech and expression in that conservative society, it will not only benefit the common people but will nip the roots of terrorism around the world as well. We the common Muslims in Pakistan are directly affected by the traditional conservative policies of the Saudi Arabian and Iranian regimes... Both Saudi Arabia and Iran have been financially supporting their agents in Pakistan and thus sectarianism and terrorism has been nourished in our land. These terrorists never let us common Pakistani women to walk around freely and try to through acid on our faces or stop marathon races by force and they want to show us the model of Saudi Arabia and Iran... (Sick). If Saudi Arabia and Iran are motivated by the world community to be a part of the world community then the world can get rid of terrorism and extremism.
The Saudi man has all the privilege...they can have 4 wives at a time... many trips around the world, especially 'moral holidays' in the West but their women live a life less than human beings...it should change now!
Just 4000 princes (from the King to the police officer) of a family are ruling the poor Saudi people with tyranny and it is not only affecting them but every one in the region, especially in the Muslim world…
These things should be included in the main article of Wikipedia in a balanced way!"

FactFinder

Why should this be considered? This a) largely about Saudi Arabia, b) grossly POV

Refdoc 23:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • I agree emphatically that this profile of Iran as a world-leading terrorist nation should be included in the article. Let the Iranians write their own "cake-and-ice cream" articles about how good Iran is. (Oct.)
Again, you are not informed and thus are making comments that are ridiculous. Iran is one of the best places for a woman to live in the Middle East and, I think, the world. That is my POV, and I can support it with the female nascar-esce drivers, firefighters, teachers, etc, that recieve the same pay and treatment by law as their male counterparts. Marzyeh

On The Nuclear issue

  1. I dont think the Nuclear issue should be mentioned on the Iran main page at all. It isnt relevant to the Main page. Do we see anything about The war in Iraq on the Main page of the United States?
  2. The Nuclear issue of Iran has its own page, which can be accessed by a link on the main page of Iran.
  3. Having the nuclear issue mentioned on the main page of Iran is a bad idea, because it will lead to POV wars (as we have seen many times before).--Zereshk 18:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)


"Al-Ahwaz"

Folks, thought I might bring to your attention the article I just wrote last night:

http://www.iranian.com/Kasraie/2005/April/Ahwaz/index.html

Im editing the Khuzestan and Ahvaz pages right now. They should be finished in a few hours.

Thanx.--Zereshk 22:58, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

There are people there already claiming "Al-Ahwaz" was not Iranian.--Zereshk 20:51, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Trouble with Afshari page

The page Afsharid dynasty is in trouble. Can someone please tend to it? eivallah.--Zereshk 22:58, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm on it and I'll have something on with in the next two days! --Aytakin 01:40, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jaber ibn Hayan was not Iranian??

Folks,

There are some people on the Geber page who have erased "Persia", "Persian", and "Iran" from the entire page, claiming Jaber was only an Arab. They have also been going around deleting Geber from the List of Iranian Scientists page as well.

I can only keep reverting for a while.

Please voice your concern. Thanx.--Zereshk 01:02, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Do we need to link to each department of Government?

The External links to Government sites seem to be overkill. --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 08:49, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  1. Actually, youll have a very hard time finding all of them in one place. These links are hard to get. Even Iran's Presidential website doesnt have all these links correctly, up to date, and in one place.
  2. It gives a good idea of the Iranian Government's structure. Just by looking at the list, one finds out about "the Secretariat of..." which is mentioned nowhere on any Wikipage.
  3. Eventually, we will replace these external links with their internal wiki links. So the list will have to be there anyway.--Zereshk 08:57, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Al-Ahwaz" --2

Folks,

Looks like we are having trouble again on the Ahvaz page with some people who are desperately trying to claim Ahvaz is of Arabic origin. A revert war is going on there. I have added as many sources as I could to the article, only to have it POVd by these Pan-Arabs.

The debate is also going on here as well: Khuzestan and Ethnic conflict in Khuzestan.

