Talk:Iran/Archive 14

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 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

In History → Modern era (1501–): "his secret police, SAVAK, were used to crushed" → "his secret police, SAVAK, were used to crush" 83.248.171.201 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Iran's HDI value for 2012, according to the UNDP, is 0.742 which falls under the high human development category. Even previously wikipedia showed 2011 statistics on HDI where Iran has a higher HDI, but now it's showing old data. Why? Iran's HDI value for 2012 is 0.742 and Iran ranks 76 out of 187 countries and territories in the report.

Here's the report for Iran: http://hdrstats.undp.org/images/explanations/IRN.pdf 2.177.8.158 (talk) 21:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

In the religion sub paragraph is stated that 2% of Iranians belong to non-Muslim religious minorities, such as Bahá'is, Mazdeans, Zoroastrians etc. However, the added chart shows just 0.4% as non-Muslim minorities. LouisAragon (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by LouisAragon (talk • contribs) 20:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Please add information about the 1988 massacre in Afghanistan and the killing of 11 Iranian diplomats. This resulted in the lining up of Iranian troops and almost every piece of armor Iran had on the border with Afghanistan. It looked like it was going to be war against the Taliban since the people were outraged, but Khatami stopped the order of assault by halting it until he could take it to the UN and get international support for it. The UN then led operations against the Taliban. I have pictures which are hard to find through regular searches. Its helicopter recorded footage from the Iranian tank column at the border. It is a bit llow-rez however it will look nicely on the side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatCa (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Please consider adding the country code (IR) to the specifications. Thanks. Mikaelwikman (talk) 08:26, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Iran is in the new Criminal Code kept stoning to death as a punishment for adultery, but the judge may designate another penalty, according to AFP. A spokesman for the Iranian Parliament Ali Mohamad Esfanani in a statement to the Iranian Mehr agency explained that stoning as a punishment provided sharia law "has not been removed and remains in the law, but the manner of its implementation is left to the choice of the judge." The Iranian jails 12 people awaiting execution of the death penalty by stoning, while on death row in Iran often execute by hanging. Sentenced to death by stoning, which are partially buried in the ground (men up to the waist, women shoulder), can save their lifes if manage to break free during the execution of the sentence.78.2.102.150 (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

17th-century painting from Hasht Behesht palace, Isfahan shows three girls.Iranian people call them " Gen-de " in Farsi.To whom it concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.116.42.192 (talk) 12:10, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please change President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hassan Rouhani ^{[1] [2]} Shareb (talk) 00:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

 Not done Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is still the President of Iran, and he will retain the position until 3 August 2013. Then, we can add Rouhani. --Bright Darkness (talk) 08:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Should we add a line for "President-Elect" in the info box then? 76.70.16.51 (talk) 17:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Clutter - no. Elizium23 (talk) 00:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The statement: Iran's current president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Should probably be replaced by: Iran's outgoing president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Michaelgalassi (talk) 20:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 21:52, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

This edit request to Template:Editnotices/Page/Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit notice has been in place for three years, the section link to the talk page is broken and it serves no real purpose, since there are more common types of vandalism than changing/removing "Persia". It should be removed.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 15:38, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. If anyone wants to change it or restore the old message, I'll be happy to oblige - just leave me a note on my talk page. Or you can always file a new edit request. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:05, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The information about Iran's proven natural gas reserves are outdated. BP released its new estimates, putting Iran above Russia, therefore being the country with the world's largest gas reserves. The information in the second paragraph of the article and 'energy' section should be adjusted. ^{[1] [2] [3]}

Y Done.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 10:32, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

When discussing the 1953 CIA-supported coup against Prime Minister Mossadeq, the article refers to it as the first time the United States overthrew a foreign government. I edited this the other day so that the sentence said it was the first time that the US had overthrown a foreign government "during the Cold War", because the 1953 Iranian coup'd'etat was not the first time the US overthrew a foreign government. The United States overthrew foreign governments and conquered territories throughout the late 19th and early 20th century (Hawaii (1893), Nicaragua (1909), Haiti (1915)). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.82.237 (talk) 05:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Explanation for this edit:

• Is there any video or photograhic evidence of stoning in Iran? No.
• Iran has rejected allegations about stoning many years ago.
• Majlis official website gives explanation that stoning has been removed from law and it criticize Western media for propaganda.

--HistorNE (talk) 08:44, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know enough about Classical Iranian history to make edits on such an important topic, but it's clear that the segment needs cleanup. The events described are not in chronological order, and as such the text is messy. In addition, part of the text is written twice.

I will try to clean up the segment as well as I am able, but I have little way of knowing if part of the source text is inaccurate. It would be good if someone with knowledge of the topic would take a look at the segment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.50.45.192 (talk) 16:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

A user by the name of Organisingcomittee corrupted the word "جمهوری", Persian for Republic. He changed it to what appears to be what is used in Urdu language to represent the word "Republic". ALL mentions of this word in Persian are written as جمهوری. If someone could fix this, it would be greatly appreciated. It appears twice in the infobox, I believe. I am a native Persian speaker, and you may confirm this by looking at the Persian Wikipedia, as well as the other languages containing its native writing, as well as online websites. Use: جمهوری Thanks! 174.17.18.128 (talk) 07:18, 3 September 2013 (UTC) Edit: I actually was able to edit it myself (thought it was locked). Though, it appears it needs to be verified before it is fully published. If someone could do that, I would greatly appreciate it. 174.17.18.128 (talk) 07:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Though they are used interchangeably they are not the same. It's the same way Britain is wrongly called "England." [1]

This article only furthers the misconception that persia is Iran, instead of being a part of it, which is what it really is. 192.0.173.58 (talk) 05:41, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

What part of Iran is analogous to Scotland and Wales? Binksternet (talk) 12:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Azerbaijan, Khuzestan, Sistan/Balochistan. These are are not Fars/Persia. Fars/Persia is located central and southern Iran.If persia and iran were the same, then every Iranian should be Persian.

The USSR is another example, though it was often called "russia" it was another state, with russia existing within it and it has a separate article on wikipeida also. The Soviet Union consisted of many republic, inducing the Russian Federation Socialist republic as well as Azerbaijan republic, Tajik, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, etc. with Russia being the dominant republic, but still not equivalent to the USSR.

Even the name Persia is derived from Fars and really refers to that region, not to the other provinces 192.0.173.58 (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

For a significant period of time prior to 1935, the country now officially known as the Islamic Republic of Iran officially referred to itself in English (and probably also in other languages) primarily as 'Persia', and it continued to use the names 'Persia' and 'Iran' interchangeably after that. There were postage stamps and many other official documents produced by the official government of the country that said 'Persia' on them, and that was also the common practice outside of the government. Please see the section of the article entitled

Persian empire. Language is fluid, but it is certainly true that the country is sometimes referred to as Persia. Also, when referring to Persians as a people or culture, that is another whole topic separate from the names of countries and regions. Also, the historical origin of a word is not the same thing as the current meaning of the word. You may have an opinion about what usage is "correct" or "not correct", but Wikipedia is not a place to express opinions. It is only a place to describe what exists (regardless of your opinion about what exists). This topic is already covered on Wikipedia in the Name of Iran article. You can also find several prior discussions of this issue in the Talk page archives. —BarrelProof (talk

) 02:02, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

persia is not iran — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.246.181 (talk) 01:33, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The Iran is a result of the persian empire and it's former colonies merging into 1 single state. persia is correctly defined as south and central Iran, just as England is defined as Eastern Britain and not the entire of Britain. England exists as a region within Great Britain as Persia exists as a region within Iran. 69.165.246.181 (talk) 01:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Please insert a part for the oscar winner (Asghar Farhadi) in the 2011. The best foreign language film (A Separation). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asghar_Farhadi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.38.213.2 (talk) 11:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please Change the Header 'Classical Iran' to to 'Iran before Islam' as the term 'classical' is needlessly vague. 70.210.195.98 (talk) 15:30, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Not done: There is no section called Classical Iran -- do you mean the one called Classical Era? Unfortunately, the title you propose would overlap the scope of the previous section (Early history in Iran) too, so it doesn't quite work. It's quite difficult to think up a name that covers at least the five empires listed in the main articles list, and I'm thinking that if this period doesn't have a standard name, the vague one is probably better than a misleadingly precise one. If you have an alternative suggestion, by all means make it here (and set answered=no at the top of this section). Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 16:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

