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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I don't know why Bush refused this but I guess he though everything was going so well in Iraq at the time.
In 2003, U.S. Spurned Iran's Offer of Dialogue Some Officials Lament Lost Opportunity
By Glenn Kessler Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, June 18, 2006; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700727.html
My input:
I personally think Ahmadinejad's picture doesnt belong on the front main page of Iran. It gives the impression to the reader that Iran is equivalent to ahmadinejad. And that is not right. I vote for it's removal.-- Zereshk 02:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
YES, AHMADINEJAD PICTURE SHOULD STAY OFF. He has no power, he is just a stupid chatter box. -- SkyEarth 22:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I've read this article thoroughly and it is a good article with a thorough overview of Iran, but there are some issues that need to be resolved. This is just a rough set of proposals:
Once these are done, a peer-review would be a good idea and then I think Iran deserves to be a featured article. Green Giant 03:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
We need a Foreign relations and military section. Maybe some of the content from the disputed paragraph can be moved into such a section. -- Jeff3000 00:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
We dont have room for it. As User:wikiacc will tell you, the whole effort was to trim down the page to guideline length, so that we can nominate it for feature status. Adding another section is basically reversing these efforts.-- Zereshk 03:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The third image in the History section, the Mahan Asemoon is pretty but it's very small and cannot be expanded beyond 100px width. I suggest replacing it with something like the Shah Mosque image which is much larger and clearer. However as space is limited at the top, perhaps the new image can go into the Culture section? Green Giant 02:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
If you want to remove an image, at least remove one that takes up a lot of space (like the president image). The very reason we put the Mahan dome image was that it was space efficient and aesthetic for the page layout, AND, that it was representative of Iran's Islamic past. I especially cropped the image to those proportions. Now we have 2 images of Iran's pre-Islamic past, and none of its post-Islamic past, which is not right. I'm putting the Mahan image back.
Second: The image of Azadi square has always been an image agreed upon by both royalist and post-revolutionary Iranians as the symbol to represent them politically. Now you have this president image messing things up. You are replacing an image everyone agrees on with one that people dont agree on, hence ignoring an established consensus.
Please, if youre going to touch the main page, consult with the people who have spent many hours, if not days, and months, making it.-- Zereshk 03:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
So instead of pictures of mountains and deserts, use pictures of cities. Images are used to reinforce the written article, and a gallery does not do that. I'm sure the FAC will object to it. -- Jeff3000 20:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
As for User:Green Giant and the Mahan picture, I'm not going to be too picky on it: As long as there are 2 pics in the history section, one for pre-Islamic Iran, and one for post-Islamic Iran. Post Islamic Iran must be somehow represented. The perseplois pic is fine. It represents Iran's pre-Islamic past. But we need one to represent the 1400 years that Iran went through. It could be a Qajar painting, or a portrait of Shah Abbas, like the one below, or an architectural masterpiece. Which one would you guys rather have? Shall we vote on this?-- Zereshk 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Oooo, this is a nice picture, I like it quite a lot. Let's put it in, and see if we can resolve the copyright later. -- Jeff3000 23:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
ok, I've cropped it, as so. I'm not sure which one I like better. -- Jeff3000 03:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Please do not keep moving/deleting that pic around, and submit it under different sections; this will clutter the artcle. Discuss it with others before you keep moving the pic, or deleting it. Thank you Zmmz 04:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
As per the discussion here, I reworded the picture's caption with relevant information. -- ManiF 13:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I think the image is a major symbol, it blends to the section/next section nicely, and it also shows a slice of the biggest tourist attraction in Iran. Plus, it is aestethically appealing. Zmmz 23:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The image in the `Geography and climate` section is also important, since it shows the snow filled mountains of Tehran, and many do not know Iran has the four seasons. Zmmz 23:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Needs to be checked for NPOV. The whole section sounds like it's been copied from a web-page of the Iranian Ministry of Tourism, if there's such a thing.
User:Zmmz, you have effectively reverted most of the edits I and Jeff3000 made without explaining the rationale. Your edit summaries should be civil and should not include comments like "do not keep moving/deleing picfs on your own, it is becoming disruptive" especially when addressed to other editors. That is not an acceptable tone to use in edit summaries and I would appreciate you explaining on the talkpage why you feel other editors cannot make changes without requiring your express typed permission? In case you are not aware, I recommend reading the guidelines on explaining reverts and edit summaries. You ask for discussion before changes but did you read the suggestions we made for Article Improvement? The very least you could do is to comment about the suggestions if you feel so strongly about the changes. This article will not pass FAC until and unless each of the editors fully appreciates the guidelines at Wikipedia:What is a featured article. It would help enormously if you could take the time out to read the featured articles on countries like Australia, China, Pakistan and Bangladesh, especially the last two because they have only recently passed FAC. Note the criticisms and comments made on their candidacies and let's apply the ideas here. Green Giant 23:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Please stay calm, and civil. Regardless of if it is ammusing to you that Zereshk and I defend pics, you cannot keeping deleting pictures on your own, then expect others to accept it. People work hard to gwet these images released, and if you have a personal preference, then you should come in the discussion page, talk about it, and reach a consensus with others. If you keep reverting others`s original work, they will revert it back. Thank you Zmmz 23:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Please feel free to read through any of my talkpage comments and come back and tell me I don't stay clam and civil. The reason I found it amusing is that in each case the only person to defend the image was the uploader. I didn't think I would have to remind an accomplished editor that Wikipedia is not about getting images released but about trying to write first-class articles. Before you accuse myself or Jeff of vandalism I suggest everybody freezes on the revert war and instead scroll up, read the suggested improvements and make a constructive comment as to how the article can be improved. Green Giant 23:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Zmmz has reverted much of the image work of Zereshk, and I have gone back to Zereshk's edits. I think the article is much improved the way Zereshk has modified it. There were too many images. -- Jeff3000 23:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, but others don`t agree with your personal taste, or other. So please do not delete other people`s hard work on your own, and discuss it thoroughly first, or set-up a straw poll. Thank you Zmmz 23:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
No, you are mistaken; I was not the one that deleted Zereshk`s works. You need to set up a straw poll, instead of, deleting stuff. Thank you Zmmz 23:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Whatever the problem seems to be on this page, it needs to be solved here. Jeff3000 and Zmmz, I'm warning both of you to stop this edit war and do not violate WP:3RR. 3RR is not an entitlment to revert three times. Don't edit war. Use the talk page. Pepsidrinka 23:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
You , I ,or Jeff3000 cannot delete others` hard works, then expect them to let it be. Please stay calm, civil and try not to monopolize articles. Instead, before you delete pics, come and set up a straw poll. If you delete pics and ask later, how can others know which pic you are talking about? So, put the pic back, while I set up a poll. Zmmz 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Pepsidrinka warn users on their talk page please; not here please. Zmmz 23:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Zmmz, no I need not warn editors on their talk page. Seeing how you've been blocked for 3RR in the past and I am aware that Jeff3000 is aware of WP:3RR, I was merely making it known to everyone to this article, and you two specifically, that edit warring is unacceptable that the 3RR is considered policy and a blockable offense. Frankly, a 3RR block is not dependent on the user being warned of his impending violation on his/her talk page. Pepsidrinka 00:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I asked you before, please review the 3RR warning policies on the 3RR page
[1]; that is the standard procedure, and I am aware of 3RR very well. Please don`t use the discussion page to talk to another person; go to their talk page, instead. Thanks
Zmmz
21:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
As per the discussion here, I replaced the picture of Damavand in summer with a picture of Damavand in winter to show diversity of climate in Iran. -- ManiF 02:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This pic hits three birds with half a stone; so there is no need for extra sections. But, you guys do what you want. Zmmz 20:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This time i vote for zereshk's picture above, not the one that exists on the page now. -- Darkred 09:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
OK guys. Im tired. Im retiring for the night. I have a seminar to give tomorrow. Happy constructive negotiating. Keep kewl, y'all.-- Zereshk 00:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
As of this note, the above vote has yielded the following assertions from 10 editors:
Various users support including the Homa image elsewhere in the article, while minor varied support has been expressed about including the bill note.
