Talk:Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

• Please redirect comments that have to do with Israel to Talk:Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel
• Please redirect comments that have to do with controversial issues to Talk:Controversies surrounding Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

---

Extreme vandalism

The moderators are thinking of protecting this page.

it is one of them ost vandlised pages on wikipedia.

Please stop the vandlism. you will be banned from using wikipedias editing application —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.223.124 (talk) 15:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I second that motion, untill most of the heat from the election is blown over, I've had to fix much vandalism.--Mrlego9 (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Anti-Semitism/Holocaust denial section

This section is a classic case of WP:UNDUE amd WP:COATRACK. This topic does NOT deserve the amount of material it currently has and it should be under another section such as "International criticism" or "Relations with Israel". Factsontheground (talk) 08:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

As these topics are what MA is primarily known for in the West, I think the amount of coverage we have is good. There could be more, but it might start to make the article too bulky. Also, your removal of the single most (in)famous statement MA has made from the lead damages the article significantly. IronDuke 15:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a generalized approach to its topics, not a "What is the Western world thinking about topic X" approach.  Cs32en  11:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

"Wikipedia has a generalized approach to its topics..." I don't know what that means, really. Wikipedia has an approach that consults reliable sources, which agree--massively--on this. Western? Some... but that's a built-in feature of an English language Wikipedia. IronDuke 02:52, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

There's absolutely no doubt that information in the leading paragraphs have given undue weight to his "holocaust denials" and ALLEGED call for Israel's destruction. Lakerking04 (talk) 19:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

How is this undue weight? The reason why the vast majority of all the people's in the world (including Iranians themselves) dislike Ahmad is a large part due to his holocaust denial (which is fact, not opinion. He is a denier and denies frequently). This is not about the "Western world", ask all the people who voted for Mousvai what they think.

Suppose that, for example, the Prime Minister of Canada were to be caught repeatedly having sexual relations with the eleven year old son of one of his friends. Would it then be appropriate to spend a gigantic part of his Wikipedia article on this activity? Of course. The Squicks (talk) 02:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The "wiped of the map" passage is fair. But in regard to holocaust denial, the lead section, if anything, is too-generous. The man is a buffoon. Dynablaster (talk) 02:31, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

MA was misquoted. He himself was quoting the imam who said that the Zionist regime would go the way of time. Someone in the FARS network, perhaps an Israeli operative, hyped his quote of the imam into "he wants to wipe Israel off the map." Get the original translation of MA's quote and read it. By the way MA is highly educated and an a person of high intellect. Referring to the man as a "buffoon" is malicious and IMO borders on libel.

By the way, MA didn't deny the fact of the Nazi holocaust; he denied the accuracy of the historical record.

Also, this entire article reads like a hit piece on Ahmadinejad, and IMO does nothing to enhance Wikipedia's credibility.Stan Battles (talk) 02:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Its amazing how many "red" named editers have commented on this page, all in the same amount of time. Hmmmm....not very subtle.ChillyMD (talk) 18:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I most certainly agree that he did not deny the holoccaust however challenged the accuracy. Unfortnuatelly if you ask a history teacher right now how frustrated they are about their new "allowable" cirriculum, they would agree with this also whether publicly or not. MA or anyone has the right to question historical reports of any kind when so many countries who do not regulate their history or alter their history for the good of their country are invoved. Unfortunatelly also there were no trustworthy monks to smuggle preservation in scrolls out at that time either. I find this article as acurate and factual as it can be plainly written.

Taboooooooooo (talk) 18:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Tabooooooooooo

excess sources in references 15 & 18

does it really take 12 sources for reference 15 to be valid? and 14 for reference 18? can't we just pick two or three good sources and call it good enough?  —Chris Capoccia ^T⁄_C 06:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that there are too many sources lumped together without any guidance for the reader. It would be better to treat this as a note, not simply a reference footnote, and add some more information. The other - maybe preferable - would be to improve the article Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Israel and then make a reference to the relevant section of this article. The second alternative looks like a lot of work, though.  Cs32en  12:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

too many non-english sources

there are too many non-english and especially persian-language sources in this article. see WP:NONENG.  —Chris Capoccia ^T⁄_C 22:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