In all part of page and all essential event in this page 1979 has been mentioned but in a first paragraph has been written 1980! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.99.169.33 (talk) 04:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

What is an advertisement in this page?! --

) 08:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, which part do you mentioning about? KhabarNegar ^Talk 11:08, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Description of this photo claims: Iranian women demonstrate against the Islamic hijab in the days after the Iranian revolution. Photo was taken during International Women's Day, March 1979, while Khomeini proclamed hejab decree for public sector in June 1980 (see Hamideh Sedghi: Women and Politics in Iran, Cambridge University Press, 2007, page 251). It's obivous misinterpretation and should be removed. --109.165.166.4 (talk) 08:38, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Numerous high quality academic sources state that mandatory veiling in the workplace was introduced shortly after the revolution and that women protested that on International Women's Day, among other things, in March 1979. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:21, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Nope. Source states (same page): On March 9, 1979, the government announced that it endorsed “reasonable, not compulsory, hejab.”. --109.165.166.4 (talk) 09:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Iran is no longer OPEC's second oil producer because of heavy sanctions imposed on it's oil and gas export. Please edit the "Energy" section to help provide correct information about the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iranmaster90 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello

Iranian Kabab served with both plain rice and Tah-chin. it should be Iranian Kabab served with plain rice.

There is no Tah-Chin there !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.190.63.22 (talk) 18:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Sadam Hussein had arsenal (Including Chemical Weapons) Needs Citation

98.176.9.22 (talk) 05:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --ElHef (Meep?) 14:10, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

I feel the quote from the intro, "[Iran] was ranked first in scientific progress in the world in 2011." is problematic. According to the source, Iran was ranked first in scientific "growth" in 2011. Any thoughts? RioDevez (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

This article has been revised as part of

) 20:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Mistranslation of Iranian national motto

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under the motto written in Farsi "Estaghlal, azadi. Jomhouriye eslami" is written "Justice He bids me do, as He will judge me" whereas the motto means "Independence, Freedom. The Islamic Republic"

Please change "Justice He bids me do, as He will judge me" to "Independence, Freedom. The Islamic Republic" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Farshid farouk (talk • contribs) 22:54, 7 April 2014‎

Done Sam Sailor ^Sing 07:07, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

The second phonetic is incorrect and should be deleted. In English, it is pronounced /ɪˈrɑːn/ or /ɪˈran/. The incorrect /aɪˈræn/ is in other words the past tense of running. For example, I ran yesterday. Please see these sources for correct pronunciation: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/american_english/Iran http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/iran

I've never heard Iran incorrectly pronounced on the national news, and radio.

This is similar to Italy, which is pronounced /ˈɪtəli/ and not /aɪˈtəli/. Another examples, include iridescent /ˌɪrəˈdɛsənt/ or irreconcilable /ɪˌrɛkənˈsaɪlə/. Ehsan10Iran (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Can someone with the proper rights please edit the gini coefficient to 38 instead of 0.38, since this makes it look like a "low" gini coefficient, though it is actually a "medium" one (as 38).

Thanks for the note. You are right and I made the change. SchreiberBike talk 17:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Iran-climate-map.svg is far more accurate then current map (cropped from World map). I suggest a replacement. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 00:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Iran is the foremost country in the world for Olympic Weightlifting. In fact, both the Clean and Jerk world record and Snatch world record are held by two people from Iran. Despite this there is no mention of Olympic Weightlifting in Iran's sporting article.194.106.151.242 (talk) 15:05, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

There's a weeks-long dispute with user Soroush90gh about his forcing politically motivated photo of irrelevant event:

1. He presents photo from International Women's Day march as "demonstration against scarf". That's false because women protest for various reasons, and they do it every year.
2. Even if some women protested only because of scarfs (which is not true), that doesn't present majority view because scholary sources agree that majority of Iranian women favored restoring of traditional dress code.
3. A protest itself is of minor importance comparing to many other significant events from 1979 till this day (revolution events, hostage crisis, war events, green protest, etc.).

I urged him to stop forcing it but he don't listen and repeatedly starts edit wars and he's also reverting reliable sources regarding war victims statistics. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

More, I also urged user

) 00:35, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Utter BS. 1) You're either a staunch support/admired of the Islamic Republic, or, 2) you weren't present there and are a completely delusional diasporean Iranian. My feeling goes definetely towards number one. The women used the International Women's Day to protest agains the just recently imposed Hijab laws. Khomeini always told there would be no forced Hijab law in the wake of his ascension, but he changed that soon afterwards he got into power. [[2]] [[3]] It's even present here with it's correct : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_revolution#Economy

Show us one source wich tells that the Iranian women favoured the traditional code.

- LouisAragon (talk) 19:55, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Here's the quote from p. 117:

Following the Revolution, the new republican government called for the participation of women in an “Islamic society,” because such a society would not be “morally corrupt” like the deposed monarchy. Observance of hejab would assure respect for women. Hejab eventually was defined as clothing that concealed the shape of a woman’s figure, such as loose outer garments, and covered her hair and skin, leaving only her face and hands exposed. The requirement to observe hejab in public was controversial among the minority of secularized women who never had worn a chador. However, for the majority of women who always had worn the chador, hejab served to legitimate their presence in the public sphere, especially in work outside the home.

Book: Iran: A Country Study (Curtis & Hooglund, 2008). A US publication by Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. I already presented it to you but you aviod obivous facts. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 23:41, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

wears scarf all the time but she's leader of anti-IRI organization which advocates secularism. You simply fail to understand scarf is part of local dress code in past three milleniums and it has nothing to do with politics (except Pahlavist bans and restrictions).

Not let's pass points one by one again:

1. Protest photo is included in article Iranian Revolution and I haven't touch it. Why? It belong to article of wider scope, it's properly referenced and it explains women demonstrated against changes to woman's status and rights, not simply "because of scarfs" as claimed here.
2. Considering there were also series of counter pro-veiling protest, someone can pick photo with chadors and put opossite description. It would fit more to
   WP:WEIGHT
   considering most women were pro-veil, but it still fails at relevance.
3. we like. Some people may like photos of recent pro-veiling protests, but for basic article about Iran it's again irrelevant. I mentioned there are far more important events and Green Revolution
   was one of them, which again refutes your claims about some "pro-IRI support".

Conclusion: disputed photo may be inserted in various articles (women, rights, movements) with proper and neutral description, but forcing it here it's clear violation of

) 00:41, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Positions of the text and photos.

I'm trying to make the positions of the texts and photos in a proper way. I also have written the summary of what I've done. Check them out and tell me if I went wrong somewhere. Thanks.

talk

) 10:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Let's Include More Sections to the Page of Iran

I am wondering, despite that we have a huge history and culture in Iran, why is this page so brief?

Why don't we include more photos of huge historical monuments?

Why don't we have more information about our national holidays and symbols?

Why don't we have more information about tourism in Iran?

I think that there are still a lot of important and notable contents about Iran that we can include to this page.

Please, help improve this page. Thank you.

talk

) 10:09, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The photos related to the part 'Culture' in the page of 'Iran'.

At the top of this part of the page (Culture), we had a photo () showing "Two Herons with Ducks". This photo was too big and had damaged the position of the text, and beside of that, it did not have a clear enough appearance. Because at the first glance, we could not communicate with this photo, and somehow it conveys a complexity and confusion to the eyes of the viewer. And I thought that the photos should be more obvious to make this connection happen.

So I found another photo (File:Miniator hotel shah abbas deevar.jpg) which shows a more clear and obvious part of a miniator painting in a Caravanserai in Spadana City.

Arts and literature

In this part of the page (Arts and literature), we had a photo () related to the Iranian arts, which I believe did not look good enough without the complete forming of it.

Then I found another photo () which shows the ceiling of the Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque and has a design showing a basic form of the Iranian art and architecture which is "continuity" and "unity", and looks kind of better than the current photo.