Thus, the map seems to be the choice of a majority and, arguably a consensus of editors. Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
What do you guys think of a sub-section in culture about sports in Iran explaining Iranians' passion for wrestling, football, skiing and etc? -- ManiF 02:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)\
Thank you for so promptly providing a source ManiF, but I hate to be the bearer of bad news. That link [2] is to a page which does indeed talk about the Cradle of Humanity but it cites the Wikipedia article Cradle of Humanity which unfortunately does not possess a single citation itself - which means at the moment the Cradle of Humanity is a personal point of view. We need a more verifiable source than one which relies on Wikipedia itself. Thanks. Green Giant 02:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm missing something here. Overnight changes have been made which have changed things back to previous versions. I can understand the images and things like that, but what concerns me is that the changes include removal of a citation request for Cradle of Humanity which ManiF at least made an effort to address, slight rewrites of two sentences in Demographics, and a grammar mistake in the History section. If you are going to change things back, at least check what you are changing back. If I didn't have faith in huan nature, I'd be tempted to think some people are blindly reverting without assuming good faith. Green Giant 13:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
"Iran: The Logic of Deterrence" http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_04_10/cover.html
Zereshk asks in an edit summary "(→Politics - Why was this merged into the intro? The "Supreme Leader" has his own separate office and place in politics.)". Another eidt summary states "(→Parliament - The parliament has a title, similar to the Bundestag, Duma, Congress, Diet, etc...)".
The simple answer is that further up the talkpage I made a list of suggestions for improving the article. The FAC failed eight months ago and it shouldn't take that long to get improvements made. Earlier edit summaries accused me of engaging in edit wars and making changes without discussing them on the talkpage. It is remarkable that people ask these questions in edit summaries and yet only one editor (Jeff) has actually responded to my suggestions. I would appreciate it if you guys would look at the suggesions and make some responses before you make edit summary comments like that.
Just so we are clear, I don't think subheadings are a good idea as they fragment sections. The Politics section should really be a Government section and needs a paragraph on each of the main components of government. The City and Village Councils could move down to major cities which could become a section on it's own. As for the gallery zereshk, even the USA article you cited doesn't have the cities in a gallery. The images are stacked up on the right-hand side and the section has some prose about the cities. Green Giant 12:01, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm begining to think that making this article featured is a bad idea. Making it featured at the cost of taking out info? That's just not a good idea; squeezing all the politics section into one "government" prose is absurd, because Iran doesnt have a clearly defined "government". Unlike other coutries, in Iran, state and church are one. The supreme religious leader can veto the entire cabinet. The clerics ("council of guardians") can dismiss the parliament's decisions or its elections, if they so wish.
That's why none of the editors involved in the feature article drive of this article are actually Iranian. To the latter, this feature article drive business is becoming actually counterproductive. Erase this, to make it featured. Erase that, to make it featured. Is this what we really want? As for myself, Im not so sure. I'd rather see an article that is comprehensive and informative (like the United States), rather than have a canned featured article for a day on the main page.
Just my opinion.-- Zereshk 17:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
And I dont understand this resilient persistence in removing the gallery in favor of piling up images. The latter highly disrupts the flow of the prose whereas a gallery is a crisp and clean way of making a befitting page. And it's only 4 images. Why do away with a visual table (aka gallery) of cities? I suppose we're trying to convey the idea that Iran has no big beautiful cities, and that people do indeed live in desert mud huts next to camels, guns, and barrels of oil, as the popular perception goes.-- Zereshk 17:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Zereshk's and GreenGiant's edits to move the images above the main template in the wikisource. The doesn't effect the main templates text location, but reduces the whitespace, and allows for better flow of text. Darkred has reverted those edits, and I am in favour of putting them back. -- Jeff3000 02:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
First of all how come you are so eager to take out the images from economy section, as you did from the city gallery? With an excuse to clean it up! Second, it is obvious that neither you or jeff are iranian or have any academic knowledge about iran. So why is it that you keep editing, and are so concerend about this article? -- Darkred 01:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Did i say you can't edit or wikipedia does not allow that. No i did not, i said why edit something you have no good knowledge about. Why not leave that to the ones that have academic knowledge or have experince about the subject.
I believe making a featured article takes more than deleting images to achieve it. Like you suggested yourself and i agreed with you, your than welcome to add more material to the economy section to delete whitespace. -- Darkred 02:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Green giant i am not offended . I don't have academic knowledge about iran either, but if someone have academic knowledge about a certain subject it is best to leave most of the providing of material and utilising of sources at their hands. Hence zereshk whom i believe is qualified for the task, and it seems has done so for a long time in wikipedia.
As jeff says you have done a great job cleaning other articles, and i know you have similar goals for this article. However it is important that we don't get in the way, and discuss the matter before changing everything ourselfs.
Furthermore i don't think there is any need for discussing this subject any further, because it think that we understand eachother well. --
Darkred
04:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I concur that Green Giant has done some great editing work. The editing aspect can be done by anyone I'd say. As for expertise on Iran, much of the information, since it has to be verifiable, can be retrieved from academic sources anyway which makes editing the article a job many people can do. Tombseye 07:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Now Cradle of Civilization usually refers to the earliest civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Indus, and China, but other than that, there isn't any mention of Iran which has contributed other things such as being the world's first multinational empire that encompassed much of the known ancient world. Plus, it's badly worded. Tombseye 07:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
The page says the Bush Administration has revealed plans for nuclear strikes. After reading the cited article, it seems the press was responsible for the revelation, not the Administration. I'm new, any advice on changing it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.128.251 ( talk • contribs)
There were a couple of references to Iran being an elective monarchy but these are gone now. There is still one hidden link though behind the "power to dismiss and replace the Supreme Leader at any time". I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments given on the elective monarchy article that Iran fits such a description. The other states mentioned as modern elective monarchies (barring Samoa and Vatican City) are all constitutional monarchies. However, Iran is defined as a constitutional republic with an indirectly-elected Supreme Leader (for life) and a directly-elected President but this doesn't necessarily mean it is a monarchy. Anyway the article lacks sources and citations so I've placed an appropriate tag there and an appropriate on here until someone rustles up a source for Iran being an elective monarchy. Green Giant 02:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
So up until the coup in 1953, supported by the British and US (in which the US mostly funded and planned it), Iran was essentially a secular democracy in the first place! It's amazing how ignorant we are about our own histories, and so naive to think that the Americans have a plan to "bring democracy to the Middle-East."