English sources are preferred, if they are of equal or better quality.  Cs32en  23:30, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

are there really that many persian-reading editors of the english wikipedia? i have no way at all to tell what these persian sources are saying or what quality sources they are because i don't know the first thing about the persian language. for all i know, they could actually be children's stories about playful kittens.  —Chris Capoccia ^T⁄_C 10:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I personally don't know what these sources are saying either. I assume that there are enough people that are fluent in Persian on Wikipedia to point out deficiencies in the sources. There is both a community of supporters and a community of opponents of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the English-speaking world, and they probably care about Wikipedia's content on him.  Cs32en  11:52, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Apart from finding separate sources, a rough translation may be obtained from here--69.208.130.182 (talk) 04:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Please do not use automatic translators! I could point to several websites where Google translates just the opposite of what the text says, from German, French, or Japanese, into English.  Cs32en  06:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ahmadinejad or Ahmadi Nejad ?

In western medias, he's always called "Ahmadinejad" whereas Arabs and Persians spell it "Ahmadi Nejad". Could smb tell me more about it?Mitch1981 (talk) 15:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC) That's easy enough: the Persian word "nejad" (with French-spelt -j-, as in "jeu") means 'origin, race, extraction' in English, whereas "ahmadi" is the Persian equivalent of Ahmad's or (son) of Ahmad. It's therefore a matter of preference: Arab and Persian speakers are aware of this analysis and may want to emphasize this by spelling the name as two separate words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.140.137.29 (talk) 04:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

A citation must be required

"also known as the Hitler of Iran, for his antisemithic and dictatorial regime"

A citation must be required for this text. "Hitler" is a strong word and it is used as nickname of Mahmoud. Why? is it common in his country? outside? Who says that?, etc. That questions have to be answered with high-quality citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.77.148.135 (talk) 17:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

It violates BLP and is most likely vandalism. I shall hunt out and remove it if it hasn't gone already. SGGH ^ping! 20:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the way original text appeared by 2009-06-15, I am just pasting a copy without any change:

Ahmadinejad, formerly known as Sharon Saburjian came from a Jewish background. His surname was later changed to Ahmadinejad for economic and political reasons.[27]was the son of a blacksmith, born near Garmsar in the village of Aradan[28] in Talysh family on 28 October 1956.[2] The name, which derives from thread painter, a once common and humble occupation, was changed into Ahmadinejad, meaning 'of the race of Mohammed' or 'of virtuous race', ahmad meaning "virtuous" in Arabic is used as a byname of Muhammad and nejad being the Farsi for "race, lineage". According to his relatives, it was for "a mixture of religious and economic reasons."[29]

The original name shows as "Sharon Saburjian" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.212.15 (talk) 04:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The REAL ORIGINAL NAME was improperly changed

{{editsemiprotected}} The original text as appeared by 14 June 2009 is the following:

Ahmadinejad, formerly known as Sharon Saburjian came from a Jewish background. His surname was later changed to Ahmadinejad for economic and political reasons.[27]was the son of a blacksmith, born near Garmsar in the village of Aradan[28] in Talysh family on 28 October 1956.[2] The name, which derives from thread painter, a once common and humble occupation, was changed into Ahmadinejad, meaning 'of the race of Mohammed' or 'of virtuous race', ahmad meaning "virtuous" in Arabic is used as a byname of Muhammad and nejad being the Farsi for "race, lineage". According to his relatives, it was for "a mixture of religious and economic reasons."[29]

The REAL ORIGINAL NAME has been "Sharon Saburjian" which is improperly changed in the new text.

 Not done: The Guardian reference seems valid. Do you have any references that support the information in the text you presented? On the face of it, the text you presented appears invalid; both the name Sharon and the assertion of a Jewish background seem highly unlikely for this individual. Also, you should avoid putting emphasis on "true " or "real" or "suppressed." Phrases like "REAL ORIGINAL NAME" actually have the opposite of the intended effect; they make the reader skeptical and unlikely to accept the remainder of the statement at face value. Celestra (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Many people consider his election in 2009 to be fair too

So why not report that in the article. Parts of this article read like a hand out from the Iranian opposition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.233.172 (talk) 06:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonderaktion_Krakau —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.157.68 (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes there is alot of articles and persons who claim it was not a fraud, furthermore that the Neda was killed by the west. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.226.81.109 (talk) 13:23, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Impact on the article traffic

Have a look at the trafic in june: [1]

--Stone (talk) 13:21, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Mahomud ahmadi nejad has officially cheated in the election by support of supreme leader and revolutionary guards... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.122.144 (talk) 15:28, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Talysh?