Popular culture and cinema

In this part, we had a very short and brief description of the Cinema and Music of Iran. Beside of including additional information, I thought we could include a photo of Leila Hatami who is a very famous and well-known Iranian actress and has been between the jury of Festival de Cannes of this year. She is a big part of the Iranian cinema and many people in Iran and France respect her as a wise and praise deserving artist. So she is a notable character in this part of the page and can be the representer of the Iranian cinema.

Cuisine

The foodware in the photo () was set very improper, messy and low class. My suggestion was to choose a better photo in this part of the page, such as the photo of 'Kuku Sabzi' () which is a popular Iranian food and is shown in a well-set way in the photo.

I've already done the edits; tell me if I was wrong so we can talk more about this.

I'm trying to improve this page, so I need your agreement and cooperation.

Thank you so much. _

) 12:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Basically I agree with all Arvid Qasemy's photo changes, he gave good reasons. Just be more careful when restoring material because you also included some disputed text above. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 20:37, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear

) 08:02, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

) 16:48, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

talk

) 09:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

) 13:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Recent history of Iran

Women protests, recent Pres. Rouhani's election details,

) 14:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2014

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Under the picture is written "haft chin table" but it's "haft seen table".It is located in Culture<Observances Iran

212.120.199.142 (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Already done SSZ seems to have taken care of this along with some other work. Thanks, Older and ... well older (talk) 19:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

, please:

1. Do not remove sourced content and replace it with dubious one. No, I don't "need to ask others" for removing unsourced content plus replacing it with sourced one.
2. Do not put irrelevant photos for sections because faravahar has nothing to do with Iranian philosophy. It's religious symbol and it's from Persepolis, and you already amassed four different photos of that ancient place.
3. Do not make personal attacks like "grow up".
4. Do not force disputed content until consensus hasn't being made, you're not authorized to do it because you're neither administrator or someone above others. Also avoid amassing photos of same places and of selective regions, almost 9/12 was related to northern Iran near Caspian coast.
5. Do not use obsolete toponyms like "Spadana" for Isfahan. In English language there are two names for city: "
   Esfahan". Middle Persian name was "Spahān", and "(A)spādāna" was in usage more then 2200 years ago. --Qizilbash123 (talk
   ) 23:14, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

The Protest of Iranian Women Against the New Rules

Hi, it's Arvid.

We have an issue in this page which is about "adding or removing" the information about "the protest of Iranian women against the new rules" after the Iranian Revolution.

I believe this information is needed here, because it is an important event and shows the idea and identity of a big group of the population of Iran, who do not agree with a couple of the rules of the new regime, and they're trying to gain a reform since the exact start of the revolution until now.

I believe that the voice of these people, who I am included between them, should be heard. This is a true and important event in the history, and it should be written here in this page.

This information had been existing here since I remember until some users became upset about this.

During my edits, I had added this information with a picture included. So it was not an "accident". I've already written the summary of what I was going to do. I think our dear friend Qizilbash123, who is upset about including this information, was wrong about this.

Our dear friend Qizilbash123 says that this information is "disputed". But I don't believe this. We're just showing a picture of an event happened in a real time in the history, with a text included to explain its time and date. That's all. They ARE a big part of this country and they should be included here.

Now, if you are really upset about including this information and you think that if we include this information, then you and the people having the same idea as yours will seem included into those people, then we can use the words "a group of Iranian women".

This is my suggestion. But we cannot remove a complete event because of this disagreement.

I think that dear Soroush90gh has the same idea as mine.

Let's talk here about this and stop the war of removing and including again.

Merci.

) 08:30, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, let's keep the text and photo of women protesting. The protest is relevant. Binksternet (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I think the details of the event should be discussed in Women's rights movement in Iran, and only a brief and concise summary of the event be presented in this article with a link to the main article. Msanta20 (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Photo already exist in article "Iranian Revolution", and I also inserted it in article "Women in Iran". Protest itself is of minor significance as explained above. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 05:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE. --Qizilbash123 (talk

) 05:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Dear

talk

) 08:36, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Have you read #Photo wars section? It's not for us to deceide what's important and notable, but to historians. And this protest was minor comparing to counterpart pro-veil protest, hostage crisis, war, green protests, etc. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

An evidence that proves that our dear friend Qizilbash123 has personal problem with the photo. He has nominated it for deletion because of a simple reason, if we can call it a reason. He says the author is unknown. He is right, when I uploaded it, I couldn't find it's author, but it's not acceptable. The photo is old and according to this label PD-Iran, it's allowed to be uploaded in Commons. I ask you to vote in the page:

EVIDENCE

I don't have any personal problem since there are also other similar photos from March 1979 which can be useful for replacement in articles "Iranian Revolution" and "Women in Iran". Problem is that you upload photos without referencing authors. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 11:52, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

) 15:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

I said the photo was relevant. I did not say I like it. Your misrepresentation of my argument makes me think

you don't like it—the same basic problem you accuse me of. Binksternet (talk

) 15:47, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Obivously your logical reasoning isn't so strong for rational concluding what's relevant or irrelevant, because I mentioned above there are tens of events in post-1979 history more important then some pity protest which even hasn't own article here on Wikipedia. You avoid arguments above and your force own personal POV. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the user Qizilbash123, uses WP as a tribune for his propaganda. He has omitted the photo, while we are discussing about the issue here. Soroush90gh (talk) 19:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

You're not discusing at all, but only participating in edit war along with your fellow Arvid Qasemy. I've provided arguments and sources and you did absolutely nothing. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 13:43, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Per

) 21:44, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Binksternet, like subsection "Women" under section "Culture"? I have no problems with it, but perhaps someone would complain it's not practice in articles about other countries (it's like making section about nuclear program and Iranian-USA/Israeli tensions; just if they're in news headlines isn't reason to highlight it). Anyway it's easy to make such subsection and if someone complain redistribute text under other sections. P.S. Please do not remove sourced content and instist on disputed one as you did in last edit. Cheers. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

government_type = Theocratic, Unitary presidential Islamic republic | legislature = Islamic Consultative Assembly Shafi5001 (talk) 17:44, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DJAMP4444 18:15, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The file File:InternationalWomen'sDayIran1979.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:InternationalWomen'sDayIran1979.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. If no action is taken, it will be deleted after 7 days. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 21:55, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

) 01:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST: 2009 Elections

The part about the 2009 elections is clearly not neutral and hides some information in order to discredit the green movement and support the regime's thesis.

"The European Union and several western countries expressed concern over alleged irregularities during the vote,[129] and many analysts and journalists from the United States and United Kingdom news media voiced doubts about the authenticity of the results."

This is really not fair to only write this, if you want to talk about people expressing concerns over alleged irregularities during the vote, you should firstly talk about us (Iranians) first. Cinema directors (for example Jafar Panahi, Mohammad Rasoulof), usual citizens, bloggers, journalists, politicians, sportsmen (Karimi, Nekounam and most of the National Iranian Football Team during the game with Korea), actors (Pegah Ahangarani, Ramin Parchami), classic musicians (Mohammad Reza Shajarian), even Basijis themselves (see the Guardian's interview with defected Basijis, see Amir Farshad Ebrahimi, and many others...), & also people among the Iranian diaspora all said the votes were fraudulent. The most relevant file is the letter from the Interior Ministry exposed everywhere in Iran and even showed by Marjan Satrapi and Mohsen Makhmalbaf in European Parliament: http://news.gooya.com/politics/archives/2009/06/089337.php showing the real votes (Mousavi won with 20,000,000 votes followed by Karroubi who had 14,000,000 and Ahmadinejad only had 5,500,000). Mohammad Asghari, the employee exposing this letter was killed just after doing it !! (see http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D8%AD%D9%85%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D8%B5%D8%BA%D8%B1%DB%8C ). You should also talk about the number of journalists arrested just before the elections, if everything was right then why so many arrests just before the elections ?? (You can see the names here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Iranian_presidential_election) You should also talk about the number of votes going down: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:FakeResults_Iran.jpg You should also write that it is impossible to count 40 million votes in 2 hours. You should talk about the fact that during these 2 hours, the percentages stayed the same !!! You should talk about the fact that provinces that used to boycott in majority suddenly began to vote for the conservative party ! You should talk about the fact the green protests gathered millions of people while pro-ahmadinejad protests took people from all over the country with buses and couldn't even gather 100,000 people ! Unfortunately, I cannot edit the article, that's why I say "you". <

"Independent polls have not contradicted official turnout of 2009 election, which gave around 60% of vote to Ahmadinejad."

