Talk:Execution of Imam Khomeini's Order

Iran Top‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

lack of sources

Created this article and found that there is next to nothing about it not leading back to the Reuters investigation. Did a search of IRNA and Fars hoping to get the IRI's rebuttle and found no mention of Setad, let alone a reply to Reuters' story.

On the one hand Wikipedia disapproves of using a single source. On the other hand a $95 billion organization, founded in large part from shakedowns of individual Iranians, should have its own article. --BoogaLouie (talk) 00:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if Persian references to the article would be helpful or allowed in English Wiki. Farhoudk (talk) 08:24, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Farhoudk, EnWiki policy explicitly accepts non-English sources so long as they satisfy Reliable Source and other policies and guidelines. When a choice of sources is available, English language sources are preferred as most valuable and accessible for our typically English-speaking readers.
See WP:Verifiability#Non-English_sources. Alsee (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Setade Peygiriye Farmane Hasht-Maddeiye Emam

This is another body which does not exist anymore and does not relate to EIKO at all. [1] Farhoudk (talk) 08:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additions and Rewriting

Hi Farhoudk,
In accordance with your request I've gone over the article. As you have no doubt noted I've done much more than check for usage, grammar, punctuation. Could not help but adding material from the Reuters series. Will go over once more, but it should be done otherwise. --BoogaLouie (talk) 01:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not found link

For the following sentence, the cited link doesn't work. So I prefer to move it here instead of removing. please move the sentence to the article just by finding other reliable sources! The 2015 Geneva interim agreement on Iranian nuclear program which eases sanctions may benefit petrochemical companies belonging to Setad ^[1]. Saff V. (talk) 07:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Exclusive-Khamenei's Business Empire Gains From Iran Sanctions Relief". New York Times. Reuters. 22 January 2014. Retrieved 22 January 2014.

Services section removed

I removed the services section, and a bit of content from the lead. It was sourced to a blog, an unreliable fringe site, and small portion was sourced to a site of unclear reliability. I have no objection if anyone wants to rebuild the section with independent reliable sources. Alsee (talk) 22:30, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to provide RS in supporting of services content in Persian such as Mehrnews, Mashregh News and finally Fars news.Saff V. (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Consortium News citation - fringe commentary

I have removed a cite to the website Consortium News entitled "A Reuters Report on Iran That Spurred US Diatribes," which is attributed to Ivan Kesic, who is described as a "Croatia-based freelance writer." I removed it for two reasons:

First, we don't need it - the Reuters article (which is of course reliable) is quoted and is cited, so it's unnecessary to include another cite.
Second, Consortium News is not regarded as a reliable source and we should not be promoting its opinion piece/media criticism article for statements of fact in the encyclopedia's voice. Moreover, Consortium News is recognized as a fringe "alternative media" source that has promoted conspiracy theories. This article by two academics notes that "the alternative news site Consortium News, ... publishes conspiracy theorist Caitlin Johnstone" and describes the website as part of a broader network of sources that promote pro-Russian government positions by "advancing pro-Russian conspiracy theories" tailored to appeal to "coalition spanning far right and radical left." This article describes Consortium News pieces as Kremlin-aligned "dubious fare" that, among other things, promotes "'false flag' conspiracy theories" regarding the shootdown of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17).

Neutrality^talk 16:18, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

using only one source

in the first paragraph the article is concluded with only routers as source. i think using only one source is discouraged int the policy of wikipedia and also the fact that the information is from a non-iranian and non-persian source that is not fully trustable and not even usable by the perspective of using official data. 5.237.237.174 (talk) 12:42, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[nyt2014-1] "Exclusive-Khamenei's Business Empire Gains From Iran Sanctions Relief". New York Times. Reuters. 22 January 2014. Retrieved 22 January 2014.

[1]