Now I understand where the anger stems from. Amazing to think that they should put someone in charge, who has been accused of being a nazi collaborater, in control of a country and be responsible for the worst human atrocities in the country in the time he ruled.
Had this not have happened, the Islamic Revolution may not have been necessary, Iran would already have a healthy secular democracy, and we could have been living relatively harmoniously now... Some how I think that with the current American foreign policy, we could be seeing a few more 'revolutions' - An uncomfortable thought..
R.A Uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.133.205 ( talk • contribs)
Pure speculation. The Iranians didn't install a democracy to replace the Shah but an theocratic Islamic state.
-- Kevin 20:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
As far as i remeber, last Shah was installed by foreign countries (guess which) to control oil and not only resources which after nationalization suddenly were returned to inernational oil companies. As the realist i dont see any possibity of changing such governemts except the revolution, because each area of pseudo-democracy were military (economically) controled.
Should there be a sports section. Many countries have this section. We should also add a military section. Im new, so I was just wondering.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.185.170 ( talk • contribs)
Yes, especially since the World Cup is coming up, there should be a section with emphasis on football as well as wrestling and skiing to show the popularity and diversity of sports in Iran. If someone takes the time to prepare such section, I will provide two appropriate pictures for the section. -- ManiF 23:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For the sports section I wrote an article in a bit of time. Please edit and once it is good we shall hopefully add this to the page.
Many kinds of sports are practiced in Iran, both traditional and modern. Some sports, such as figure skating or professional dancing, are in conflict with Islamic Sharia law and therefore not practiced by Iranian athletes. The most popular sports in Iran are football (soccer), weightlifting, skiing, martial arts and wrestling. Iran also hosts and participate in major international sporting events to this day. For example, Tehran was the first city in the Middle East to host the Asian summer games in 1974. Football in Iran has become increasingly popular in Iran. The Iranian national football team is usually in the top 20 of the world and has qualified for 3 world cups. In weight lifting Hossein Reza Zadeh has made the world records in the Olympics and Is known as the worlds strongest man. Due to the low cost and the great benefits for the individual, martial arts have exploded in popularity in Iran in the past 20 years. Varzesh-e Pahlavani wrestling, commonly practiced in gymnasia called Zurkhaneh, is a century-old tradition in Persia. But also Greco-Roman, and particularly Freestyle Wrestling is incredibly popular in Iran, often even referred to as its national sport. With a history of great wrestlers, such as Gholamreza Takhti, and considerable success in Olympic and World Championships, Iran is considered among the elite nations in the sport (along with the US and CIS states). KingKongIran 05:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a problem with the image in the "Name" section. The image is formatted on the left side of the page, but when the menu is displayed, the table on the right hand side of the page, which has the statistics, extends down into the "Name" section, in a way that causes the picture to obscure some of the text in the first paragraph (at least with my browser, Safari on MacOS X). If I try to move the picture to the right, the text is not obscured, but if I hide the main menu, the picture moves into the "History" section, where it is not intended to be.
I do not know how to fix this problem. I hope that someone more knowledgeable than I can fix it. Bill Jefferys 22:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
UPDATE: User:Gadolam has been confirmed as a sockpuppet of User:Aucaman. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser#User:Gadolam. SouthernComfort 20:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
It's very interesting that the anon is angry at charges that someone is anti-Jewish, and believes that these charges are being leveled by "a group of Jewish editors". A curious lack of symmetry here. Calling someone anti-Jewish = slur, calling someone Jewish != slur. Zora 22:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Would anybody be able to tell me the translation of the name of the Iranian national Anthem? Much thanks 205.210.170.48 14:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I think this article deserves to be a featured article since it's well documented, precise, and very well written. What do you think? And since I'm a newbie please help to put this article as a featured article (move the last featured article discussion on Iran to archives and resubmit). Thanks The Unknown 16:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Just popped in to find out what kind of government Iran had. Then read the talk page. Personally, I liked the easy to read subheadings in the politics section. Helped me get exactly what I needed out of the article.
Take this with a grain of salt, but after reading the talk page, I do feel a bit bad about the Iranian who seems to have spent a lot of time writing the article, and then was eclipsed/outvoted by multiple visiting editors. If you don't have passionate folks putting together the whole thing originally, you wouldn't have anything to come through and edit later.
I think the 1000 Toman bill in this picture is both dirty and old (although, thanks to Zereshk for uploading it). Please if anyone has a newer version (cleaner and more respectable) upload it. It will improve the quality of this article a lot. Thank You. The Unknown 21:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
PROVEN UNTRUE. STOP THIS NONSENSE. THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL FORM. -- SkyEarth 22:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I am pleased to announce that I have just finished making a special comprehensive gallery (repository) of images for Iran.
Please use it, and fill it up!!!
It is located at:
Wikipedia:List of images/Places/Asia/Iran
Thanks to all.-- Zereshk 04:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
The following Anons, have all been confirmed to be sockpuppets of User:Ahwaz, just as I had suspected:
Please notify Admins for any necessary measures. Thanx all.-- Zereshk 02:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
All,
Please contribute to: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Persianism by Arabs whether you vote for or against the article.
The article has unjustly been nominated for deletion (by User:LukasPietsch) despite the fact that there is an entire list [7] and even category [8] of similar articles.
User:LukasPietsch has denied the similar nomination for the similar Anti-Arabism article. [9]
Your input would be appreciated.
Thank You all. Peace.-- Zereshk 00:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Since Mahmud Ahmadinejad was elected as president the time will no longer be set back or forth one hour. 84.71.37.64 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)
Theyll eventually revert their own decision. Economic pragmatism will be what counts et the end of the day. And even the conservatives understand the meaning of profit.-- Zereshk 00:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
please do add to: Iran-Italy relations. Thanx all.-- Zereshk 03:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Like these folks [10] [11] [12] [13] [14], I feel so devastated, I dont feel like contributing to WP anymore.-- Zereshk 04:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I need that Iran page for my World Studies assignment. Hope you get banned from Wikipedia.
This article doesnt have one real pic. of an iranian. Maybe its just me but when i look up a country i like to know wut the people look like as to compare them to countrys around them.