Agar zahmatee neest, please give your input on the talk pages.--Zereshk 05:04, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Qazvin is now updated

Folks,

I just finished expanding and updating Qazvin Province. Please feel free to peruse and make any necessary edits.--Zereshk 20:47, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Iran (The Great)

I've been working on some Iranian sites in wiki in order to expand them and teach more people about this great country. I would appreciate everyones help in making as many sites on wiki about persians and their culture.--Pedram

Gas laser

I've just done some work on this site Gas laser can someone please add more information and pictures to it. Thanx--Pedram

Afsharid Dynasty

I have finished editing the Afsharid dynasty site but it still needs more improvement... if someone could please add a few pictures and information of your own.--Pedram 11:10 pm ET, 15 May 2005

Ahvaz

Looks like we're having trouble with User:Zora again. She has vandalised the article and is engaging in an edit war. I can only hold down the fort for so long, so to speak. It would be appreciated if others share their input and help put an end to this nonsense that this user has constantly been imposing. SouthernComfort 12:25, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Provincial update

Folks,

I just finished expanding the pages Guilan and Bushehr. Please feel free to peruse and make necessary edits or additions. We have 18 more provinces left that need to be expanded and written (if interested, go to my page and scroll down to see to-do-list of provinces needing work). Im retiring for the day. Thanx yall.--Zereshk 19:31, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

I will be working on Hormozgan in the next few days.--Zereshk 13:52, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Just finished Hormozgan.--Zereshk 00:28, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Finished Hamadan Province and Lorestan. Please edit if necessary.--Zereshk 23:16, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
Just finished Razavi Khorasan, North Khorasan, and South Khorasan. Check for my mistakes.--Zereshk 15:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Yall, please add to Semnan Province which I have just finished expanding.--Zereshk 23:21, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

BCE/CE Standard for Iran-related articles

I would like to respectfully advise all editors with an interest in ancient Iranian history that User:Jguk has taken it upon himself to continue the imposition of Christian POV 'BC/AD' terminology in all ancient Iranian history articles. Iranian history is not Christian and to impose BC/AD upon these articles is POV and offensive. I had begun converting all relevant articles (dealing only with ancient Iranian history) to BCE/CE, beginning with List of kings of Persia - this was not difficult since most editors dealing in this subject adhere to the BCE/CE standard (which is very much standard for ancient history as it predates Christianity and Christian POV terminology). However, User:Jguk is against BCE/CE and has reverted all my edits and will apparently continue doing so indefinitely.

BCE/CE is standard throughout the English-speaking academic world, and most especially in the fields of ancient Near Eastern history. For those uninformed, please see Common Era for details and definitions. I would appreciate the support of all editors willing to be bold and help make Wikipedia more balanced and academically accurate for everyone and allow Iran-related articles to fully adhere to the BCE/CE NPOV standard. SouthernComfort 16:23, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea.--Zereshk 19:51, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

I've never understood what the big deal is over whether to say "AD" and "BC" or "CE" and "BCE". Either way it's still Christian-based, after all.
Darn straight! Let's change all of the dates to Julian day format, so we can avoid this insidious Christian-centrism on Wikipedia.

Language

It has come to my attention that many of the Persian or Persian related sites do not have a Persian translation. Unfortunately I alone cannot translate all of the sites by myself, if possible can anyone help me on this issue. --Pedram 9:27 AM ET May 26, 2005

Ahvaz

User:Zora has again been vandalizing the Ahvaz article by deleting almost the entire article and ruining the layout of pictures. This has been going on for about two months now. I can only keep an eye on these articles for so long. SouthernComfort 13:27, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Can someone please go to this link and help us stop Zora from violating this site... Talk:Ahvaz Pedram 4:09 PM ET June 06, 2005

List of Iranians

PLEASE HELP ME PUT SOME INFORMATION UP ABOUT THESE PERSIAN AND IRANIAN PEOPLE. WHILE WE ARE HERE ADDING MORE INFORMATION TO THESE SITE WE CAN BE ADDING INFORMATION TO ONE THAT DON'T HAVE ANY TO BEGIN WITH. GO TO THIS SITE ---------->>>> List of Iranians THANK YOU! Pedram 22:45, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 !!SUPPORT----THIS IS A PLEA OF HELP TO ALL OF YOU!!

______IMPORTANT AND A MUST READ______

______Help bring knowledge of Iran and everything to do with Iran to all the people around the world. Instead of ruining these sites by starting debaits, add more links to it. put your information under a seperate link for other people to view that way you can show your point of view as well. There are so many thing that we can talk about and teach to others but we can't because of these argument. For example look at Ahvaz's link, it is ruined everyday by these argument but they just wont give up. If we would have put these behind us we would have written more and pasted on much more knowledge. There are people that think Iran is nothing more than deserts or that Persians are Arabs. We can make that difference. If we write something and other people read it, they will pass it on, they will expand on it.

______PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS AND LET THEM KNOW THAT IF WE ALL PUT IN A SMALL AMOUNT OF WRITTING IT WILL SOON BECOME MUCH MORE!!

______MUCH THANX AND WITH HOPES OF YOUR SUPPORT______ Pedram-e 23:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I just thoroughly expanded the List of Iranian scientists by adding 20 or so more biographies which I have been writing over the past week. The list is almost complete.--Zereshk 08:56, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I just added the biographies of Ruhollah Khaleghi, Abolhasan Saba, and Rahi Mo'ayeri. I must however mention that the same people who tried messing up the Ahvaz and Khuzestan page, are now busy on the Elamite Empire page claiming that The Elamites were not Iranian. My point: you have to make a stand, otherwise those people will revise Iran's history.--Zereshk 08:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cuisine of Iran

Started article, which is now a stub. I plan on expanding it to cover dishes and culinary styles specific to each province, as well as anything else general in regards to Iranian cuisine (as opposed to specifically Persian cuisine) and the assistance of other editors in this area would be greatly appreciated. SouthernComfort 20:38, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cinema of Iran

This article is also in dire need of attention. It would be much appreciated if those editors who have read, or are willing to take some time to read the many available Persian-language texts on the history of Iranian cinema, could add to this article. SouthernComfort 21:46, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag is completely unwarranted

Wikipedia clearly specifies:

"Reasons for listing an article [for cleanup] include:
It is a substub, and might need removal or merging with a broader article

It needs extensive formatting, proofreading, or rephrasing in comprehensible English.

You think it should be deleted (copyvio, unsalvageable POV), but aren't sure, and don't want to mistakenly put it on VfD (it will be moved to the appropriate page by somebody else).
Its problems are too broad to list it on a more specific page (see the table to the right)"

The page Iran exhibits none of these problems whatsoever.

The next time it crosses your mind to list this page for a cleanup, take a look at the page United States.--Zereshk 2 July 2005 09:10 (UTC)

Sharia law

can someone please include some more information on sharia law in Iran? specifically im interested in its ramifications for non-Muslims, as well as Sunnis.

--Gozar 3 July 2005 23:53 (UTC)

That would be have to detailed in the article Judicial system of Iran. There is no standard interpretation of Islamic law in Iran and such interpretation varies between individual judges. The Sharia article already covers the core fundamentals. Both Shi'as and Sunnis are subject to the same Islamic law in the courts. Non-Muslim minorities are not generally subject to Islamic law (for example, Armenians, Assyrians, Jews, and Zoroastrians are allowed to produce and consume alcohol for their own communities). See religious minorities in Iran. SouthernComfort 4 July 2005 01:19 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. Although, I dont see the Judicial system of Iran article in here(the article on the Islamic Republic of Iran, not wikipedia), would it be a good idea to include this somewhere? --Gozar 4 July 2005 01:32 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't realize there wasn't any link. Yes, there is a section in this article, simply called 'The Judiciary.' It's not much (the respective article itself is not much either), but the system in Iran is so hopelessly convoluted and circular that I'm not sure if there's anyone who really wants to tackle this issue. ;) SouthernComfort 4 July 2005 01:39 (UTC)

ha, yeah i noticed the article was actually just a stub :O --Gozar 4 July 2005 01:47 (UTC)

Announcement for Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran

Attention all Iranian related contributors:

Please join the Wikipedia community of Iranian related contributors at Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran to better organize writing and expanding articles. Thank You.

periodic "cleansing" of article

Material people apparently are uncomfortable with is being purged/deleted without discussion. That's not appropriate. It's especially not appropriate to say it belongs elsewhere, and delete it here without moving it there.

The section is as follows:

Image:Mashhad.jpg
Two male teenagers were executed by hanging in Mashhad on 19 July 2005. They were accused of having a consensual homosexual relationship.

The head of the judiciary is appointed by the Supreme Leader, who in turn appoints the head of the Supreme Court and the chief public prosecutor.

Public courts deal with civil and criminal cases. There are also revolutionary courts that try certain categories of offenses, including crimes against national security, narcotics smuggling, and acts that undermine the Islamic Republic. Decisions rendered in revolutionary courts are final and cannot be appealed.

The rulings of the Special Clerical Court, which functions independently of the regular judicial framework and is accountable only to the Supreme Leader, are also final and cannot be appealed. The Special Clerical Court handles crimes allegedly committed by clerics, although it has also taken on cases involving lay people.

