Talk:Mohsen Fakhrizadeh
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mohsen Fakhrizadeh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 15 days ![]() |
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
How can the souces saying its an Assassination be trusted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.129.117 (talk) 23:29, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Many major and reliable news networks are telling the same information. Linphil (talk) 19:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- since all reliable sources are ultimately re-reporting officialdom’s confused narrative none are reliable and should not be used. Also, the story seems reminiscent of the downing of the Ukrainian jet. 2601:200:C100:CEA0:C9B6:9306:51EE:8A84 (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
I think we need sources beyond what the Iranian government says to establish that this cat is appropriate. Al-Andalusi thinks otherwise. Who's right? Let's discuss. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:01, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- I don't give a crap what the Iranian government thinks. But I don't like the double standards here. Those "requirements" do not seem apply when US/UK and France are the ones making the accusations. They are taken at face value without anyone questioning. It's worse because we have entire articles and categories for their claims, such as: State Sponsors of Terrorism (U.S. list) and Category:Organizations designated as terrorist by the United States. Al-Andalusi (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Al-Andalusi, That's an argument for deleting or editing those articles/categories, not an argument for including this cat here. I see no reason why the controversial claim this cat implies—that Fakhrizadeh was a victim of terrorism—should not be subject to the same sourcing requirements we impose on all controversial claims: namely, that reliable secondary sources are necessary to establish them. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- If a person dies inside a separate, very closed country, and the media of this country interpret his murderers as a terrorist attack, then this is probably the same thing :) Or do you, as the author of an international encyclopedia, think differently? JukoFF (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- I don't quite know what you mean. If the ministry of defence of that country called it a terror attack, I would not think that Wikipedia should repeat the ministry's views in wikivoice without attribution. If independent sources called it a terror attack, then we would be justified in repeating the claim in our own voice. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:28, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- If a person dies inside a separate, very closed country, and the media of this country interpret his murderers as a terrorist attack, then this is probably the same thing :) Or do you, as the author of an international encyclopedia, think differently? JukoFF (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Al-Andalusi, That's an argument for deleting or editing those articles/categories, not an argument for including this cat here. I see no reason why the controversial claim this cat implies—that Fakhrizadeh was a victim of terrorism—should not be subject to the same sourcing requirements we impose on all controversial claims: namely, that reliable secondary sources are necessary to establish them. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- I haven’t seen anyone calling it a terrorist attack. Iranian govt/media is saying it was an assassination. Western media is simply reporting that Iran govt confirmed the death and is claiming it is an assasination. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 21:43, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it isn't. An innocent person (without any trial etc) was murdered by a state inside another state (illegally?) with potentially other victims as well
- I take it back. I see that Iran is claiming it’s state sponsored terrorism. Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 01:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Merge
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
No need for a separate article on his death at this point, both articles are borderline stubs. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:52, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose There is a WP:Precedent. This situation is similar to Qasem Soleimani and Assassination of Qasem Soleimani. ~ HAL333 22:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- It matters not, there's not a single legitimate reason for a fork on the death when the main article is barely above a C-class article. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:03, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- P.S. the articles you refer to are 143KB and 202KB in length. Here the BLP is 11KB and the "death" article is 5KB. Get a grip. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- The current size of Soleimani's article is not relevant. Its size has increased threefold since he was killed and the assassination article was created. ~ HAL333 23:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- No, what's relevant is the size of the two articles here. Both are barely above C-class. No need for individual articles at this time. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:28, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- The current size of Soleimani's article is not relevant. Its size has increased threefold since he was killed and the assassination article was created. ~ HAL333 23:26, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support merge the 2 stubs into one reasonable article JW 1961 Talk 23:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- I've WP:IAR and merged the one section from the "killing" article into this one. In due course, it may be relevant to split, but right now, it's abundantly clear that we don't need two separate articles for this. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:31, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- The Rambling Man Please undo that move. As there was not a clear consensus and there was an ongoing discussion on the talk page, that action was unjustified. Can we just let this discussion run its course? ~ HAL333 23:33, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- No, I invoked IAR. Let's see what consensus there is in favour of having two separate stub articles. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:34, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support Premature article creation of the death while this article was/is barebones. Gotitbro (talk) 23:43, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment With the massive media coverage of this event (almost entirely focused on his death) we can not adequately cover his death without giving undue weight to it in comparison to his life and works. The move was immature and should be undone. ~ HAL333 00:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- That just means the article needs to be actually worked on to expand his actual bio and trim down on extraneous info about his death plaguing the article rather than spinning another article off. Gotitbro (talk) 00:29, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose This was a political assassination, and coverage of the event relegates it to it's own article due to the players involved and the target's role in the Iranian Nuclear Program. This is particularly true given that Israel is being accused of carrying out the assassination. Iran is stating that the killing was an act of terrorism, which also equates that the killing was carried out for political motives, which also makes it an assassination. Octoberwoodland (talk) 01:49, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Splitting proposal