Well there is many diverse looks for Iranians from blond and red headed Nordic types to Oriental/Asiatic looking types to Indic and Mediterreanen types resembling Greeks, Italians, and Arabs. 69.196.164.190
I think we need more images for the History Section of the article. With such a long history and so many monuments, this section is really empty, one or two more images will do the job. Please give your opinion so we can decide. Thank you The Unknown 04:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
A US Federal court can't just decide to give away a country's heritage. It doesnt belong to them. That's pretty fucked up.
See: University of Chicago's Persian Heritage crisis.-- Zereshk 06:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey guys, I read an article that said director Maziar Miri has created a documentory about how the clothing and culture of Iran has changed from the times of the achamaenids to the present. It will be shown on Channel 4 on the Iranian TV in 13 eposides, each 30 mins. I thought everyone might be intrested in seeing it. Now here is the problem.I don't know when it'll be shown and what time it will be on. If anyone knows anything please let us know, thank you. --( Aytakin) | Talk 00:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello, the page List_of_the_localities_around_Tehran is about to be deleted. Everyone, please help in turning the red links into blue and help keep the page alive and also in the talk page state your opinion on the page. Thanks --( Aytakin) | Talk 18:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The bottom of this page should have a list of all the organizations that Iran is a part of, like many other country articles. 69.196.164.190
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/persia/index.html (GREAT SOURCE, NEUTRAL FROM BRITISH MUSEUM) Somebody please add things from this site and others.
The "history section" uses MORE THAN HALF OF THE SECTION TO DESCRIBE THE LAST 60 YEARS OF HISTORY.
THAT ISN'T HISTORY! MOST OF THIS IS FOCUSED ON IRANIAN AMERICAN TIES.
-- SkyEarth 23:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I wanted to know why the British were involved in Iran before oil was discovered. Bold text
I just re-edited the culture section, but I wanted to make an appeal for help here. First, whoever continues to replace Farsi with Persian, please stop. Second, can anyone expand the film section, and also add a separate "internet culture" paragraph as well? I think the jump from film to "any and all media" is rather jarring. I did what I could to soften the transition but it could still use some work. Spectheintro 21:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)spectheintro
I went back and replaced Farsi with Persian in the Culture section. If it gets decided otherwise, I'll switch it back. I also replaced the broken text in the section with my original edits. I'm not against someone editing my work, but since the only edits were deletions (I assume to make it shorter for legibility purposes) and improper grammar (I counted two sentence fragments), I would say that the intended purpose was not reached, hence my decision to revert to the old description. If anyone feels it should be shorter, please let me know, or feel free to edit it yourself--I just ask that the edits be grammatically correct.-- Spectheintro 20:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)spectheintro
The decision was made on the basis of the official statement of The High Academy of The Persian Language of Iran: See: The English name of the Persian Language.-- Zereshk 01:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I didn't know about the high academy of persian language decision either. Good decision :). But this statement: But many Persians migrating to the West after the 1979 revolution continued to use 'Farsi' to identify their language in English and the word became commonplace in English-speaking countries. which you can find in the link is just not true. -- Spahbod 15:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
We can not just mess with the official names of the languages of the countries to help people who know little to recognise their wrong spellings of the names. -- Mani1 07:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC) Fārsi is not a wrong spelling. It is a widely used term for Persian in Persia and elsewhere. Also you said that parallel names for the official language were not used for other Wikipedia country articles. Have you looked at India? What do you have against the use of the word Fārsi in the appropriate context of a transliteration of the official name for the country's language? Bejnar 14:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I thought this was interesting.-- Zereshk 16:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The map was the ugliest, saddest thing I've ever seen. The creator is mentally challenged and knows nothing about the cultures of middle eastern countries. Arad 23:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
A template should be created for Iran, much like the following example;
{{ Azerbaijan ties}}
Is there a problem with the references section? Amrix 08:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8504200464
"Many political commentators in the Middle East believe Washington's stance on Iran is more governed by the latter's substantial oil reserves and pressure from the Zionist lobby in the US who hope to establish free rein for Israel in the region and who see Iran (as they saw Saddam) as an obstacle to this plan. The US allegations in regard to nuclear weapons and support for Iraqi insurgency are thus a convenient vehicle to seek to achieve these means."
This is speculative commentary which has no sources cited. This paragraph suggests readers adopt a particular political view. It attributes motives to the USA which are arguable, and uses the phrase "Zionist" which many find objectionable due to it's connotations. Unless this paragraph can be attributed to a reliable source I suggest it be removed.
"It has been reported that the Bush Administration has not ruled out using nuclear weapons against Iran which, if it were to occur, would be the first hostile nuclear bombing since World War II.[10]. "
This statement is attributed to a source, but the source reports only speculation, which diminishes it's value as an unbiased source of information. In addition the statement is again only a speculative opinion and it's inclusion in this wikipedia entry serves no purpose other than to bias readers towards a political viewpoint (in effect it suggests that Iran is a potential victim of US agression through nuclear warfare, which opinion has no place in an unbiased and factual publication.)
Matic3d 17:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Matic3d. This article makes it sound as though poor innocent Iran is being persecuted by the big bad U.S. I see no mention, however, of Ahmadinejad's assertion that Israel should be "wiped off the map".
The article. The English name of the Persian Language is about to be deleted. requesting that the authors of that piece attend to it immediately.-- Zereshk 06:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
The usual people are at it again. Now trying to delete Misconceptions about Iran article.-- Zereshk 16:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Please also see Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings and my comments on Talk:Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings - I have suggested a split into two articles, UFO sightings in Iran and UFO sightings in Iraq since they have nothing to do with each other and the article is apparently a product of simple ignorance. There is a vote on the talk page. Khorshid 04:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
If my understanding and the Zoroastrianism entry are correct, the alleged "formative link" between Zoroastrianism and Judaism are not as certain as this entry purports to be. I intend to fix it if no objections are raised. It is quite a contentious topic. -- Canar 02:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I was about to start go through and change all referrences to dates using these notations into the accepted BCE/ CE format, since all of the above appear throught the article, but I figured it might be good to check and see what anyone's thoughts would be first :-) If no one has a convincing reason not to, I'll just go ahead and do it. Regress 21:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Done and done. Regress 15:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
may I suggest some images for this article:
Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Mount-Damavand Isfahan Perspolis Perspolis Isfahan Isfahan1 iii Qom Shiraz ppp Isfahan Isfahan Shiraz nnn lll Yazd Isfahan Shiraz Yazd Shiraz Yazd Shiraz Shiraz sss Isfahan Mashad ttt Perspolis rrr Kashan Isfahan Mashhad Mashhad Qom Qom ttt Kerman Kerman Kerman
Some of these images are from Iranian news agencies and others are free images released into public domain.
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 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
I don't know why Bush refused this but I guess he though everything was going so well in Iraq at the time.