That is a joke and an insult to anyone living in Iran. I oppose the whole regime but if I am called asked if I do, I will obviously say I don't !!! You guys should start putting yourself into contexts before saying something and stop being naive ! This "independent poll" (only one) was made MONTHS after the elections, after Khamenei said anyone opposing the elections will be repressed harshly and hundreds were killed and thousands put into prison and tortured including some of my closest friends for contesting it ! What do you expect people to say ? Plus, on the phone ! That is ridiculous. And I suggest you to watch this video at 26:50 and you will understand what I am talking about http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/general/2011/11/2011118122637129536.html

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Abirangdarya (talk • contribs) 02:44, 8 November 2011‎ (UTC)

This article is an essential Iran-related article and needs to be reviewed by a specialist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.203.202.130 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The Iranian national football team has never reached the World Cup final, please remove this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brahdude (talk • contribs) 22:01, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Iran climate map needs attention , it is better to use koppen climate classification , not Koppen-Geiger , because koppen climate classification is more accurate about Iran climate , in koppen climate classification , west of Iran has (Csa) climate.

As you can see in Koppen climate classification, Khorramabad city has a Csa climate not Bsh. one of important signs of Csa climate is to having Oak trees , and in iran we dont any oak trees in zanjan or qazvin that are included Csa in iran climate map , but west of Iran that has millions hectares of oak forest not in included in Csa climate , Please Correct it , Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apiculate (talk • contribs) 15:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

More recent data is available here: 1.--Billymac00 (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Iran climate map needs attention , it is better to use koppen climate classification , not Koppen-Geiger , because koppen climate classification is more accurate about Iran climate , in koppen climate classification , west of Iran has (Csa) climate.

As you can see in Koppen climate classification, Khorramabad city has a Csa climate not Bsh. one of important signs of Csa climate is to having Oak trees , and in iran we dont any oak trees in zanjan or qazvin that are included Csa in iran climate map , but west of Iran that has millions hectares of oak forest not in included in Csa climate , Please Correct it , Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apiculate (talk • contribs) 15:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

More recent data is available here: 1.--Billymac00 (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I was redirected here as I was searching for Persia. I wanted to know more about Persian culture, Persian cuisine and the extent of the old Persian empire. But all I read, is centred on what we now know as the country of Iran. Why is that? I cannot see any discussion on this issue here on the talk page either, so if there has been a discussion, then please let me know.

I am Danish myself and have no affiliation to anything Persian, but I would guess this to be a hot topic for people from the area?

RhinoMind (talk) 19:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree it is confusing. There was a recent shake-up of the Pahlavi dynasty article, changing it from being about Iran during 1925–1979 to being about the royal family of the same period. A similar treatment could be made of the other dynasty articles such that Iran's history is covered in coherent phases. So a certain amount of reconfiguration is needed, but we should talk about it first. The next step is to agree on what kind of content will go in each article.

• Iran
• Persian Empire
• History of Iran
• Iranian monarchy (disambiguation)
  • Safavid dynasty (1501–1736)
  • Afsharid dynasty (1736–1796)
  • Zand dynasty (1750–1794)
  • Qajar dynasty (1785–1925)
  • Pahlavi dynasty (1925–1979)
• Islamic Republic of Iran
  (1979–present)

Perhaps we can have historic Iran covered in articles named something like

Persia pages can be disambiguation pages, taking over from Persia (disambiguation) and Persian (disambiguation). Other suggestions should be considered. Binksternet (talk

) 21:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Great inputs Binksternet!

I think it can help, if we build a kind of "link farm", gathering all the articles relevant to this broad discussion here. You have already supplied a great deal and I would like to add this:

• Greater Iran
• Pan-Iranism. Perhaps this page will help put the overall discussion in perspective?

Having said that, I believe the root cause of this confusion is that there is no discussion, no sources and no explaining text about how the nation of Iran came about and in particular when it came about. When was the name Iran applied to the area we know as Iran now? When was it established as a nation? I think it is clear that it is a much later event than the establishment of Persia and the Persian Empire, but good sources are needed. When we have these sources ready, it will be all the easier to separate, divide and link the two concepts properly across all these pages. So this is a shout-out to all you history-nerds out there! :-) Come and help us! we need your enlightened guidance!

I might have more comments on your good post Binkternet, but this is it for now. Hope more people will engage constructively to sort out this? RhinoMind (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I think your confusion comes from the fact, that in terms of the state name, Persia and Iran are synonyms :) . Before 1935, Iran was known as Persia, on an international level - the article outlines this problem. So there are no such things, as "Persian culture" and "Iranian culture" being two different things (though the latter may, and does, apply also to the culture of so-called Greater Iran). It's one and the same country, actually it's the same case as ancient and modern Greece. The difference being, that the local name of Persia, Iran, became promoted on an international level, whereas the local name of Greece, Hellas, was not. More on this, here:

) 21:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Complete Official Religions

Please complete the official religions of the country. Sunni_Islam is missing from the listQudas (talk) 12:41, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

this has been added.Monopoly31121993 (talk) 17:38, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

mashhad ali laghari najaf ali laghari

sindhi.and,pakistan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.51.82.79 (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

5.239.48.190 (talk) 08:58, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Your request is blank. Stickee (talk) 10:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Polkash (talk) 09:08, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Your request is blank. This template is for requesting changes in the form of "please change X to Y". Stickee (talk) 10:54, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I am not an Iran expert, but I read articles on countries a lot. When I am waiting at restaurants or the post office, I often read the first few paragraphs about countries on mobile Wikipedia. I've looked at this article maybe five times in the past few months. Almost every time, the terminology used for Iran's government changes. Sometimes it's a presidential state, sometimes a theocracy, sometimes an Islamic republic, sometimes a constitutional government...and so forth.
Look, I don't care much either way as long as it's accurate. But the changing nomenclature every few weeks makes the site seem inconsistent and unprofessional. Whether the current nomenclature is the most acceptable or not, can we at least get that in writing here on the talk page from a wide selection of editors? That way, it will be official and the back-and-forth changes will have no basis. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:33, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

To get things started, I would like to lay out what ought to be discussed.

I don't think there is any disagreement that Iran is a unitary state, not a federal one.

On paper, they have a Presidential system. That may or may not be included in the final decision on nomenclature.

They are not a monarchy; that's quite clear.

Beyond that, though, there seem to be some questions which the community of editors should answer:

Iran calls itself an Islamic republic. A republic draws its power source from the people, whereas a theocracy derives it from clergy. Can a state be both republican and theocratic at the same time?

If so, which term comes first?

If not, which term takes precedence? Why?

I don't mean to make this sound like an exam, but I think this will help put any disagreement to rest. Articles on other countries like South Korea, Mexico and Germany might serve as examples regarding how the "government" tab is formed. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

One thing I would like to say is that we need to stop labeling the Islamic republics as simply "Islamic republic" in the infobox. What does that even mean? I've seen this in Iran as well as Afghanistan. This doesn't describe the structure of the government - even the most basic description of whether or not it's unitary is omitted. Abstractematics (talk) 03:19, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

There are several paragraphs at Theocracy#Iran about the government of Iran. It describes Iran's constitution is a "hybrid" of "theocratic and democratic elements". It has references to many scholarly sources. I wonder why that careful argument is in a wiki page about Theocracy and not in the page about Iran. JanetElizabeth (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

This is silly: 1736 under Nader Shah, Iran would once again reach high prominence, reaching its greatest territorial extent since the Sassanid Empire, and briefly possessing what was arguably the most powerful empire in the world should be removed. Spain Portugal China england france russia, iran?...(-; — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.211.58.197 (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2015 (UTC) I was very surprised that there was not any mention of the Iranian-Russian wars which led to the Treaty of Turkmenchay in which Iran lost considerable lands to Russia. In fact there is little about Russia meddling in the internal affairs of Iran in the past century. For one example, Iran lost one-third of its population in the world war I, primary due to the wars between the Russian government and Ottomans inside Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qudas (talk • contribs) 15:46, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

I have now added this.Monopoly31121993 (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

ΣΑΡΟΝ: ΤΟ ΧΩΡΙΟ ΣΤΟ ΙΡΑΝ ΟΠΟΥ ΟΜΙΛΕΙΤΑΙ Η ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΓΛΩΣΣΑ - SAROO: THE GREEK SPEAKING VILLAGE OF IRAN from soldiers left from Alexander the Great's campaign. 58.165.162.82 (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

These foods probably don't fall under the category of 'cuisine' but it would be nice if readers were made aware of the following facts with respect to the origins of certain fruits, vegetables and foods --

1) (2000 BC) - Peaches are a fruit of Iranian origin, as indicated by their Latin scientific name, Prunus persica, from which (by way of the French) we have the English word "peach."