The article says that he was born in a Talysh family, but there's no source for it. Searching Google shows only Wikipedia and its clones in the first few pages of results.

I am removing per WP:BLP. Feel free to put it back with a reliable source. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, i can find some sources in Russian that say that he is Talysh. Searching for "Ахмадинежад талыш" yields some Russian news sites that say it, but they don't appear 100% reliable to me. The Russian Lenta-pedia, which is more or less reliable for current personalities, doesn't mention his ethnicity. And i can't find anything in English.

Please correct me if i'm wrong. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 16:03, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Talysh people don't even look like him.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.5.148 (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

A Danger to Wikipedia's Credibility

This entire entry on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a shameless negative political opinion piece. It is supposed to be a biography yet it focusses on a one sided arguement regarding the last Presidential elections in Iran. The entire phraseology is emotive and negative towards the supposed subject of the biography, even in the context of the election itself, contentious, disputed or even merely rumoured incidents or events are stated as facts. There are also a large number of factual errors for instance the use of English translations of Farsi text which are blatantly incorrect. This article should be expunged to prevent the independence or integrity of Wikipedia becoming a laughing stock. Pedrobulado (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC) pedrobulado

You are welcome to point out exactly what it is you mean, or contribue to the article with sourced information. However, your opinion is not important unless you can back it up with sources, and simply because you don't like something doesn't make it incorrect.ChillyMD (talk) 18:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

He means, and correctly so, that this entire article is not encyclopeadic in nature. It is a polemic. See reference 17 and its citation, the citation does not suggest anything about UN sanctions against Iran for nuclear enrichment. This is because Iran is allowed to to enrich uranium under the current rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.8.4 (talk) 08:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I removed the unrelated last line of the above comment regarding someone being an imbecile. Please make meaningful contributions. Mattbondy (talk) 01:32, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

What are his most important actions?

I think the article needs to discuss properly his policies as Iran's president, not just the controversies surrounding elections etc. Please see the leading page of other world leaders.

For example Bill Clinton, Nicolas Sarkozy and Gordon Brown each have an opening discussion in about 300 words highlighting important aspects of the administration.

What is the most important relevant information about Ahmadinejad (important decisions he has made and his main impact on Iran) that should lead the article in this way? I would appreciate help in making a list of what most important decisions should be highlighted in an appropriate number of words.EdH (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

The article has now been flagged by User:Snigbrook that "the introduction of this article may need to be rewritten". I agree with this. Here are some notes on the Wikipedia standard for lead sections followed by my comments about the lead section content for this article.

In this case, the lead section should have three or four paragraphs: "Introductions to biographical articles commonly double as summaries, listing the best-known achievements of the subject. Because some readers will read only the opening of an article, the most vital information should be included." Introductory_text "should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." In biographies "notable material should neither be suppressed nor allowed to overwhelm... Well-publicized recent events affecting an article subject, whether controversial or not, should be kept in historical perspective. What is most recent is not necessarily what is most notable: new information should be carefully balanced against old, with due weight accorded to each. When an article subject dies, the lead does not need to be radically reworked."

Taking this as a guide, I suggest (apart from the existing info box) the following four paragraphs, of which 2, 3 & 4 reflect the structure of the article:

<Paragraph 1>

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (Persian: محمود احمدی نژاد, Mahmūd Ahmadinezhād ; born 28 October 1956) is the sixth and current President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the main political leader of the Alliance of Builders of Islamic Iran. The presidency is not the highest constitutional office in Iran. The Supreme Leader has ultimate control over foreign policy, the armed forces, and the nuclear policy of the Iranian state.