In 2003, U.S. Spurned Iran's Offer of Dialogue Some Officials Lament Lost Opportunity
By Glenn Kessler Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, June 18, 2006; Page A16
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/17/AR2006061700727.html
My input:
I personally think Ahmadinejad's picture doesnt belong on the front main page of Iran. It gives the impression to the reader that Iran is equivalent to ahmadinejad. And that is not right. I vote for it's removal.-- Zereshk 02:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
YES, AHMADINEJAD PICTURE SHOULD STAY OFF. He has no power, he is just a stupid chatter box. -- SkyEarth 22:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I've read this article thoroughly and it is a good article with a thorough overview of Iran, but there are some issues that need to be resolved. This is just a rough set of proposals:
Once these are done, a peer-review would be a good idea and then I think Iran deserves to be a featured article. Green Giant 03:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
We need a Foreign relations and military section. Maybe some of the content from the disputed paragraph can be moved into such a section. -- Jeff3000 00:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
We dont have room for it. As User:wikiacc will tell you, the whole effort was to trim down the page to guideline length, so that we can nominate it for feature status. Adding another section is basically reversing these efforts.-- Zereshk 03:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The third image in the History section, the Mahan Asemoon is pretty but it's very small and cannot be expanded beyond 100px width. I suggest replacing it with something like the Shah Mosque image which is much larger and clearer. However as space is limited at the top, perhaps the new image can go into the Culture section? Green Giant 02:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
If you want to remove an image, at least remove one that takes up a lot of space (like the president image). The very reason we put the Mahan dome image was that it was space efficient and aesthetic for the page layout, AND, that it was representative of Iran's Islamic past. I especially cropped the image to those proportions. Now we have 2 images of Iran's pre-Islamic past, and none of its post-Islamic past, which is not right. I'm putting the Mahan image back.
Second: The image of Azadi square has always been an image agreed upon by both royalist and post-revolutionary Iranians as the symbol to represent them politically. Now you have this president image messing things up. You are replacing an image everyone agrees on with one that people dont agree on, hence ignoring an established consensus.
Please, if youre going to touch the main page, consult with the people who have spent many hours, if not days, and months, making it.-- Zereshk 03:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
So instead of pictures of mountains and deserts, use pictures of cities. Images are used to reinforce the written article, and a gallery does not do that. I'm sure the FAC will object to it. -- Jeff3000 20:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
As for User:Green Giant and the Mahan picture, I'm not going to be too picky on it: As long as there are 2 pics in the history section, one for pre-Islamic Iran, and one for post-Islamic Iran. Post Islamic Iran must be somehow represented. The perseplois pic is fine. It represents Iran's pre-Islamic past. But we need one to represent the 1400 years that Iran went through. It could be a Qajar painting, or a portrait of Shah Abbas, like the one below, or an architectural masterpiece. Which one would you guys rather have? Shall we vote on this?-- Zereshk 18:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Oooo, this is a nice picture, I like it quite a lot. Let's put it in, and see if we can resolve the copyright later. -- Jeff3000 23:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
ok, I've cropped it, as so. I'm not sure which one I like better. -- Jeff3000 03:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Please do not keep moving/deleting that pic around, and submit it under different sections; this will clutter the artcle. Discuss it with others before you keep moving the pic, or deleting it. Thank you Zmmz 04:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
As per the discussion here, I reworded the picture's caption with relevant information. -- ManiF 13:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I think the image is a major symbol, it blends to the section/next section nicely, and it also shows a slice of the biggest tourist attraction in Iran. Plus, it is aestethically appealing. Zmmz 23:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
The image in the `Geography and climate` section is also important, since it shows the snow filled mountains of Tehran, and many do not know Iran has the four seasons. Zmmz 23:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Needs to be checked for NPOV. The whole section sounds like it's been copied from a web-page of the Iranian Ministry of Tourism, if there's such a thing.
User:Zmmz, you have effectively reverted most of the edits I and Jeff3000 made without explaining the rationale. Your edit summaries should be civil and should not include comments like "do not keep moving/deleing picfs on your own, it is becoming disruptive" especially when addressed to other editors. That is not an acceptable tone to use in edit summaries and I would appreciate you explaining on the talkpage why you feel other editors cannot make changes without requiring your express typed permission? In case you are not aware, I recommend reading the guidelines on explaining reverts and edit summaries. You ask for discussion before changes but did you read the suggestions we made for Article Improvement? The very least you could do is to comment about the suggestions if you feel so strongly about the changes. This article will not pass FAC until and unless each of the editors fully appreciates the guidelines at Wikipedia:What is a featured article. It would help enormously if you could take the time out to read the featured articles on countries like Australia, China, Pakistan and Bangladesh, especially the last two because they have only recently passed FAC. Note the criticisms and comments made on their candidacies and let's apply the ideas here. Green Giant 23:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Please stay calm, and civil. Regardless of if it is ammusing to you that Zereshk and I defend pics, you cannot keeping deleting pictures on your own, then expect others to accept it. People work hard to gwet these images released, and if you have a personal preference, then you should come in the discussion page, talk about it, and reach a consensus with others. If you keep reverting others`s original work, they will revert it back. Thank you Zmmz 23:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Please feel free to read through any of my talkpage comments and come back and tell me I don't stay clam and civil. The reason I found it amusing is that in each case the only person to defend the image was the uploader. I didn't think I would have to remind an accomplished editor that Wikipedia is not about getting images released but about trying to write first-class articles. Before you accuse myself or Jeff of vandalism I suggest everybody freezes on the revert war and instead scroll up, read the suggested improvements and make a constructive comment as to how the article can be improved. Green Giant 23:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Zmmz has reverted much of the image work of Zereshk, and I have gone back to Zereshk's edits. I think the article is much improved the way Zereshk has modified it. There were too many images. -- Jeff3000 23:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, but others don`t agree with your personal taste, or other. So please do not delete other people`s hard work on your own, and discuss it thoroughly first, or set-up a straw poll. Thank you Zmmz 23:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
No, you are mistaken; I was not the one that deleted Zereshk`s works. You need to set up a straw poll, instead of, deleting stuff. Thank you Zmmz 23:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Whatever the problem seems to be on this page, it needs to be solved here. Jeff3000 and Zmmz, I'm warning both of you to stop this edit war and do not violate WP:3RR. 3RR is not an entitlment to revert three times. Don't edit war. Use the talk page. Pepsidrinka 23:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
You , I ,or Jeff3000 cannot delete others` hard works, then expect them to let it be. Please stay calm, civil and try not to monopolize articles. Instead, before you delete pics, come and set up a straw poll. If you delete pics and ask later, how can others know which pic you are talking about? So, put the pic back, while I set up a poll. Zmmz 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Pepsidrinka warn users on their talk page please; not here please. Zmmz 23:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Zmmz, no I need not warn editors on their talk page. Seeing how you've been blocked for 3RR in the past and I am aware that Jeff3000 is aware of WP:3RR, I was merely making it known to everyone to this article, and you two specifically, that edit warring is unacceptable that the 3RR is considered policy and a blockable offense. Frankly, a 3RR block is not dependent on the user being warned of his impending violation on his/her talk page. Pepsidrinka 00:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I asked you before, please review the 3RR warning policies on the 3RR page
[1]; that is the standard procedure, and I am aware of 3RR very well. Please don`t use the discussion page to talk to another person; go to their talk page, instead. Thanks
Zmmz
21:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
As per the discussion here, I replaced the picture of Damavand in summer with a picture of Damavand in winter to show diversity of climate in Iran. -- ManiF 02:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This pic hits three birds with half a stone; so there is no need for extra sections. But, you guys do what you want. Zmmz 20:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
This time i vote for zereshk's picture above, not the one that exists on the page now. -- Darkred 09:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
OK guys. Im tired. Im retiring for the night. I have a seminar to give tomorrow. Happy constructive negotiating. Keep kewl, y'all.-- Zereshk 00:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
As of this note, the above vote has yielded the following assertions from 10 editors:
Various users support including the Homa image elsewhere in the article, while minor varied support has been expressed about including the bill note.