2) (500 BC) - First cultivation of spinach

Spinach is thought to have originated in ancient Persia (modern Iran and neighboring countries). It is not known by whom, or when, spinach was introduced to India, but the plant was subsequently introduced to ancient China, where it was known as "Persian vegetable" (bōsī cài; 波斯菜; present:菠菜). The earliest available record of the spinach plant was recorded in Chinese, stating it was introduced into China via Nepal (probably in 647 AD).

3) (700 AD) - The Cookie.

Cookies appear to have their origins in 7th century AD Persia, shortly after the use of sugar became relatively common in the region.[1] They spread to Europe through the Muslim conquest of Spain. By the 14th century, they were common in all levels of society throughout Europe, from royal cuisine to street vendors.

4) ice cream

In the Persian Empire, people would pour grape-juice concentrate over snow, in a bowl, and eat this as a treat. This was done primarily when the weather was hot, using snow saved in the cool-keeping underground chambers known as "yakhchal", or taken from snowfall that remained at the top of mountains by the summer capital Ecbatana. In 400 BC, the Persians went further and invented a special chilled food, made of rose water and vermicelli, which was served to royalty during summers.[10] The ice was mixed with saffron, fruits, and various other flavours.

5) wine

The earliest chemically attested grape wine in the world was discovered at Hajji Firuz in the northwestern Zagros Mountains of Iran, ca. 5400 BC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.143.139 (talk) 04:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

6) carrots

The wild ancestors of the carrot are likely to have come from Persia (regions of which are now Iran and Afghanistan), which remain the centre of diversity of Daucus carota, the wild carrot

How can i edit the page?

Of course you can (you will need a to create a free account before that because this article is protected). 67.83.6.149 (talk) 05:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

An edition REQUEST? Sheesh. Anyhow, under "Etymology" the follow phrase is used: ...the termination became coined forever... Perhaps the editor meant "terminology", but even this is dubious. "Appellation" or similar is more appropriate. Dan omg (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you User:Dan omg. I have guessed that 'term' is the appropriate term. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 17:12, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps "termination" was the work of a spellcheck program? The article has unfortunately had to be

semiprotected because of excessive vandalism. Welcome to Wikipedia, Dan. If you stick around for four days and make ten edits, you'll be able to edit semiprotected pages. Bishonen | talk

17:24, 8 March 2015 (UTC).

Social Media and Women's Empowerment

Women living in Iran have encountered various challenges and obstacles socially, politically, economically, and psychologically that have affected character and integrity. In Iran today we see women’s rights activists have very little opportunity to voice their opinions. Although academics and lifelong learning is deemed valuable in Iran historically and religiously, there is legislation aimed to undermine women’s social and legal progress. An example is women’s rights to an education in Iran. The right to an education is increasingly viewed as a basic human right worldwide but it monitored and regulated in Iran. We see education is strongly correlated to economic growth and political stability. It nurtures awareness, liberation, critical thinking, and success.

The rise of independent women’s rights activists is due to developments in technologies and increasing participation in digital spaces. The reform movement in Iran in the 1990’s encouraged secular thought and feminist thinking. This challenged Iran’s traditional structure by raising self-awareness of social issues, notably women’s rights issues. The emergence of social media has been a great tool to abolish pre-conceived notions of Iranian Women and have gave them a platform to reach out to the world. The media shapes the worlds opinion by deciding what and what not to broadcast. Social media has aided the empowerment of women by attracting global recognition. It gives a voice to the most marginalized groups in society and energizes activists to spread information and create discussions around the world, instantly. Social issues can no longer be hidden from the world by the Iranian government because public scrutiny forces their actions into light, and holds them accountable for wrongful discourse. Bloggers continue to demand social justice and refuse to be silent, knowing there is a possibility of harassment or jail time.

Feminism and activism pose a direct threat to the current power balances in Iran. Media of all forms is a great way to raise important questions and start conversations about women’s lack of rights in Iran. Communication technologies including Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. creates a stage for awareness and participation. Digital and social media is a very powerful tool and one of the most effective ways to advocate for women’s rights. The future gains of these technology platforms are endless. We can note that technology presents its own challenges in itself, because it is difficult to regulate and is quickly revolving. Women contributing equally to society will have an immense impact on socio-economic, social, and political development. Women being allowed to participate in society will not only benefit women, but all Iranian citizens; and on a bigger scope, the world.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Mehran, Golnar. “Lifelong Learning: New Opportunities for Women in a Muslim Country (Iran).” Comparative Education 35.2 (1999): 201-15. Web 29 Mar 2015. Nafisi, Azar. “Empathy for Iran’s Women.” New Perspectives Quarterly 27.4 (2010): 34-7. Web. 1 April 2015. Odine, Maurice. “Role of Social Media in the Empowerment of Arab Women.” Global Media Journal 12.22 (2013): 1-30. Web 29 Mar 2015. Shavarini, Mitra. “The Social (and Economic) Implications of Being an Educated Women in Iran.” Harvard Educational Review 79.1 (2009): 132-40. Web. 29 Mar 2015. Shojaei, Seyedeh Nosrat, Ku Hasnita Ku Samsu, and Hossien Asayeseh. "Women in Politics: A Case Study of Iran." Journal of Politics and Law 3.2 (2010): 257-68. Web. 29 Mar 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamelizabeth (talk • contribs) 23:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Women living in Iran have encountered various challenges and obstacles socially, politically, economically, and psychologically that have affected character and integrity. In Iran today we see women’s rights activists have very little opportunity to voice their opinions. Although academics and lifelong learning is deemed valuable in Iran historically and religiously, there is legislation aimed to undermine women’s social and legal progress. An example is women’s rights to an education in Iran. The right to an education is increasingly viewed as a basic human right worldwide but it monitored and regulated in Iran. We see education is strongly correlated to economic growth and political stability. It nurtures awareness, liberation, critical thinking, and success.

The rise of independent women’s rights activists is due to developments in technologies and increasing participation in digital spaces. The reform movement in Iran in the 1990’s encouraged secular thought and feminist thinking. This challenged Iran’s traditional structure by raising self-awareness of social issues, notably women’s rights issues. The emergence of social media has been a great tool to abolish pre-conceived notions of Iranian Women and have gave them a platform to reach out to the world. The media shapes the worlds opinion by deciding what and what not to broadcast. Social media has aided the empowerment of women by attracting global recognition. It gives a voice to the most marginalized groups in society and energizes activists to spread information and create discussions around the world, instantly. Social issues can no longer be hidden from the world by the Iranian government because public scrutiny forces their actions into light, and holds them accountable for wrongful discourse. Bloggers continue to demand social justice and refuse to be silent, knowing there is a possibility of harassment or jail time.

