Talk:Iran

Please consider reading the archived discussions for this article before asking any questions on this talk page or initiating any new debate.

Linking wrong!

the linking to the pronunciations of "Iran" seems to have been reversed, the naming is right but the order is reversed which could lead to misunderstandings. Sorry if I'm doing something wrong, I'm n00b at Wikipedia :) 62.20.235.202 (talk) 12:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC) to clarify, the link to the audio files that is. 62.20.235.202 (talk) 12:09, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

'Plastaic Keys to Heaven'

Might the following commentary be added to the discussion regarding the 1980s Iraq-Iran War? Occassionaly this topic appears in the media, I thought that the following might correct/clarify some of the discussion. Might the appropriate monitor-person add it?: Supposedly about 1984 the Iranian government distributed golden-colored, plastic ‘Paradise Keys’ to its soldiers; they were told that these keys would ‘open the gates of Paradise’ where 72 ‘houri’ (celestial virgins) awaited battlefield martyrs. This is unsubstantiated; soldiers were issued metallic identification tags, and/or plastic identification cards, along with a copy of Shaykh Abbas Qomi (d. 1959) prayer book entitled ‘Mafatih ul-Jenan’ or “Keys to Paradise”. Some contend this comingling of military items enabled opponents of Khomeini to misrepresent that the soldiers had been issued ‘Plastic Keys to Heaven’ – a concept that they hoped would evoke derision in the Western media against Khomeini [cite: “Khomeini’s Search for Perfection: Theory and Reality” by Baqer Moin in Pioneers of Islamic Revival, 2005 ed. by Ali Rahnema, p. 68.]. Although 500,000 of these keys were allegedly ordered from Taiwan, and were allegedly found by Iraqi soldiers in the clinched fists of dead Iranian soldiers, no photographs of them have appeared. BillGarrisonJr (talk) 18:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I removed it only because we cannot mention EVERYTHING on the main page - see WP: Undue, WP: Size. I think you might want to place this mention in its appropriate section on the Iran-Iraq war's page instead. 68.197.144.38 (talk) 01:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010 Kerman province eathquake

7 were reported dead and just over 100 hurt in a relatively sparsely populated and rural area of Kerman province after a magnitude-6.5 earthquake hit an area between the cities of Zahedan and Bam. according to state-run Press TV on the 20th. The governor general of Kerman province told the IRNA news agency that the death toll would probably start to rise as rescuers found more dead and injured in the rubble. The ground tremors were felt as far away as the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.--82.11.99.44 (talk) 10:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Peer Review

I have recently requested this. Some users are helping. I should specially thank User:SSZ for helping this article to improve. Most of his edits are acceptable. But some of them are not corrcet that I would like to mention:

• If there is supposed to be only one picture in Sports section, It's better to be the most popular one (football). Other pictures as well as Azadi Stadium should all be in here.
• removing this picture from the article is also not appropriate in here.
• The size of this picture should be a little larger to best fit the article, as I did it here.
• Why this category has been removed ?
• Finally, as I have described here, I did it according to the cover of the book.

*** in fact *** (contact) 06:27, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

As you mention, please note these changes were initiated by your own request for review and explained later in my edit summaries here and again here. Basically, in Sports and one History sub-section that you mention, there is not enough room to have as many pictures if you want to avoid sandwiching text between images. Finally, navboxes are generally not placed at the top of the page. See one example here. Kind regards, SSZ (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I add this category because this page is a redirect page of IRI and IRI is a regime, not being of Iran. but someone removed that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazdakabedi (talk • contribs)

Dear SSZ, I already thanked you for helping. Please read my notes again (carefully) and try to discuss them one by one. We all want the best for this article. Cheers. *** in fact *** (contact) 04:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear *** in fact ***, I don't mind if you want to choose this picture. Sorry, but I don't have much else to say here...SSZ (talk) 09:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Iranian election protests

The part about the Iranian election protests is much to long. In a country with 7,000 history, the relevance of a few monthts of protesting, which failed to change anything in the political system at all is very small. At the time there was a lot of hype about it, but now, almost 2 years later, as it is clear that this was not the new Iranian revoulution, I think the part about it should be cut down, a lot.

Dear user Kermanshahi, First of all, please sign your messages in the talk pages.