Thus, the map seems to be the choice of a majority and, arguably a consensus of editors. Thanks! E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
What do you guys think of a sub-section in culture about sports in Iran explaining Iranians' passion for wrestling, football, skiing and etc? -- ManiF 02:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)\
Thank you for so promptly providing a source ManiF, but I hate to be the bearer of bad news. That link [2] is to a page which does indeed talk about the Cradle of Humanity but it cites the Wikipedia article Cradle of Humanity which unfortunately does not possess a single citation itself - which means at the moment the Cradle of Humanity is a personal point of view. We need a more verifiable source than one which relies on Wikipedia itself. Thanks. Green Giant 02:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm missing something here. Overnight changes have been made which have changed things back to previous versions. I can understand the images and things like that, but what concerns me is that the changes include removal of a citation request for Cradle of Humanity which ManiF at least made an effort to address, slight rewrites of two sentences in Demographics, and a grammar mistake in the History section. If you are going to change things back, at least check what you are changing back. If I didn't have faith in huan nature, I'd be tempted to think some people are blindly reverting without assuming good faith. Green Giant 13:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
"Iran: The Logic of Deterrence" http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_04_10/cover.html
Zereshk asks in an edit summary "(→Politics - Why was this merged into the intro? The "Supreme Leader" has his own separate office and place in politics.)". Another eidt summary states "(→Parliament - The parliament has a title, similar to the Bundestag, Duma, Congress, Diet, etc...)".
The simple answer is that further up the talkpage I made a list of suggestions for improving the article. The FAC failed eight months ago and it shouldn't take that long to get improvements made. Earlier edit summaries accused me of engaging in edit wars and making changes without discussing them on the talkpage. It is remarkable that people ask these questions in edit summaries and yet only one editor (Jeff) has actually responded to my suggestions. I would appreciate it if you guys would look at the suggesions and make some responses before you make edit summary comments like that.
Just so we are clear, I don't think subheadings are a good idea as they fragment sections. The Politics section should really be a Government section and needs a paragraph on each of the main components of government. The City and Village Councils could move down to major cities which could become a section on it's own. As for the gallery zereshk, even the USA article you cited doesn't have the cities in a gallery. The images are stacked up on the right-hand side and the section has some prose about the cities. Green Giant 12:01, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm begining to think that making this article featured is a bad idea. Making it featured at the cost of taking out info? That's just not a good idea; squeezing all the politics section into one "government" prose is absurd, because Iran doesnt have a clearly defined "government". Unlike other coutries, in Iran, state and church are one. The supreme religious leader can veto the entire cabinet. The clerics ("council of guardians") can dismiss the parliament's decisions or its elections, if they so wish.
That's why none of the editors involved in the feature article drive of this article are actually Iranian. To the latter, this feature article drive business is becoming actually counterproductive. Erase this, to make it featured. Erase that, to make it featured. Is this what we really want? As for myself, Im not so sure. I'd rather see an article that is comprehensive and informative (like the United States), rather than have a canned featured article for a day on the main page.
Just my opinion.-- Zereshk 17:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
And I dont understand this resilient persistence in removing the gallery in favor of piling up images. The latter highly disrupts the flow of the prose whereas a gallery is a crisp and clean way of making a befitting page. And it's only 4 images. Why do away with a visual table (aka gallery) of cities? I suppose we're trying to convey the idea that Iran has no big beautiful cities, and that people do indeed live in desert mud huts next to camels, guns, and barrels of oil, as the popular perception goes.-- Zereshk 17:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Zereshk's and GreenGiant's edits to move the images above the main template in the wikisource. The doesn't effect the main templates text location, but reduces the whitespace, and allows for better flow of text. Darkred has reverted those edits, and I am in favour of putting them back. -- Jeff3000 02:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
First of all how come you are so eager to take out the images from economy section, as you did from the city gallery? With an excuse to clean it up! Second, it is obvious that neither you or jeff are iranian or have any academic knowledge about iran. So why is it that you keep editing, and are so concerend about this article? -- Darkred 01:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Did i say you can't edit or wikipedia does not allow that. No i did not, i said why edit something you have no good knowledge about. Why not leave that to the ones that have academic knowledge or have experince about the subject.
I believe making a featured article takes more than deleting images to achieve it. Like you suggested yourself and i agreed with you, your than welcome to add more material to the economy section to delete whitespace. -- Darkred 02:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Green giant i am not offended . I don't have academic knowledge about iran either, but if someone have academic knowledge about a certain subject it is best to leave most of the providing of material and utilising of sources at their hands. Hence zereshk whom i believe is qualified for the task, and it seems has done so for a long time in wikipedia.
As jeff says you have done a great job cleaning other articles, and i know you have similar goals for this article. However it is important that we don't get in the way, and discuss the matter before changing everything ourselfs.
Furthermore i don't think there is any need for discussing this subject any further, because it think that we understand eachother well. --
Darkred
04:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I concur that Green Giant has done some great editing work. The editing aspect can be done by anyone I'd say. As for expertise on Iran, much of the information, since it has to be verifiable, can be retrieved from academic sources anyway which makes editing the article a job many people can do. Tombseye 07:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Now Cradle of Civilization usually refers to the earliest civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Indus, and China, but other than that, there isn't any mention of Iran which has contributed other things such as being the world's first multinational empire that encompassed much of the known ancient world. Plus, it's badly worded. Tombseye 07:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
The page says the Bush Administration has revealed plans for nuclear strikes. After reading the cited article, it seems the press was responsible for the revelation, not the Administration. I'm new, any advice on changing it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.128.251 ( talk • contribs)
There were a couple of references to Iran being an elective monarchy but these are gone now. There is still one hidden link though behind the "power to dismiss and replace the Supreme Leader at any time". I'm not entirely convinced by the arguments given on the elective monarchy article that Iran fits such a description. The other states mentioned as modern elective monarchies (barring Samoa and Vatican City) are all constitutional monarchies. However, Iran is defined as a constitutional republic with an indirectly-elected Supreme Leader (for life) and a directly-elected President but this doesn't necessarily mean it is a monarchy. Anyway the article lacks sources and citations so I've placed an appropriate tag there and an appropriate on here until someone rustles up a source for Iran being an elective monarchy. Green Giant 02:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
So up until the coup in 1953, supported by the British and US (in which the US mostly funded and planned it), Iran was essentially a secular democracy in the first place! It's amazing how ignorant we are about our own histories, and so naive to think that the Americans have a plan to "bring democracy to the Middle-East."