I propose that section Death be split into a separate page called Killing of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh or Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. With the massive media coverage of this event (almost entirely focused on his death) we can not adequately cover his death without giving undue weight to it in comparison to his life and works. Furthermore, there is a WP:Precedent. This situation is similar to Qasem Soleimani and Assassination of Qasem Soleimani. Multiple reliable sources, such as the New York Times have stated that Fakhrizadeh's killing is as significant and notable as Soleimani's killing. This section thus deserves to be split and given its own article. ~ HAL333 00:46, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support as proposer. ~ HAL333 00:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Oppose. This was just merged (albeit in a somewhat unorthodox manner). Let's wait a few days and see if there's enough content to justify splitting. At least for general editing purposes, it is much easier to have a single article so we can integrate the biographical details that emerge during news coverage of his death. Before his death was reported, there was virtually no information about him as a person in this article. Since he passes WP:BASIC as a senior official in the Iranian nuclear programme, it makes more sense to fill out the article about him than prematurely forking to an article only about his death. Information specific to the assassination can be split off if and when the relevant section gets too big. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:38, 28 November 2020 (UTC)- Weak support. It still seems a little soon, but I think we're at the point where the assassination has enough content for an article and is overwhelming the article on Fakhrizadeh himself. My concerns about finding additional biographical details are sort of moot now, as we've found quite a few (albeit many of them disputed). AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 17:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support contingent that the article title be Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. This was a political assassination, and coverage of the event relegates it to it's own article due to the players involved and the target's role in the Iranian Nuclear Program. This is particularly true given that Israel is being accused of carrying out the assassination. Iran is stating that the killing was an act of terrorism, which also equates that the killing was carried out for political motives, which also makes it an assassination. Octoberwoodland (talk) 01:51, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- I prefer that title too. It keeps it in line with Soleimani's article and most news sources describe it as such. ~ HAL333 02:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with AleatoryPonderings. The focus should be on improving the article ATM by using the sources that have emerged. If we split it off now there is nothing left in the article and we'll be saying that, hey this article has basically nothing on the subject but here is a page long death about him (with the argument that is the subject even notable beyond just his death to even have a separate article). So, I say wait for sometime let the article get improved and if the death still covers half the page, I would support the split. Gotitbro (talk) 02:39, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- The fawiki article is a good start to add more to his bio. Gotitbro (talk) 07:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
The Rambling Man and Joseywales1961 Sorry for the ping. Since you were involved in the merge discussion (and the Death section has been greatly expanded), I assume that you would want to contribute here. ~ HAL333 02:56, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose There is so little about him prior to the attack that his notability seems to be very much due to the unusual attack. (not that he wasn't notable before, but very weakly there). A separate article makes no sense here unless the bio part can be expanded greatly. --Masem (t) 03:59, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose obviously, no sense at all in separate articles at this time. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:38, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Comment This clearly merits a separate article on notability but I totally agree with the opposers that it's not reasonable to split it off from a medium-sized article at this time. The recent work on the article, however, gives hope that the split-off may be justifiable soon contingent on further expansion, so I strongly advise to keep the discussion open for a while in order to prevent that a speedy closure with a rebuke be taken as an argument in a re-opened future discussion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:30, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose for the time being, per comment above - it would surely merit it's own artcle at some stage but, at the moment, the main article needs more expansion to warrant this. I would have no objection were that to happen. JW 1961 Talk 11:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Wait - Agree that there may not be enough content for a split now. Per User:Octoberwoodland's comment, if/when split occurs title should be Assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. NickCT (talk) 17:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Too little is known about the assassination at this point. My very best wishes (talk) 22:54, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - unless the killing snowballs into something larger - it doesn’t seem to merit its own article. Iran anyway blames Israel for anything that goes wrong in its country and threatens to wipe Israel off the map every day. So Iran screaming