About your suggestion, I disagree. It's not the matter of How long something is. It's the matter of importance. I believe That part shouldn't be cut down. I think if there should be a change, then that part (Iranian election protests) could be in another sub-heading under "Recent history (1921–present)". It would look like this in the list:

• 3.6.2 Iranian election protests

This is all I can agree with. But you should also ask other editors' ideas as well. Regards, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 06:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree to reduce this section. Comparing to other section, it's too long. In a historical point of view, it's not more important than constitutionalization efforts, the coup d'etat of 1953 or Iran-Iraq war. Let's see what's others opinion.--Aliwiki (talk) 07:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I think there is too much detail. The next-to-last paragraph in this section can be deleted. There are sub-articles that contain all the details. See Iranian presidential election, 2009. 68.197.144.38 (talk) 11:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Persia again

I did an edit removing Persia from the opening sentence "Iran (Persia)" which is 1. Wrong 2. The sources were falsified. It would be appreciated if editors 1. read wp:lead and do not add Persia again and again (because it is mentioned at least once more in the lead!) and 2. See the discussion on this in the archive of this talk page. Xashaiar (talk) 12:16, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Supreme Leader

The government and politics section calls the Leader of the Revolution the "supreme leader of Iran". So far as I know, Supreme Leader of Iran is a term coined by US politicians and he is not called a supreme anything inside the nation and its government. I'm going to change it to match the title of the post it refers to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.53.198 (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Flora

While there are list of native and common fauna for Iran, should there also be a short list of native flora and common flora?74.216.44.7 (talk) 00:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea to me. *** in fact *** ( contact ) 04:37, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Independent polls?

"Independent polls have not contradicted official turnout of 2009 election, which gave around 60% of vote to Ahmadinejad.[138]"

I'm not sure this statement, though sourced well, should probably have some more room for ambiguity; there's a lot of other information (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-05/27/content_11446054.htm, http://www.rferl.org/content/Iranian_Opinion_Polls_Have_A_Checkered_Past/1750622.html) that seem to be at odds with that statement.

Further, there is some reasonable analysis here by Professor Juan Cole, who appears to be a reputable source on Middle Eastern affairs. There should probably be some qualification on the quoted statement in the article, seeing as the magnitude that statement carries is pretty large. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.96.0.202 (talk) 04:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

What it means is that US media is BS and we knew that already as it is NOT controlled by us the Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.77.253.25 (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Argument /Deletion

Somebody just deleted my statement . My statement was true. Is this a joke ? Please say who did it or I will report this. This is a joke ! TerenceBoshy (talk) 01:33, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Aryana or Eran

Whilst attempting to make some edits to the etymology (name) section i soon found this passage from encycopedia iranica:

"The combination *aryānām xšaθra- is nowhere found in the Old Persian inscriptions of the Achaemenians. In the later Yašts there is only mention of airiiå and anairiiå daiŋhāuuō “Aryan” and (unspecified) “Non-Aryan lands.” Thus the term Ērānšahr was evidently an invention of the Sasanians"

This clearly distinguishes the two terms accredited as the original form of "Iran". As "Eran" seems the more feasible i think this version should be given full credit. Although Aryana may have served to describe the same thing as Eran and Iran, as it has no connection with these two terms i think it should only get a brief mention in the section, of any. comments welcome, especially if it enlightens us all on the true origin of the term "Iran"Karafs (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Good points but OR and Synth. Here is what we know and what the article says: The term "Iran" is directly related to Eran of Sasanids as "a name of the empire/state/group of people" but as an Ethnic-Religious-... word Eran is (by all sources) a sasanid way of writing of the fully attested Old Iranian (Avestan which is older than Old Persian) word "Aryanam ..". The term "*aryānām xšaçra-" is what the Old Persian term SHOULD have been. Xashaiar (talk) 10:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. I would also like to put forward this reduced version of the section for the article. This version reduces the repetitive, longwinded and vague section with a smaller, more compact and to-the-point one:

The name of Iran (ایران) is the Modern Persian derivative from the Proto-Iranian term Aryānā,, meaning "Land of the Aryans", first attested in Zoroastrianism's Avesta tradition. The term Ērān is found to refer to Iran in a 3rd century Sassanid inscription, while the Parthian language inscription that accompanies it uses the term aryān instead. However historically Iran has been referred to as Persia or similar (La Perse, Persien, Perzië, etc.) by the Western world, mainly due to the writings of Greek historians. In 1935 Reza Shah requested that the international community should refer to the country as Iran. Opposition to the name change led to the reversal of the decision, and in 1959 both names were to be used interchangeably. Since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 the official name of the country has been the "Islamic Republic of Iran."

Karafs (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me, covers pretty much all the important information in the section in a much concise and reader-friendly way. I say replace it, but let´s wait to see what other editors think. Uirauna (talk) 22:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes the section should be reduced to a few sentences. And the version you propose seems to have some problems: ", while the Parthian language inscription that accompanies it uses the term aryān instead" this is a misrepresentation. Parthians spoke no Persian but rather Parthian and thats why they WROTE differently. So the sentence (which is unnecessary) should be "and the Parthian version of the inscription that accompanies it uses the Parthian term "aryān"in reference to Iranians ". Xashaiar (talk) 12:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with ur modification, as the sentence in question IS misleading. i was also thinking of finding what the greeks called the persians. i think it was Persēs but i can confirm it. so the sentence would look like this:

...mainly due to the writings of Greek historians who called Iran Persēs (Πέρσης), meaning land of the Persians<citation>

Karafs (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Boldly go ahead!. If your changes need further edits people will do it. Xashaiar (talk) 15:41, 27 hi wats up