Feminism and activism pose a direct threat to the current power balances in Iran. Media of all forms is a great way to raise important questions and start conversations about women’s lack of rights in Iran. Communication technologies including Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. creates a stage for awareness and participation. Digital and social media is a very powerful tool and one of the most effective ways to advocate for women’s rights. The future gains of these technology platforms are endless. We can note that technology presents its own challenges in itself, because it is difficult to regulate and is quickly revolving. Women contributing equally to society will have an immense impact on socio-economic, social, and political development. Women being allowed to participate in society will not only benefit women, but all Iranian citizens; and on a bigger scope, the world.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Mehran, Golnar. “Lifelong Learning: New Opportunities for Women in a Muslim Country (Iran).” Comparative Education 35.2 (1999): 201-15. Web 29 Mar 2015. Nafisi, Azar. “Empathy for Iran’s Women.” New Perspectives Quarterly 27.4 (2010): 34-7. Web. 1 April 2015. Odine, Maurice. “Role of Social Media in the Empowerment of Arab Women.” Global Media Journal 12.22 (2013): 1-30. Web 29 Mar 2015. Shavarini, Mitra. “The Social (and Economic) Implications of Being an Educated Women in Iran.” Harvard Educational Review 79.1 (2009): 132-40. Web. 29 Mar 2015. Shojaei, Seyedeh Nosrat, Ku Hasnita Ku Samsu, and Hossien Asayeseh. "Women in Politics: A Case Study of Iran." Journal of Politics and Law 3.2 (2010): 257-68. Web. 29 Mar 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamelizabeth (talk • contribs) 23:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Shouldn't Yalda be the primary name for the Yalda festival in the holidays section? Chelleh seems better to follow as the "also known as" in my opinion. WoziSSL (talk) 07:45, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

This is an ancient Iranian celebration for the

Winter Solstice (Persian

: Čelle ye Zemestān).

Both Čelle and Yaldā are used in official texts, and are used interchangeably by the people. Yalda is a Syriac (non-Iranian) word meaning "birth" – used after the Muslim invasion. Čelle (literally "forty"; meaning "a period of time") refers to a special period. In Persian, we have the two phrases Čelle ye Zemestān and Čelle ye Tābestān, respectively for "winter solstice" and "summer solstice".

So I chose Čelle when I added this section; because it sounds more relevant, and is a native name. Rye-96 (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

I used the title 1979 Revolution instead of the Iranian Revolution. Because the Iranian Revolution is a fundamentally vague title. The event cannot be regarded as "Iranian", because the target wasn't about the nationality, and that is a quite imprecise title; and also not as "Islamic", because the target was about freedom and a political and economic progress, and the religious rule was gradually imposed, embedded over a "republic". Besides, no such name is used in Iran for this event; the common non-controversial title is "Enqelāb e 57" ("Revolution of (the year) 1357" (according to the Persian calendar)), referring to an event in a certain time.

Rye-96 (talk) 11:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for submiting the new updates of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iran page regarding the GDP numbers based on latest IMF and UN statistics...

There are the same outdated economic data in main article of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran... In order to update economic numbers (GDP, GDP PPP, Per Capital, etc) in Iran's main article, one must have a certain level of membership... I can not update those numbers... can anyone who has an access to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran fix and update its GDP, GDP ppp, Per capitals numbers based on newly updated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iran

I would really appreciate it if anyone can update few numbers in IRAN main page...Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielaram (talk • contribs) 20:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Here are sources you can use, http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/iran/overview , https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ir.html , http://www.cbi.ir/default_en.aspx . Danger^Mouse (talk) 08:40, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

ye/e, meaning "of", is a

in Persian language.

Ye is used after the words ending with a vowel (e.g. pari ye jangal, "fairy of (the) woods"); and e is used after the words ending with consonants (e.g. pardis e man, "paradise of mine").

It is a separate (class of) word, and it must be written separately in sentences, just like the English of and the French de.

However, we have many articles here in which this preposition is hyphenated; which means it is attached to the previous word with a hyphen. This composition is fundamentally wrong, because ye/e is not a syllable, and it doesn't share a single role with another word.

This preposition is used on the page of Iran several times, and we should consider the mentioned issue about it.

Rye-96 (talk) 15:40, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

The official Iranian system for

talk

) 01:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I think we should ask the UN to correct that. Because that doesn't make sense.

Rye-96 (talk) 11:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense. Persian does not have to follow the Latin style of "of". It shares a role with the word it is "attached" (I realize it is not literally attached) to because it is used to link the two words to denote possession or adjective, (e.g. barādar-e man, "my brother" [lit. brother (of) me]) also (parcham-e sorkh, "red flag" [lit. flag [of/which is/that is red]). If it still does not make sense to you, then at the very least, we can agree to disagree, if that's alright with you. Negahbaan (talk) 07:37, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Your statements are totally baseless, dear Negahbaan.

What you are mentioning by "style," does not have anything to do with the system of Persian language.

You are confusing the script with the language.

These prepositions are attached (and sometimes even removed) in the Persian texts written in Arabic script, and this goes to the incapability and the lack of the relevant standards of Arabic script to record Persian language.

It is not a lingual "style," and it doesn't change or influence the grammar rules of the language.

However, you do not seem to have the valid knowledge to intervene in this discussion.

Rye-96 (talk) 10:46, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

There was an RfC opened that might affect tens of articles, including this one. Your opinions would be welcome. “WarKosign” 05:45, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Alexander "the Great" should be "Alexander III of Macedon"

Whether he is considered "Great" is subjective.

38.99.152.4 (talk) 17:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as per

WP:COMMONNAME our article is called Alexander the Great - Arjayay (talk

) 17:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2015

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Rashidun Muslims" is also subjective

"Rashidun Muslims" should simply be "Arabs"

38.99.152.4 (talk) 17:25, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited

reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk

) 17:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Image caption for Russia

One image caption says Iran and Russia are "strategic allies".

Russia has imposed unilateral sanctions (e.g. S-300 defense system cancellation/suspension) and UN security council resolutions against Iran for many years.

Bushehr's construction was intentionally delayed for *17 years* by Russia!

Concretely this assertion is not support by facts - even if this might become true sometime in the near future (after/IF the international sanctions are lifted.)

Besides, this assertion is nowhere mentioned on Russia's article. 68.199.100.166 (talk) 23:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Iran and Russia are competing for Europe' gas market and this will be only exacerbated once

sanctions against Iran

are lifted.

Is Iran a totalitarian dictatorship? I'd say no. A totalitarian dictatorship implies, firstly, that, the state holds total control over society and seeks to control all aspects of life. In Iran, individual freedoms are seriously restricted, but there's certainly no total control - things like compulsory veil-wearing for women are less strict than countries like Saudi Arabia. There's also some democratic freedom, as evidenced by the election of Hassan Rouhani over less moderate candidates. Is it a dictatorship? Again, I'd say no - it's certainly not governed by a single dictator, but as a mixture of a theocracy and a limited parliamentary democracy. IMO, then, the addition of that

) 19:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

In the absence of any material in the article defining Iran as a totalitarian dictatorship, I've removed this category. If sources are found that classify Iran as a totalitarian dictatorship, then the categorisation can be reconsidered. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The Infobox states Iran's land area as 1,648,195 square kilometers or 636,372 square miles. In actuality, since a kilometer is six tenths of a mile, that would be 988,917 square miles; in other words almost twice the size of Alaska or four times the size of Texas or approximately the size of the United States east of the Mississippi River, meaning any military adventure taken there should be considered very carefully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.242.248.88 (talk) 03:04, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

The figure of 636,372 sq. miles is correct. 1 sq. mile = just under 2.61 sq. km. See: http://www.asknumbers.com/square-mile-to-square-kilometer.aspx (You need to allow for the effects squaring. You can't just multiply by 0.61) Norvo (talk) 19:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on

|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150626145102/http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_22427.shtml to http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_22427.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070503235931/http://go.worldbank.org:80/KQD2RP3RX0 to http://go.worldbank.org/KQD2RP3RX0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —

:Online 09:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In Iran#Architecture can I have History of the architecture of Iran goes back to the 7th millennium BC. changed to The history of Iranian architecture goes back to the 7th millennium BC. Seems to flow better grammatically. Brustopher (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Sure, Brustopher; I agree.

And by the way, there is a blank line between the sections of Music and Theater. Since I apparently am blocked to edit Iran, is there anyone to remove that?

