Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Anonymous editor (talk | contribs) at 21:49, 28 June 2005 (→Disputed election procedures quote). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Dr.Saami?

• Would someone please start something about his role in assasination of Dr. Saami?--Sina 20:29, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think we should refrain from adding further allegations unless there is a somewhat accurate connection that can be established. Sources should be used for this matter. Thanks.--Anonymous editor 20:31, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

His role? I've heard a few accusing Rafsanjani of the same assasination. I think it's a more he did she did fingerpointing now, than anything with conclusive evidence. ~User_talk:m87

Conservative hardliner or fascist

There seems to be a very minor disagreement on whether he is "conservative hardliner" or a "fascist". Although I personally consider him a "conservative hardliner", I would like to get opinions of why he might be considered "fascist". Opinions are appreciated. Thanks.--Anonymous editor 20:53, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

There has been people calling him and his supporters "fascist", yes, I've read these. But taking a look at Fascism#Definition, no he is not nationalist or racist and does not support corporatism, but many people believe that he will implement a totalitarian regime (he has mentioned that a civil worker must believe in Islamic management or should be sacked), will limit political, social, and personal freedoms, and will implement modern propaganda techniques and heavy censorship. As for loyalty to a single leader, yes, he is supporting nation-wide loyalty to the Supreme Leader. He is also believed to be fundamentalist. roozbeh 21:23, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm. Yes I agree, by definition that does not make him fascist. People usually have different POV and what they believe will happen. So although some people think he will involve some of the tenets of fascism, I don't think that has been proven yet, so he shouldn't be called fascist. Thanks for your response. --Anonymous editor 21:29, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Bush emphasizes the importance of maintaining Christian values in his speeches all the time; in some other speeches he directly refers to Christianity. Many seem to think that he is "involved some of the tenets of fascism"... I don't see any refrences to fascism in his article. *looks again* "many people believe that he will implement a totalitarian regime (he has mentioned that a civil worker must believe in Islamic management or should be sacked)" Ain't that a heavily biased point a view, now? (noting the interesting word-choices that you have made...) ~User_talk:m87

Islamism and minor neutrality dispute

I seriously believe that Islamism should be added. This is not a hint toward religion, but toward the point that he believes Islam is not a religious only, but a global solution for government, etc. Please read the Islamism article. roozbeh 21:40, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

The problem is the fact that it is a widely controversial term which can have many different meanings for different people especially here in the west. This might give the wrong impression of who he really is. I think we should keep the conservative hardliner label for him and let the viewer decide whether he truly is of "Islamist" principles or not.--Anonymous editor 22:20, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

After reading lots of what is said on his campaign website, I really believe that Ahmadinezhad considers himself an Islamist and that this is not POB. I also don't agree that "Islamism" is a controversial term. Please check the Islamism article to see that there is no mention of controvesy in usage or meaning there. Also, check Misplaced Pages:Words to avoid to see that Islamist is not listed there. I consider not mentioning his self-described Islamism non-NPOV. If you think Islamism is not descriptive, add explanations instead of removing good descriptions. roozbeh 02:10, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Yo, hold on a second, man. There is no need for the POV tag. If this is so much a concern to you then I will insert that little phrase into the article. I didn't think that you were so much concerned about my slight rewording in order to avoid controversy. But if you are that concerned then no problem, I will insert that accordingly. Thanks.--Anonymous editor 02:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I removed conservative again, because of his critism of "conservatism practiced by current civil servants" on his campaign website. roozbeh 02:39, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Lay off the "isms" A lot of leaders believe religion is the "global solution for government" or at least that can be inferred from their speeches and unless your going to take the same appproach with everybody else-- (which reflects your non_NPOV) please lay off the ism. Islamism... such an ambiguous (read:Newspeak) term for Wiki to be using, don't you think? ~User_talk:m87

Zpelling

Maybe Ahmadinejad would be better. -SV|t 07:12, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I completely agree with SV. Please note that all the major news agencies and news websites use the form "Ahmadinejad." Just check the Google results: Ahmadinejad (202,000), Ahmadinezhad (584) -DamonM 25 Jun 2005

Ahmadinejad is right... the "J" does not take a zh sound. It's J.. like jar, joke ~User_talk:m87

Moved. --Wikimol 16:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Now if only someone would take the task of making sure his name is Ahmadinejad everywhere on Misplaced Pages... Dralwik 17:13, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've changed the name in most important links (cca 30). The image is locked, userpages IMO doesn't matter. The rest should be checked using fulltext - you're welcome to help with that :-) --Wikimol 18:39, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Critiques of Ahmadinejad

Hey there- I reworded parts of the critiques paragraph of this article, but I'm not sure exactly what the writer of this paragraph intended to explain. I was going to contact them, but the history of this article is too long to find the member who wrote it! If anyone else could look into fixing/adding that paragraph to make it more readable, that would be great! Thanks! — Aurora (Say hi!)] 18:11, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Critiques paragraph??? Do you mean criticism. If you do I will check it out. Thanks. --Anonymous editor 18:12, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Wikiquote

What happend to his article at Wikiquoke?