Amnesty International (a non-governmental organisation NGO) describes cases in which children were sentenced to the death penalty. Torture is part of the legal system in Iran. On 19 July 2005 two teenagers, identified only as "M.A." and "A.M.", were executed by being lashed 228 times and then hanged in Edalat (Justice) Square in the city of Mashhad. They had confessed, after being imprisoned for 14 months, and under torture, to having had a consensual homosexual relationship. Consensual gay sex in any form is punishable by death in the Islamic Republic of Iran. According to Iranian human rights campaigners, over 4000 lesbians and gay men have been executed since the Ayatollahs seized power in 1979.

Why doesn't this belong? - Outerlimits 23:18, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

As for El Capitan's snide comment, " (Discuss your proposed addition on the talk page. :)": I'm not proposing an addition. The material has been here since the executions. (And I had already added my comments to the talk page.) - Outerlimits 23:21, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Outerlimits, please refrain from accusing me of having made snide comment, or addressing me informally. My user name is El_C. Now, the Islamic government is very oppressive and commits brutalities against many people for various reasons – I fail to see why this, and why these two human lives, should count beyond others; should recieve exposure and prominence and detail within the main country article to that extent. Which is why I suggested that it be integrated into the Judicial system of Iran stab. A suggestion which recieved no comment whatsoever from yourself. I also remind you of the no personal attacks policy, meaning that s/he must further refrain from inflmatory edit summaries such as sorry that you approve of judicial killing of gay children, but your approval doesn't give you the right of censorship [3]. Lastly, I note that if User:Outerlimits feels too strongly about this issue, perhaps a short break is in order so as to better facilitate a composed and collected state of mind. El_C 23:34, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Another obnoxious comment from El C, who didn't "make suggestions" but simply deleted (and after I had commented here on the talk page, though he states otherwise above). If he feels these two judicial murders are featured too prominently here, the answer is to include other examples of judicial murders. There are lots to choose from. As long as we're making suggestions to one another, issues are best dealt with on talk pages, not edit summaries: and you'd be on firmer ground if you'd resist personal attacks suchs as intimating my "state of mind" is other than composed and collected. I'm glad you eventually joined the discussion here. As I understand it, your contention, then, is that this doesn't belong here because these two deaths are unimportant? - Outerlimits 23:46, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
When you call my comment obnoxious, that hurts my feelings, please don't charactarize my comments that way; I was trying to be constructive. I did not delete, I reverted your edit, including other changes I disagree with such as having "Iran / Persia" in the lead. Key is to explain and discuss your edits in a calm and dispassionate way (which I challenge you are not living up to here, please reconsider your attitude). Now, I suggest you undertake the task of how to summarize/move the material, and I see no reason to intervene with that process at this time. As for my suggestion regarding "a composed and collected state of mind," that was not a personal attack, nor to be snide, and I'm sorry you feel otherwise. Finally, I don't place greater or lesser important on any given human life, but I'm interested in context and proportionality. El_C 23:57, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
If you have an issue about "Iran / Persia", the proper response is to edit and/or discuss those two words, not to revert other changes. - Outerlimits 00:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that edit has been inserted multiple times, by a veriaty of IPs, and has never gained consensus. So it is prudent to explain its merit and gain that consensus in the talk page first. Just from my vantage point. El_C 10:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
It seems that you can perceive personal attacks and snide comments only when you consider them directed at you. Let me rephrase, with attribution: I perceived your edit summary as snide, and I perceived your comment as noxious. Reverting is deletion, and it's deletion without engagement: it indicates not mere disagreement, but disagreement and contempt: it indicates that a contribution is so worthless it need not even be discussed. Please consider re-reading your comments before making them, and imagining whether or not your own feelings would be hurt if they were made toward you. - Outerlimits 00:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
I will re-add a briefer summary in deference to your concern over proportion. - Outerlimits 00:06, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
I will comment immediately, because misunderstanding ensue. It wasn't a deletion of an addition in isolation, is what I meant, I'm not going to argue over the semantics though, so fair enough. Also, I did not argue that you, or anyone here, directed a personal attack toward myself – please reread my comments. I'm sorry if I have given you an imperssion to the contrary, but as mentioned above, it was related to the edit summary you directed to Zereshk. Incidentally, I'm not pleased with his edit summary, which read: reverting back all edits about the judiciary. It doesnt belong here. Take your political feelings elsewhere. This is an encyclopedia. [4] I was going to comment on that to him here, but he has yet to arrive on the scene, so this will have to do. Finally, my edit summary was meant as diffusive humor, I'm sorry if you found it snide. I hope that clarifies my position and predisposition here. El_C 00:24, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