–Rye-96 (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks, Nakon 04:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please change ((Macedonian)) to ((Macedonia (ancient kingdom)|Macedonian))

 Done. Thanks, Nakon 04:36, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to change the unsourced statement Despite Irans strong Anti Israel policy, the community is the second largest in the Middle East behind Turkey(not including Israel or course), and the communities rights are typically protected. to Iran has the largest Jewish population in the Middle East outside of Israel. sourced to this Associated Press report published by Fox News.[4] AP is reliable even if Fox News usually isn't considered so. I think this should be uncontroversial so I'm proposing it without prior discussion. Brustopher (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

No objections so  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I've locked the article, due to the ongoing

, it would prevent him/her from discussing the issue. Therefore, I'm going to assume that they are mature enough to discuss the issue - which seems to revolve around the addition (or not) of an image showing the tomb of Cyrus the Great. I will admit I know little of Iran, and nothing of the Achaemenid Empire (not even looked at the article as I write this), so therefore I consider myself completely uninvolved in the issues. It needs to be explained why the image should be included (or not) in the article and a consensus formed as to its inclusion (or not). Mjroots (talk) 20:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rye-96: - same applies to you too. Both of you are lucky not to have been blocked by now. I'm hoping that some maturity can be shown and discussion will ensue. I will also be asking for assistance from members of the Wikiproject covering the country. Mjroots (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I came here from a notification at Wikiproject Iran and here are my thoughts:

• Cyrus' tomb is not prehistorical. It very much falls within recorded history, and therefore a photo of it should not go in the prehistory section. Most of this dispute seems to be born out of Aidepikiwnirotide not understanding what prehistory means.
• I endorse Rye-96's clean up of the article. They've removed a lot of puffery and
  WP:BRD
  after such a bold and large change is reverted they should have discussed it on the talk page. BUT Aidepikiwnirotide without any explanation and on a later revert claimed these were unreferenced changes when they clearly werent, so fair enough I guess.

In summary. Rye is in the right here content-wise, but some minor non-contentious changes are needed, which I'm going going to edit request now! Brustopher (talk) 21:04, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I just realised there was no source for the football stuff in the article in the first place. Apologies. Brustopher (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Mjroots & Brustopher, thank y'all for your consideration and performances against the chaos that I unwantedly participated in.

I agree; I've had my own wrong actions. I will consider all this in my future performances.

I confirm what Brustopher said.

If anyone found any error included in the sections that I have edited, be sure that I have nothing against discussion and modification.

All I've been trying to do is to remove the wordinesses and the incorrect or exaggerated contents, to source and modify the remaining (as far as I could), to add more notable information, and to regulate.

And by the way, the reason that I removed that image is that it was placed in a wrong section, and was damaging the regularity of the article, and that there is basically no necessity for that image to be kept. But however, I didn't remove it by the time I realized that Aidepikiwnirotide wasn't going to stop; so I kept it, but moved it into the section which refers to the time of Cyrus the Great.

–Rye-96 (talk) 22:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

@Aidepikiwnirotide: Given that your reverts are part of the reason this page is locked, it would be useful if you commented here on the talk page. Otherwise it will be more difficult to resolve this issue and get this page unlocked quickly. Brustopher (talk) 21:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

@

Persia or Persian from page of Iran.Aidepikiwnirotide (talk

) 13:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

@Aidepikiwnirotide: I'm sorry but you still don't seem to get it. The reason he kept on removing the image of Cyrus' tomb is becuase you put it in the wrong section. "Prehistory" means before people recorded history. Cyrus exists in recorded history and is therefore not prehistoric. With regards to the usage of Persia he also did the right thing I think. When talking about the modern country the correct and most common terminology is Iran not Persia. Brustopher (talk) 09:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@Brustopher: I well got. The main purpose is to separate history of Iran which usually known as Persia and current Iran. It has to be considered also Iran is not a modern or new name for current Iran, but this name has been used since Sasanian Empire as "land of the Aryans". By the way, Iran came to be known as Persia in the west thanks to classical Greek authors during whose time Persia was the dominant kingdom in Iran. It means that both words of Iran and Persia have the same lifetime and history and both of them have to be used together and simultaneously. So, It's a grave mistake to consider Iran as modern Iran and Persia as ancient Iran. In fact, like many other countries (ex. Deutschland (native) and Germany), we can say Iran has been native name and Persia was used in western world until 1935 and after request of Reza Shah, Iran was used in the western world too. Is not 1934 modern duration? We have to prevent this separation as much as possible to avoid possible confusion by using both Iran and Persia (both two old names for Iran) simultaneously. Concerning the image of Cyrus the Great or his tomb, I agreed with you if Rye-96 from the beginning had changed its place instead of several time deletion. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 15:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I phrased myself pretty badly, I agree with everything you say about Persia being the western term, and Iran being the native term. But the official name of the country in England until Reza Shah was Persia, and this is english wikipedia. So when I edit articles on Iran, I usually use Persia if I'm talking about before Reza Shah, and Iran if I'm talking about after. With regards to the tomb image: now that you both agree its in the right place is there anything you would still like to revert in the article if you could? Brustopher (talk) 22:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

@Brustopher: Just another thing about Persia and Iran: If we use Persia for before Reza Shah (1935) and Iran for after that, it causes a possible confusion for many people who are not familiar with history that: Iran is a new country? and where is Persia now? Although answer is clear, but : as I mentioned previously, we have to prevent such this possible confusion by using both historical names (i.e. Persia and Iran) simultaneously, otherwise we need to attach history of Iran along with some additional explanations to prevent likely confusions about such these issues. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

P.S. The following text is just my personal opinion and not any more: in my opinion, despite good intent of Reza Shah, he had to keep Iran as native name and Persia as western name to avoid such these problems. sometimes some people deem Iran is a new country and Persia doesn't exist any more. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 22:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

@

Manual of Style talk page if you'd like. I think it will make perfect sense as long as we add a sentence to the history section about Reza Shah changing the official western name to Iran. After all the first sentence of the article starts: "Iran also known as Persia." Brustopher (talk

) 22:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

@

tribes."

Practically, all of the founding tribes of the country's society have been referred to as Iranian, both by the native individuals and (since the recognition by the order of

)

That is why I have replaced the words Persia and Persian with Iran and Iranian, while referring to the country and the nationality of its peoples. I also believe that this information should be added to the section of Etymology.

–Rye-96 (talk) 14:49, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

What is more important than "meaning" of name, is the "name" itself. My purpose is to prevent possible confusion by using both historic names of Persia and Iran simultaneously, otherwise we need always to attach history of Iran to old Persia. It must be also considered we are editing the English page of Iran, so, consequently we need to consider usual western name of Iran (i.e Persia that is used yet informally) without considering ethnic issues, if we want to represent well current Iran. Aidepikiwnirotide (talk) 18:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

redirects to

) 12:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic groups

The statistics provided in the section of

) 10:31, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

The demonstration of March 1979 and the Cultural Revolution of 1980

Certain paragraphs of the section After the 1979 Revolution, regarding the March 1979 Demonstration and the 1980 Cultural Revolution, have been variously removed by a number of users who claim the portions to be incorrect, and criticize the descriptive expression of the text.
The portions have been reviewed, along with wording modification and additional references.
Please avoid repeating the removal, to prevent edit wars. Such performances are regarded as vandalism, and will led to administrator attention, where the vandals will be blocked. To provide your remaining criticisms, please discuss on this page.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Rye-96 (talk) 15:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I reverted such nonsense because its misinformation. Alleged "mass demonstration" included only ten to fifteen thousands participants (Shahidian, 2002, p. 21; Ramezani, 2010), and only few of them were motivated by rumors about dress code and family law (see Milani, 1992, p. 37-38; Algar, 2001, p. 83), while far larger demonstrations in support of Ayatollah Khomeini and denunciation of these intrigues of the leftists on the one hand and the upper classes on the other went largely unreported in the Western press (see Algar, 2001, p. 84). Rumors were based upon distorted series of sentences in the speech of Ayatollah Khomeini (see Algar, 2001, p. 83-84), and Iranian officials including prime minister Bazargan announced that the left-wing troublemakers, corrupt royalists, and counterrevolutionary elements had distorted the ayatollah’s statement (see Milani, 1992, p. 37; Algar, 2001, p. 84). Rumors were proved as completely false because decision about restoring original dress-code was made in 1984 (five years after this march), and family law was actually replaced by a far more protective law in 1987 (see Hoodfar, 1993, p. 12). Another very controversial thing is participation of Kate Millett who popularized this event with her book "Going to Iran", and its content was described as symptomatic of ethnocentrism and even racism because she suggests that the only way to liberation is to follow Western women’s models and strategies for change (see Hoodfar, 1993, p. 12-13). This short overview based on two Western and two Iranian reviews:

• Algar, Hamid (2001): Roots of the Islamic Revolution in Iran: Four Lectures, Oneonta, New York: Islamic Publications International (IPI),
  ISBN 9781889999265
• Hoodfar, Homa (fall 1993): The Veil in Their Minds and On Our Heads: The Persistence of Colonial Images of Muslim Women, Resources for feminist research (RFR) / Documentation sur la recherche féministe (DRF), Vol. 22, n. 3/4, p. 5-18, Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto (OISE), ISSN 0707-8412
• Milani, Farzaneh (1992): Veils and Words: The Emerging Voices of Iranian Women Writers, Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press,
  ISBN 9780815602668
• Ramezani, Reza (2010): Hijab dar Iran az Enqelab-e Eslami ta payan Jang-e Tahmili [Hijab in Iran from the Islamic Revolution to the end of the Imposed war] (Persian), Faslnamah-e Takhassusi-ye Banuvan-e Shi’ah [Quarterly Journal of Shiite Women], Qom: Muassasah-e Shi’ah Shinasi, ISSN 1735-4730

Dubious, controversial and marginal events are not worth mentioning in primary article about Iran. --MehrdadFR (talk) 17:01, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to declare your standpoint, although the expression doesn't comply with the expected neutral perspective.
Please note that these events, despite having occurred among more generic conflicts, have been effective in a significant cultural and political revolt which has been challenging up to the present time, within both political and social atmospheres of Iran.
This whole thing is in no way a minor issue; but given the tensions over the clarification of the targeted events, I am almost compelled to agree with the removal, at least until performing a quite careful and impartial investigation on the case.
–Rye-96 (talk) 11:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Iran has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Iran Population is 80,840,713 http://www.migrationpolicy.org/country-resource/iran-islamic-republic 37.98.107.39 (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Please discuss all changes before using {{

editprotected}}. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk

) 22:04, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protection status revokation

The Iran page hasn't received much vandalism in a few weeks, but this is undermining the Wikipedia philosophy wherein anyone can contribute to the article. I move for the protection status herein to be lifted. Vormeph (talk) 17:32, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

That's not how it works removing the template is just removing the notice pls see Wikipedia:Rough guide to semi-protection -- Moxy (talk) 17:46, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

There are loads of dead links on the Iran page. There are also links which reference things which are over a decade old and lack current value. Some opinions and facts which are older than ten years old lack relevance, and I have made a point to remove all such references and links. Overtime, I will find more current references that are younger than ten years of age. The dead links should not be reinstated as it means that the article will have information being referenced by sources which do not exist. (It potentially also creates an issue that a user could also 'make up' a reference and claim that it's dead, in the hopes that such a claim be bought). Suffice it to say that none of this is tolerable, and the dead links will be kept out of the article. For what it's worth, most of the dead links have secondary references which aren't dead. I have checked some of the dead links and this is very much the case. I thus ask editors to please stop adding dead links to the article and to remove dead links because they are unhelpful and counterproductive in the verifiability of the Iran article. Vormeph (talk) 17:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Could we get you to read over

WP:MDLI and pls looks at the references section you edits are causing many errors. -- Moxy (talk

) 17:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

@Moxy: I have fixed the errors caused by the dead links. Thanks! Vormeph (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I beg to differ. You simply removed all dead links without reinstating anything new. Dead links do not mean the references do NOT exist anymore. I indeed as well sincerely suggest you read those WPs Moxy has linked. Also, you need a

WP:CON to push for something like this. What were seeing, is that you first mass remove, and then try to push for a talk page discussion upon reversion of your stuff. Sorry, but it doesn't work like that. - LouisAragon (talk

) 21:14, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

You have three editors stating either here or through edit summaries that they don't appreciate your edits. You're going against

a pretty clear voice of the majority. Don't revert it again before having reached a consensus for your changes. - LouisAragon (talk

) 14:56, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: What, so you'd rather have dead references? Wtf. I'm digging out dead references and replacing them with newer references. That is something to be appreciated. Besides, the removal of dead references hasn't harmed the article in a negative way. The only reason you're against it is because I took the time to get rid of the dead references, rather than you. The edit is final, and we are continuing the article without the dead references. I can't believe you're actually accusing me of 'blanking' out or 'vandalising' the page because I have removed references which do not have any existing URL! This discussion is final: the dead references are removed and are counterproductive in keeping them. Vormeph (talk) 15:08, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Of course, you do not get to single-handedly decide that your edit "is final". Wikipedia is a community project. Dead links should generally not be removed but tagged and if possible repaired; if a working replacement is available, it can be used, but that doesn't mean removing the dead links before a replacement is even provided. LjL (talk) 16:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Clear threat to continue edit warring. Sure, revert it again, but don't complain you get reported. You're totally ignoring the voice of the majority. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@LouisAragon: Screw voice of majority! If the majority say 2 + 2 = 5, that don't mean 2 + 2 = 4 no more. It's just outrageous! 2 + 2 = 4 because logic dictates so. And logic also dictates that when an article is smothered in dead links, they have to be removed and replaced by links which are newer. Why? Because it undermines verifiability. If someone new reads the article and wants to verify a source, only to find that source has a broken URL, then that's gonna look bad on the editors and the integrity of the article as a whole. You know, if there were a bug with Wikipedia's website; and a programmer tried to fix that bug, only to find that they can't fix the bug beause the 'voice of the majority' say so, then that's only going to prolong progress and change. I'm sorry, but logic has priority over democracy; and we all agree (even you) that dead links are not feasible to be kept. You can report me all you want, all administrators will agree with me that if a newer link is available, then that is feasible to replace the broken/dead/old links. Vormeph (talk) 15:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Then add the new link (as long as it sources the same content) before or concurrently with removing the old link. If you remove a link (dead or not) and leave content unsourced, people will be well-entitled to reinstate it. Dead links can often by repaired, for instance by using archived versions. LjL (talk) 16:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

First,

WP:KDL, find and repair links once they have been tagged as dead. Third, Wikipedia's ways of working have been developed by consensus; this includes methods for maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia such as those described at Wikipedia:Link rot and methods for protecting the encyclopedia from editors who refuse to accept consensus. NebY (talk

) 16:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

It's very hard to know why anyone would edit against

WP:KDL here the logic and reasonableness of which seems obvious – let edit-war against it. Anyway, Vormeph is now blocked so hopefully that's an end to it. DeCausa (talk

) 17:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@NebY: Despite my blocking, my proposal to replace dead links with more recent ones has been realised thanks to @Moxy:. I am also pleased that the article has now taken up a new shakeup whereby we shall remove these dead links and replace them with great care. I was wrong to have removed all dead links without finding the proper references to replace them. When it comes to consensus there are some things which democracy can never answer to: logic. It is indeed logical to remove dead links, nevertheless. Although people who view me as their foe have decided to act hastily in reporting me rather than resorting to diplomacy. Mind you that I created this discussion on the talk page therefore I have shown enough diplomacy in the face of all the opposition made. What has originally been proposed will not be retracted; but how it will be implemented shall be modified slightly to ensure that the callousness of some editors herein are evaded. Btw, @DeCausa:, you know me quite well that there's no end so long as I'm around. Rest assurred of that, and maybe we can collaborate on which dead links are apt to be removed; and perhaps include a few recent ones. Vormeph (talk) 16:31, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

No one is, of course, against replacing deadlinks. It was your ignoring

WP:KDL which was the problem. DeCausa (talk

) 17:09, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Ok as mentioned above have done some ref cleanup...still lots can be done ..as in replacing alot of the websites (that will all die in time if this is such a concern here) with real scholarly publications. On a side note we need an image clean here ...as in reduction of the amount ...galleries and sandwiching of text is not what we are looking for in a parent articles of this nature. Wikipedia:Image dos and don'ts--Moxy (talk) 19:15, 30 November 2015 (UTC)