<Paragraph 2>

Synopsis of article information covering
1 Background, campaigns and election to presidency
   * 1.1 Administrative and academic careers
   * 1.3 Early political career
   * 1.4 Mayor of Tehran
   * 2.1 2005 campaign 
   * 2.2 2005 election
   * 2.3 2005 cabinet appointments
   * 2.4 2006 Councils and Assembly of Experts election
   * 2.5 2009 presidential election
   * 2.6 2009 Iranian election protests
   * 2.7 2009 cabinet appointments

<Paragraph 3>

Synopsis of article information covering
3 Domestic issues
   * 3.1 Economic policy
   * 3.3 Housing
   * 3.2 Family planning and population policy
   * 3.4 Human rights
   * 3.5 Universities
   * 4.1 Accusations of corruption
   * 4.4 Criticisms from other political parties
   * 4.8 2009 alleged complicity in conviction for "earthquake saferoom"
   * 4.6 Ali Kordan's fabricated doctoral degree and moral charges

<Paragraph 4>

Synopsis of article information covering
4 Controversial statements & relationships
   * 4.5 Ahmadinejad–Haddad Adel conflict over Iranian constitution
   * 4.7 Ahmadinejad–parliament conflict
   * 3.6 Nuclear program
   * 4.3 Statements on the United Nations and football stadiums
   * 4.2 Criticisms of statements and social issues
5 Foreign relations
   * 5.1 Relations with the United States
   * 5.2 Relations with Israel
6 Allegations of Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism
   * 6.1 Controversies
   * 6.2 Response to allegations
   * 5.3 Relations with Russia
   * 5.4 Relations with Venezuela
   * 5.5 Regional relations

Note: There was in 2007 a mediation exercise about controversial aspects of the introduction to this article.

Please, does anybody have any comments about this suggestion? EdH (talk) 00:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

In the absence of any comments I have continued with the activities outlined above and updated the page with the initial and domestic policy sections of the outline above. I have written a precise summary of the corresponding sections of the article, with the relevant references linked in the lead-in section also. I have not yet had time to address the internationally-focused part of the lead-in with its previously controversial material about Israel. Please share any comments here.EdH (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Controversies are just as relevant to someones history as is their accomplishments. I am sure if you look up a serial killer you will still find his academic record and his crimes. Not to say that MA's page is riddled with crime its just not lacking his actual history at all no matter what balance it takesTaboooooooooo (talk) 18:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

How to reduce article length

The article is currently too long. How can we restructure to reduce size without sacrificing useful content?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the 1979 Hostage Crisis

According to the article Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the 1979 Hostage Crisis, a CIA investigation determined "with relative certainty" that he was not involved in the hostage crisis and another U.S. official said of the report that there was "no evidence" that he was among the captors. I would like to propose reducing the amount of attention paid to this in the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad page to one sentence with a link to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the 1979 Hostage Crisis. Does anybody have strong opinions about this? EdH (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I implemented this suggestion.EdH (talk) 00:53, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Reduction in number of sources

This is discussed above in section excess sources in references 15 & 18.

2009 Iranian election protests

This section contains a reference to a main article and some links tagged "See also". We should either rely only on the main article, or have a block of text here. The links point to important, relevant, and highly emotive subjects, but they are completely unexplained. We could include here a brief synopsis of the main article, but it may be more effective to delete the links here and rely on the main article as a nexus for the discussion of the protests. Comments? EdH (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I implemented this suggestion.EdH (talk) 00:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Economic policy

MA's management of the Iranian economy, unemployment, etc is hugely important. Currently we have two large and rather unappealing blocks of text whose information is a year old. Is there a short list of important, and possibly more recent, facts that we should mention under this heading? EdH (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Relations with the United States

This section is one of the longest. Now that the activities of the Bush administration are no longer current, would it be acceptable to summarize the minutiae more briefly here? Could we rely on the main article for the full historical details of the posturing that has taken place over the years? EdH (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with your evaluation. Thank you. --BoogaLouie (talk) 01:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Mass deletion and reversion

There was a mass deletion of about a quarter of the entire article. Nobody has explained any reason for this so I put it back. If there is a reason for deleting this much material it should be discussed here first. EdH (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Tel. #

What is his phone number? 77.127.161.181 (talk) 18:25, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Intro

This has got to be one of the longest (and most unbalanced) intros anywhere on Wikipedia. There needs to be a more concise introduction. Just because the guy is hated does not mean there should be five long-winded paragraphs criticizing him in the lead. Someone with expertise in the area please fix this. Colipon+(T) 21:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree completely though I'm totally unqualified to make such an edit. Were I to, I would aggressively remove a lot of the lead in to this article as it's clearly negatively biased. I think this article needs to be looked at ASAP due to the controversy it could cause. ^Alex J _Fox (Talk) (Contribs) 23:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)