about the killing isn’t in itself notable. If Iran actually does something significant in retaliation for the killing then we can have this conversation but until then it’s really premature to create an article about the actual killing which may very well have no significant impact--Etatsor (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Article is nowhere near so big as to need splitting. Nurg (talk) 02:11, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. This article is way too short to need splitting.XavierItzm (talk) 11:10, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- XavierItzm The main concern here is content, not size. The assassination, the leadup to it, the response, and its ramifications, deserve their own article where they can be placed in full context. (But on your complaint of size, the article is already nearly 60 KB.) ~ HAL333 22:13, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Very strong support. I see a lot of "oppose" votes above, but honestly none of them make particularly compelling arguments. It really ultimately comes down to two questions: 1) Is Mohsen Fakhrizadeh notable, as the subject of an article, outside of this event (BLP1E). And the answer to that is of course yes - he clearly was!...And indeed Wiki has had an article on him since March of 2008 - more than 12 and a half years before his assassination! 2) Is the event notable? And again, the answer to that is yes - it clearly was!...For all sorts of reasons, ranging from foreign affairs to internal Iranian politics (including the MASSIVE weakness and vulnerability in Iran's intelligence and state security infrastructure that the assassination revealed) to US politics, etc., etc. And indeed, many of these reasons are explored in the large and rapidly expanding assassination section, which now dwarfs the rest of the article....So again, we come back to the original two questions. The ostensible subject of this article is (or now was) clearly notable outside of the single event, and yet coverage of that (also obviously very notable) single event now has massively undue weight within this (ostensibly) biographical article, so therefore it must be split. I'm honestly surprised that there was even ever a serious debate about whether or not the assassination should be split into a separate article, much less that those opposing the split would have a majority of the votes! 2003:CA:8743:FC86:C96D:69D6:5302:2012 (talk) 19:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. Unnecessary. — Amakuru (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- support I strongly support splitting this article and calling it an assassination as opposed to a killing. This was clearly politically motivated as all past assassinations have been. Maqdisi117 (talk) 02:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support The section on the assassination has been expanded greatly in the past few days so that even if it didn't need splitting at the start of this discussion, it certainly does now; it takes up about half of the article, so this article definitely gives undue weight to his death. And apart from that, the event is certainly notable, which is proven by the extensive media coverage which is still ongoing (also meaning that the assassination section will continue to grow). Lennart97 (talk) 14:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Netanyahu-MBS-Pompeo-Cohen rendezvous in Saudi city Neom
- https://apnews.com/article/israel-saudi-arabia-benjamin-netanyahu-tel-aviv-mike-pompeo-f55744d193db805923bbe9177a90c291
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL3eFRc98ho Implications of the hush hush Netanyahu-MBS-Pompeo-Mossad chief rendezvous in Saudi city
The criminal assassination of Fakhrizadeh came days after the media reported Netanyahu "secretly" flew to Saudi Arabia (Neom) to meet with MBS. Reports framed the meeting as discussions of "normalization", but targeting Iran is a top priority for both leaders. --217.234.68.245 (talk) 09:03, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- See WP:NOTFORUM. If reliable sources connect this meeting to the assassination, we will add it to the article. But these sources do not do that. The first one does not mention Fakhrizadeh; the second one appears to be a video-based opinion piece. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 15:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- The connection is tentative, sure, but it was described in RS [1]. Still, probably does not belong to this page at this point. My very best wishes (talk) 23:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- The article linked above is an opinion piece. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- This is sourced view/synthesis by Simon Tisdall published in The Guardian. Looks like a trivial analysis of facts, but again, it does not belong here yet, I agree. My very best wishes (talk) 23:20, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- The article linked above is an opinion piece. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 23:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- The connection is tentative, sure, but it was described in RS [1]. Still, probably does not belong to this page at this point. My very best wishes (talk) 23:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
- Tamara Cofman Wittes and Natan Sachs (Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution): Saudi-Israeli relations: The curious case of a NEOM meeting denied, November 25, 2020 : "There is a final, less likely but more dramatic possibility: that Pompeo’s trip was not just about legitimating Israeli settlements and tightening sanctions on Iran, but about coordinating a major American policy step that would precede the inauguration. This would have to be significant enough to demand a face-to-face consultation between the leaders. Such a step could perhaps even be a limited military strike targeting Iranian interests, such as the Natanz nuclear facility, where Iran has now reportedly enriched 12 times the amount of fissile material permitted under the Iran nuclear deal." --217.234.69.151 (talk) 16:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- "Less likely", "possibility", "would have to be". Speculation, speculation, speculation. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hold your horses! It is an analysis written November 25. --217.234.69.151 (talk) 16:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- That was obvious for political commentators immediately after Trump has accomplished his purge in Pentagon - see this article published in NYT on November 11 [2]: "In his final weeks as president, Mr. Trump faces a series of decisions that could shape his legacy in national security. He must decide whether to leave Iran with far more nuclear material than it possessed when he entered office, a direct result of his decision to pull out of the 2015 nuclear deal ... It is not impossible that the shake-up of Pentagon personnel could presage some volatile and dangerous period, to include even overt or covert operations against adversaries like Iran... It is possible, however, that Israel could see the next 70 days as a window to conduct significant attacks to set back Iran’s nuclear program.". And that is exactly what had happen. My very best wishes (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Again, see WP:NOTFORUM. If there is a reliable source that clearly connects this assassination with Trump's policy objectives in the Middle East, we can (and will) include it. But there is no point airing theories on the talk before such a source comes to light. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 06:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- That was obvious for political commentators immediately after Trump has accomplished his purge in Pentagon - see this article published in NYT on November 11 [2]: "In his final weeks as president, Mr. Trump faces a series of decisions that could shape his legacy in national security. He must decide whether to leave Iran with far more nuclear material than it possessed when he entered office, a direct result of his decision to pull out of the 2015 nuclear deal ... It is not impossible that the shake-up of Pentagon personnel could presage some volatile and dangerous period, to include even overt or covert operations against adversaries like Iran... It is possible, however, that Israel could see the next 70 days as a window to conduct significant attacks to set back Iran’s nuclear program.". And that is exactly what had happen. My very best wishes (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hold your horses! It is an analysis written November 25. --217.234.69.151 (talk) 16:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- "Less likely", "possibility", "would have to be". Speculation, speculation, speculation. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Tamara Cofman Wittes and Natan Sachs (Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution): Saudi-Israeli relations: The curious case of a NEOM meeting denied, November 25, 2020 : "There is a final, less likely but more dramatic possibility: that Pompeo’s trip was not just about legitimating Israeli settlements and tightening sanctions on Iran, but about coordinating a major American policy step that would precede the inauguration. This would have to be significant enough to demand a face-to-face consultation between the leaders. Such a step could perhaps even be a limited military strike targeting Iranian interests, such as the Natanz nuclear facility, where Iran has now reportedly enriched 12 times the amount of fissile material permitted under the Iran nuclear deal." --217.234.69.151 (talk) 16:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Impact on U.S. policy
This entire paragraph (except for the last line about the USS Nimitz returning to the region) is just speculation about an impact that may or may not materialize. Not everything “Commentators” say are noteworthy!--Etatsor (talk) 01:15, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Add military to employer
Given he is well know for heading a military program his military career should be his primary occupation, unless I am missing something Nheyer (talk) 04:31, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless, he is known as the "father" of Iranian nuclear program (this is not just according to Israel) and should be described as such on this page. My very best wishes (talk) 00:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Nuclear physicist by training but not by education
Article states that: "Fakhrizadeh received his BA in nuclear physics from the University of Tehran in 1987. He studied for a master's degree at the University of Isfahan and received a PhD in nuclear radiation and cosmic rays." Written this sentence like an Iranian (a proud one) would have it done. The source is Iranian-- it cannot be trusted as a singular source. Multiple sources needed to verify this statement. PhD in physics usually requires thesis and published it online which can be found. With PhD, You are entitled as "Doctor" but in this case, Mr. Fakhrizadeh was never called that.
It is highly possible that Fakhrizadeh could be trained as a nuclear physicist without a degree (just like Russians did to theirs in 1920s in cases on Zel'dovich or Petrzhak).
Can we verify that or remove that sentence mentioned above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:2D80:84:8886:EE11:A491:F85E (talk) 06:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- Ministry of defense has its own university called Malek-Ashtar University of Technology its graduate do not publish their thesis as it is security related(like IRGC imam hussein univwrsity and etc), the source here is Fereydoon Abbasi the former head of Iran atomic energy and all Iranian sources refer to him as doctor, the site publishing it is IRIN, Iran's official news network, it doesn't get more official than thatLFarzam1370 (talk) 14:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I have added Isfahan University of Technology official websites message of condolences, on that message IUT boards of governers explicitly identify Dr.Mohsen Fakhrizadeh as a graduate in master degree, his date entry in IUT was 1989.[1]
- Farzam1370 (talk) 20:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
Fakhrizadeh killing: Iran's security apparatus under scrutiny
Deutsche Welle wrote: Nuclear physicist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was one of the best-protected people in Iran. His assassination has cast a damming light over the country's security apparatus.https://www.dw.com/en/fakhrizadeh-killing-irans-security-apparatus-under-scrutiny/a-55761779 --Falkmart (talk) 10:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
Birth date
Does https://beheshtezahra.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=92 actually support the claim that his birth date was 21 March 1961? I have reverted that change for the moment. (It has since returned.) I don't read Farsi but Google Translate does not seem to indicate that this page contains information about Fakhrizadeh or his birth date. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 21:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- Low-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class Iran articles
- Low-importance Iran articles
- WikiProject Iran articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- Start-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
- Start-Class Middle Eastern military history articles
- Middle Eastern military history task force articles
- Start-Class Post-Cold War articles
- Post-Cold War task force articles
- C-Class physics articles
- Low-importance physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of Low-importance
- C-Class physics biographies articles
- Physics biographies articles