Now I understand where the anger stems from. Amazing to think that they should put someone in charge, who has been accused of being a nazi collaborater, in control of a country and be responsible for the worst human atrocities in the country in the time he ruled.
Had this not have happened, the Islamic Revolution may not have been necessary, Iran would already have a healthy secular democracy, and we could have been living relatively harmoniously now... Some how I think that with the current American foreign policy, we could be seeing a few more 'revolutions' - An uncomfortable thought..
R.A Uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.133.205 ( talk • contribs)
Pure speculation. The Iranians didn't install a democracy to replace the Shah but an theocratic Islamic state.
-- Kevin 20:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
As far as i remeber, last Shah was installed by foreign countries (guess which) to control oil and not only resources which after nationalization suddenly were returned to inernational oil companies. As the realist i dont see any possibity of changing such governemts except the revolution, because each area of pseudo-democracy were military (economically) controled.
Should there be a sports section. Many countries have this section. We should also add a military section. Im new, so I was just wondering.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.185.170 ( talk • contribs)
Yes, especially since the World Cup is coming up, there should be a section with emphasis on football as well as wrestling and skiing to show the popularity and diversity of sports in Iran. If someone takes the time to prepare such section, I will provide two appropriate pictures for the section. -- ManiF 23:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For the sports section I wrote an article in a bit of time. Please edit and once it is good we shall hopefully add this to the page.
Many kinds of sports are practiced in Iran, both traditional and modern. Some sports, such as figure skating or professional dancing, are in conflict with Islamic Sharia law and therefore not practiced by Iranian athletes. The most popular sports in Iran are football (soccer), weightlifting, skiing, martial arts and wrestling. Iran also hosts and participate in major international sporting events to this day. For example, Tehran was the first city in the Middle East to host the Asian summer games in 1974. Football in Iran has become increasingly popular in Iran. The Iranian national football team is usually in the top 20 of the world and has qualified for 3 world cups. In weight lifting Hossein Reza Zadeh has made the world records in the Olympics and Is known as the worlds strongest man. Due to the low cost and the great benefits for the individual, martial arts have exploded in popularity in Iran in the past 20 years. Varzesh-e Pahlavani wrestling, commonly practiced in gymnasia called Zurkhaneh, is a century-old tradition in Persia. But also Greco-Roman, and particularly Freestyle Wrestling is incredibly popular in Iran, often even referred to as its national sport. With a history of great wrestlers, such as Gholamreza Takhti, and considerable success in Olympic and World Championships, Iran is considered among the elite nations in the sport (along with the US and CIS states). KingKongIran 05:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a problem with the image in the "Name" section. The image is formatted on the left side of the page, but when the menu is displayed, the table on the right hand side of the page, which has the statistics, extends down into the "Name" section, in a way that causes the picture to obscure some of the text in the first paragraph (at least with my browser, Safari on MacOS X). If I try to move the picture to the right, the text is not obscured, but if I hide the main menu, the picture moves into the "History" section, where it is not intended to be.
I do not know how to fix this problem. I hope that someone more knowledgeable than I can fix it. Bill Jefferys 22:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
UPDATE: User:Gadolam has been confirmed as a sockpuppet of User:Aucaman. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser#User:Gadolam. SouthernComfort 20:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
It's very interesting that the anon is angry at charges that someone is anti-Jewish, and believes that these charges are being leveled by "a group of Jewish editors". A curious lack of symmetry here. Calling someone anti-Jewish = slur, calling someone Jewish != slur. Zora 22:01, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Would anybody be able to tell me the translation of the name of the Iranian national Anthem? Much thanks 205.210.170.48 14:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I think this article deserves to be a featured article since it's well documented, precise, and very well written. What do you think? And since I'm a newbie please help to put this article as a featured article (move the last featured article discussion on Iran to archives and resubmit). Thanks The Unknown 16:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Just popped in to find out what kind of government Iran had. Then read the talk page. Personally, I liked the easy to read subheadings in the politics section. Helped me get exactly what I needed out of the article.
Take this with a grain of salt, but after reading the talk page, I do feel a bit bad about the Iranian who seems to have spent a lot of time writing the article, and then was eclipsed/outvoted by multiple visiting editors. If you don't have passionate folks putting together the whole thing originally, you wouldn't have anything to come through and edit later.
I think the 1000 Toman bill in this picture is both dirty and old (although, thanks to Zereshk for uploading it). Please if anyone has a newer version (cleaner and more respectable) upload it. It will improve the quality of this article a lot. Thank You. The Unknown 21:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
PROVEN UNTRUE. STOP THIS NONSENSE. THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL FORM. -- SkyEarth 22:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I am pleased to announce that I have just finished making a special comprehensive gallery (repository) of images for Iran.
Please use it, and fill it up!!!
It is located at:
Wikipedia:List of images/Places/Asia/Iran
Thanks to all.-- Zereshk 04:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
The following Anons, have all been confirmed to be sockpuppets of User:Ahwaz, just as I had suspected:
Please notify Admins for any necessary measures. Thanx all.-- Zereshk 02:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
All,
Please contribute to: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Persianism by Arabs whether you vote for or against the article.
The article has unjustly been nominated for deletion (by User:LukasPietsch) despite the fact that there is an entire list [7] and even category [8] of similar articles.
User:LukasPietsch has denied the similar nomination for the similar Anti-Arabism article. [9]
Your input would be appreciated.
Thank You all. Peace.-- Zereshk 00:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Since Mahmud Ahmadinejad was elected as president the time will no longer be set back or forth one hour. 84.71.37.64 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)
Theyll eventually revert their own decision. Economic pragmatism will be what counts et the end of the day. And even the conservatives understand the meaning of profit.-- Zereshk 00:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
please do add to: Iran-Italy relations. Thanx all.-- Zereshk 03:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Like these folks [10] [11] [12] [13] [14], I feel so devastated, I dont feel like contributing to WP anymore.-- Zereshk 04:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I need that Iran page for my World Studies assignment. Hope you get banned from Wikipedia.