It does, and no hard feelings. We (and I mean "we") often forget that typed communications seem harsher than spoken ones, having no human voice to go with them, and that a little smiley face doesn't really cure that. Perhaps it would have been a good idea to comment on Zereshk's summary at the time you noted it; my impression is that that user seems to be establishing, or trying to establish, a sort of "ownership" of this article that does not need to be abetted. - Outerlimits 00:42, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
No, not at all. English isn't my native tongue, and I do sometimes fail to effectively nuance my comments. El_C 01:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
The two young men (and not "children", every country has its own definition of what "child" is in the eyes of the law) were executed, not because they were homosexual males per se, but primarily because the had RAPED AND SODOMIZED a straight 13-year-old boy and thus, ruined his life FOREVER. Unlike what the Western homo-lobbyists claim, Iran did not FOR THE FIRST TIME announce the rape charge after the execution. The case was indeed publicized before. Another very important, and I would say entertaining, point is that the Western Iran-bashing sources talk about "teenagers". Can you just think about it for a moment to see the sheer stupidity of it? The word "teenager" has to do with the fact that in ENGLISH LANGUAGE the numbers thirteen through nineteen end with teen. Can you think of a more stupid way to categorize human beings, much less, extending it to another culture whose language is not even English? At any rate, Iran has its own clearly defined legal system and by the law of the land, these two criminals should have been executed. USA also has Capital Punishment. If USA categorizes its citizens on the basis of the suffix of their age in the English language, that's their prerogative, although it is stupid and funny beyond words can describe. Unsigned by 69.233.169.3 El_C 07:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
13 is not an adult, so they were not men. The United States does not execute people for rape, neither to my knowledge does Iran (of women). Please avoid moralistic pronouncements and stick to the facts. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. El_C 07:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
Your "knowledge" is good for Zionist-owned, Iran-bashing, Western media. Iran executes rapists, whether their victims are male or female. In cases where public sentiment has been hurt, the executions are in public. I myself have had the utter pleasure of watching two cases. One was three years ago where a gang of 4 was hanged in northern Tehran. They were a gang of rapists (all in their late teens) who had raped numerous (at least 20) young girls between the ages of 8 to 12. They had caused quite a terror for a long time until they were finally captured. In fact, I wished I could be the one who flags them almost to death before putting the rope around their necks and sending them directly into hell by kicking their arse after the noose was fit around their necks. It is nobody's business how Iran deals with its criminals as it is nobody's business to tell USA how they should deal with their criminals. Every country has its own law of the land. 69.233.169.39 08:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm unintersted in this anectodal rant; if you have pertinent sources — cite them; otherwise, again, adhere to WP:NOT. El_C 08:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Article 112 of the Islamic Punishment Law states that: "When an adult male has sodomized a minor the 'doer' shall be executed and the 'object' shall receive 74 lashes." So, since the alleged rapists were above 15 (and thus adults) and the victim was below that age (and thus a minor) the sentence appears to be airtight. The fellow from the Californian IP, however, seems to be just trolling. – Kaveh (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and one might also cite Iranian law to justify the killing of a rape victim on the grounds that she has been unchaste, if she's at least ten years old. About a dozen minors were executed in Iran last year. Law <> justice. Nobel Peace laureate Shirin Ebadi has condemned the hanging of Mahmoud Asgari and Ayaz Marhoni on charges of involvement in homosexual acts as a violation of Iran's obligations under the International Convention on the Rights of the Child, which bans such executions. [5]. - Outerlimits 05:20, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
There is no provision for executing women on the ground of being "unchaste". And if an incident has taken place in the Islamic Republic, one has to cite the applicable laws to understand the judicial reasoning behind it. – Kaveh (talk) 00:27, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Tell it to Leyla Mafi, sentenced to death for "acts contrary to chastity". Her stoning, temporarily delayed while it was determined whether or not she's mentally retarded, was rescinded last Monday. Tell it to Atefeh Rajabi, hanged on 15 August 2004 for "engaging in acts incompatible with chastity". - Outerlimits 20:38, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
In both cases the charges leading to the death penalty have been adultery with married men, not simply being unchaste. Sexual relations outside marriage carry lashes, unless performed with married persons. I think it would help if those concerned with the situation in Iran actually learn the facts and avoid making baseless grand statement. – Kaveh (talk) 17:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
I think it would help if those concerned with the situation in Iran would recognize the severity with which it deals with sexual "crimes", and especially with women involved in them, disgusts and horrifies the world, rather than defend a system in which one can be stoned to death for having sex because the punishment for "simple" unchastity is "merely" lashing. - Outerlimits 01:21, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Persian vs. Iranian

Could you, if you will, please have a look into the following dispute on the Zoroastrian talk page.