This article doesnt have one real pic. of an iranian. Maybe its just me but when i look up a country i like to know wut the people look like as to compare them to countrys around them.
Well there is many diverse looks for Iranians from blond and red headed Nordic types to Oriental/Asiatic looking types to Indic and Mediterreanen types resembling Greeks, Italians, and Arabs. 69.196.164.190
I think we need more images for the History Section of the article. With such a long history and so many monuments, this section is really empty, one or two more images will do the job. Please give your opinion so we can decide. Thank you The Unknown 04:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
A US Federal court can't just decide to give away a country's heritage. It doesnt belong to them. That's pretty fucked up.
See: University of Chicago's Persian Heritage crisis.-- Zereshk 06:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey guys, I read an article that said director Maziar Miri has created a documentory about how the clothing and culture of Iran has changed from the times of the achamaenids to the present. It will be shown on Channel 4 on the Iranian TV in 13 eposides, each 30 mins. I thought everyone might be intrested in seeing it. Now here is the problem.I don't know when it'll be shown and what time it will be on. If anyone knows anything please let us know, thank you. --( Aytakin) | Talk 00:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello, the page List_of_the_localities_around_Tehran is about to be deleted. Everyone, please help in turning the red links into blue and help keep the page alive and also in the talk page state your opinion on the page. Thanks --( Aytakin) | Talk 18:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
The bottom of this page should have a list of all the organizations that Iran is a part of, like many other country articles. 69.196.164.190
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/persia/index.html (GREAT SOURCE, NEUTRAL FROM BRITISH MUSEUM) Somebody please add things from this site and others.
The "history section" uses MORE THAN HALF OF THE SECTION TO DESCRIBE THE LAST 60 YEARS OF HISTORY.
THAT ISN'T HISTORY! MOST OF THIS IS FOCUSED ON IRANIAN AMERICAN TIES.
-- SkyEarth 23:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I wanted to know why the British were involved in Iran before oil was discovered. Bold text
I just re-edited the culture section, but I wanted to make an appeal for help here. First, whoever continues to replace Farsi with Persian, please stop. Second, can anyone expand the film section, and also add a separate "internet culture" paragraph as well? I think the jump from film to "any and all media" is rather jarring. I did what I could to soften the transition but it could still use some work. Spectheintro 21:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)spectheintro
I went back and replaced Farsi with Persian in the Culture section. If it gets decided otherwise, I'll switch it back. I also replaced the broken text in the section with my original edits. I'm not against someone editing my work, but since the only edits were deletions (I assume to make it shorter for legibility purposes) and improper grammar (I counted two sentence fragments), I would say that the intended purpose was not reached, hence my decision to revert to the old description. If anyone feels it should be shorter, please let me know, or feel free to edit it yourself--I just ask that the edits be grammatically correct.-- Spectheintro 20:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)spectheintro
The decision was made on the basis of the official statement of The High Academy of The Persian Language of Iran: See: The English name of the Persian Language.-- Zereshk 01:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I didn't know about the high academy of persian language decision either. Good decision :). But this statement: But many Persians migrating to the West after the 1979 revolution continued to use 'Farsi' to identify their language in English and the word became commonplace in English-speaking countries. which you can find in the link is just not true. -- Spahbod 15:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
We can not just mess with the official names of the languages of the countries to help people who know little to recognise their wrong spellings of the names. -- Mani1 07:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC) Fārsi is not a wrong spelling. It is a widely used term for Persian in Persia and elsewhere. Also you said that parallel names for the official language were not used for other Wikipedia country articles. Have you looked at India? What do you have against the use of the word Fārsi in the appropriate context of a transliteration of the official name for the country's language? Bejnar 14:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I thought this was interesting.-- Zereshk 16:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
The map was the ugliest, saddest thing I've ever seen. The creator is mentally challenged and knows nothing about the cultures of middle eastern countries. Arad 23:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
A template should be created for Iran, much like the following example;
{{ Azerbaijan ties}}
Is there a problem with the references section? Amrix 08:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=8504200464
"Many political commentators in the Middle East believe Washington's stance on Iran is more governed by the latter's substantial oil reserves and pressure from the Zionist lobby in the US who hope to establish free rein for Israel in the region and who see Iran (as they saw Saddam) as an obstacle to this plan. The US allegations in regard to nuclear weapons and support for Iraqi insurgency are thus a convenient vehicle to seek to achieve these means."
This is speculative commentary which has no sources cited. This paragraph suggests readers adopt a particular political view. It attributes motives to the USA which are arguable, and uses the phrase "Zionist" which many find objectionable due to it's connotations. Unless this paragraph can be attributed to a reliable source I suggest it be removed.
"It has been reported that the Bush Administration has not ruled out using nuclear weapons against Iran which, if it were to occur, would be the first hostile nuclear bombing since World War II.[10]. "
This statement is attributed to a source, but the source reports only speculation, which diminishes it's value as an unbiased source of information. In addition the statement is again only a speculative opinion and it's inclusion in this wikipedia entry serves no purpose other than to bias readers towards a political viewpoint (in effect it suggests that Iran is a potential victim of US agression through nuclear warfare, which opinion has no place in an unbiased and factual publication.)
Matic3d 17:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Matic3d. This article makes it sound as though poor innocent Iran is being persecuted by the big bad U.S. I see no mention, however, of Ahmadinejad's assertion that Israel should be "wiped off the map".
The article. The English name of the Persian Language is about to be deleted. requesting that the authors of that piece attend to it immediately.-- Zereshk 06:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
The usual people are at it again. Now trying to delete Misconceptions about Iran article.-- Zereshk 16:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Please also see Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings and my comments on Talk:Iran-Iraq UFO Sightings - I have suggested a split into two articles, UFO sightings in Iran and UFO sightings in Iraq since they have nothing to do with each other and the article is apparently a product of simple ignorance. There is a vote on the talk page. Khorshid 04:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
If my understanding and the Zoroastrianism entry are correct, the alleged "formative link" between Zoroastrianism and Judaism are not as certain as this entry purports to be. I intend to fix it if no objections are raised. It is quite a contentious topic. -- Canar 02:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I was about to start go through and change all referrences to dates using these notations into the accepted BCE/ CE format, since all of the above appear throught the article, but I figured it might be good to check and see what anyone's thoughts would be first :-) If no one has a convincing reason not to, I'll just go ahead and do it. Regress 21:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Done and done. Regress 15:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
may I suggest some images for this article:
Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Tehran Mount-Damavand Isfahan Perspolis Perspolis Isfahan Isfahan1 iii Qom Shiraz ppp Isfahan Isfahan Shiraz nnn lll Yazd Isfahan Shiraz Yazd Shiraz Yazd Shiraz Shiraz sss Isfahan Mashad ttt Perspolis rrr Kashan Isfahan Mashhad Mashhad Qom Qom ttt Kerman Kerman Kerman
Some of these images are from Iranian news agencies and others are free images released into public domain.