Talk:Zoroastrianism#Persian_vs._Iranian

Thanks in advance. Str1977 10:02, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Copyright

It says there is a copyright infingment on the image Azadidown.jpg. I think this should be fixed. Newguineafan 15:59, August 10, 2005 (UTC)



User:SouthernComfort

Just wanted to let you guys know that User:SouthernComfort was one of our best editors in Iranian related pages.

He lived in Louisiana.

He hasnt logged in for some time now. I have no idea of his whereabouts.--Zereshk 04:42, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

ridiculous disambiguation

While Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? was a great book and all, I do not think that a reference to one of its supporting characters should be the first thing that readers of this article see—just as someone looking for Leonardo shouldn't be greeted by mention of the Ninja Turtle. Create Iran (disambiguation) if you must, but write Iran Deckard first. —Charles P. (Mirv) 05:28, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Problems with sentence relating to the Oil Bourse

The claim that "This attempt to rebalance trading relationships in the world economy may trigger a series of far reaching consequences, including the potential for a resource war with the United States of America over the flow of both dollars and oil." is in need of moderation. Time is running out for the supposed attack to stop the oil bourse and there is little evidence that the American government will somehow make a decision to attack Iran for petroeuro reasons. The poll numbers over public support for the U.S. position in Iraq keep getting further and further against continuing intervention.

It is rather strange that such a pov and unlikely scenario is proferred on this page. If the claim stays in its present form it should be moved to a section about peak oil production theories since that is were this idea seems to have originated. On the Iranian nuclear program page it does not say that "Iran's nuclear program will have dramatic geopolitical consequence; it may lead to immeditate use of nuclear wars against Iran's adversaires or some type of terrorist organization recieving nuclear aid." There are good reasons why that article doesn't make such a claim yet on this article such accusations made against other countries despite the fact that an effort to stop Iran's oil bourse would be nearly impossible and would lead to the shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz. That would stop cold any economic rationale for such a scenario. If Iraq is rent apart by complications resulting from disagreements over its constitution how will the United States gain the wherewithal to conduct such an epic undertaking? Although the United States may despise Iranian policy and the changes in the petroleum trade that is occuring it is not simply not possible or plausible that it will muster together the resources for an extremely self damaging conflict. It would make much more sense for the article to claim that the U.S. would attack for reasons relating to the nuclear power plants although that too is speculative and not as probable as some seem to hope.

By March 20th 2006 this sentence will have to be scrapped if no such war has taken place. My recommendation is to either delete the part after the word "consequences", acknowledge that it is a claim made by certain, specific groups, or mitigate the phrasing. Tidal Air 02:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC) Tidal Air

Persian hat

Persian hat is a stub; in trying to fix it I was wondering if the tall hats word by the individuals in the image at Qajar were such hats? Thanks --Dpr 18:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Iran Iraq War Video

A rare video of the Iran Iraq War frontlines, where in the early days of the war Iranian volunteers are destroying Iraqi tanks:

http://www.iranian.com/Pictory/2005/October/war.html


See details of "Fanning the Flames": Guns, Greed & Geopolitics in the Gulf War by Kenneth R. Timmerman

http://www.iran.org/tib/krt/fanning_ch7.htm


Save your images from deletion with proper tagging

Attention all Iran related photo uploaders:

We all know that Wikipedia judges qualification to displaying images based on US copyright law. And the US does not recognize, hold up, honor, or have any copyright relations with Iran, as stipulated here.

However, there are administrators out there (including Iranian ones) that WILL erase the photos that you upload, no matter how nice, important, and safe they seem for uploading, if they dont have the proper tagging.

If you didnt take the photo yourself, and if the photo's source is from Iran, and if you decide to use the Fairuse tag, please use the following tags to ensure that your photo doesnt get erased:

{ { fairusein| the page you are using the image in } }

{ { OCILLA } }

That should keep your images safe.--Zereshk 07:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)



We're on the main page

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Jawami ul-Hikayat

, which was recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.
Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Gonbad-e Qabus, which was recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

cool.--Zereshk 04:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)