Disputed election procedures quote

Since he won, the circumstances of his election are relevant to his article. Other election details are presented in the article. Maybe it should be moved from the intro, though. HKT 28 June 2005 05:00 (UTC)

(The disputed quote follows:)

"Ahmadinejad was elected President of Iran on June 24, 2005 in the second round of the 2005 presidential election, in which only Muslim men approved by the Council of Guardians were allowed to run. The Council of Guardians controls the electoral infrastructure and has not allowed any independent observers or vote counts."

Here are the bolded phrases (above). I believe the reason that this info is irrelevant there is because it does not really add to anything about that canditate. The criteria for how someone is elected should be added to an article that outlines how the elections are performed within that country, not on the canditates or president-elect's page. That's like giving a complete detail about how elections are conducted in the USA on Al Gore's page! I think you understand. Thanks. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 05:48 (UTC)

Normally I'd agree with with you, but, vis-a-vis Iranian elections, people are typically unaware of procedure that's radically different than what they are used to in English-speaking countries. People are likely to assume that his election was typically democratic. I see your point, and I think that mention of this election detail should be placed less prominently in the article (in the Biography section perhaps?). HKT 28 June 2005 05:58 (UTC)

See we can't really assume who is reading the article, as wikipedia is an international encyclopedia so it is up to one's own desire whether they want to learn more about how candidates are chosen. Every country has a different method (some slightly more than others), but I mantain that should not be mentioned on a person's page, but rather on one about the electional criteria or the "elections in country X". Also whether a country has performed democratically or not is personal opinion and should be avoided for neutrality. Thanks.--Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 06:00 (UTC)

(1.) English wikipedia is primarily in existence for people from English-speaking countries. I think that providing information about something that most people probably wouldn't have any prompt to look up is worthwhile. (2.) Does such an article about Iranian election protocol already exists? Is such protocol mentioned anywhere on English Misplaced Pages? (3.) I used "typically democratic" loosely to refer to election-types that most English-speakers are accustomed to, and they are not used to such restrictions. (Strictly speaking, though, Democracy has a definition and is not a matter of opinion). Thank you. HKT 28 June 2005 06:19 (UTC)

HTK, strictly speaking though, regardless of various "democracy definitions" and who or who doesn't view the encyclopedia, this does not need to be mentioned on a candidate/president-elect's page. Surely you agree that the appropriate mention (if any) would be on an article about elections in that country? Thanks. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 06:24 (UTC)

It certainly should be mentioned somewhere. I continue to think that it should also be mentioned, hinted to, or at least linked to in this article. If readers would have no indication that such information exists, than I would consider the article incomplete and lacking context. P.S. I'm still wondering if the info exists anywhere on English Misplaced Pages. Do you know if it does? HKT 28 June 2005 06:32 (UTC)

No I don't know if it does exist but I am sure it probably does. I don't believe that this article needs to hint nor mention that as in many cases that would be considered POV and irrelevant for the article content. Thanks for your message. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 06:35 (UTC)

Call me thick, but why would it "be considered POV and irrelevant for the article content?" HKT 28 June 2005 06:45 (UTC)

I agree that there should be a link, but I do not agree that hinting the personal opinion that the elections are "undemocratic" is acceptable to the article. Thanks. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 06:45 (UTC)

While the statement is trying to highlight negatives about the election process, it doesn't mention "democracy" at all, nor does it bring personal opinions. Even considering the negativity, I think the statement brings appropriate context, as I stated above. Perhaps you could add a countering statement, if you think that would make it more NPOV. (Don't worry: If I think it's inappropriate, I'll just revert!) :) HKT 28 June 2005 07:10 (UTC)

You don't have to look very hard to find information on Iran's political system. It's a prominent part of the main Iran article. The problem with throwing in a couple negative statements like that is that in this climate of heavy anti-Iran propaganda, it reads like an endorsement of the U.S. position that the election was illegitimate (a position which says more about the state of U.S.-Iran relations than it does about the elections). Mirror Vax 28 June 2005 07:42 (UTC)

(1.) The Iran article does not contain the info that is mentioned by the statement in question. Neither does Council of Guardians, to which the info directly pertains. (2.) While the author probably intended to bring negative info about Ahmadinejad, his info only contained factual material. The author brought no personal opinion, and the only POV issue may be the prominent placement of the info. The author drew no conclusions about the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the election.

Practically speaking, I hope we can (at least) agree to the following resolution: (1.) Add the info to the Council of Guardians wiki. (2.) The two points mentioned in the author's statement can be split up in that wiki to appear less POV. (3.) Add any relevant counterpoints to the Guardians wiki (if any). (4.) Add a sentence to this article (probably to the Biography section) stating that all candidates must be screened by the Council of Guardians (with a link to that wiki). This way, readers can find details on Misplaced Pages if they so desire. HKT 28 June 2005 21:40 (UTC)

I agree that it should be put in the relevant article, however it does NOT need to be mentioned on this one, but it may be linked. Also be aware that appending this info may result in further attempts by editors to indicate the same type of "election clarifications" in articles about other countries (e.g. Israel, USA). So if you do add the info into the appropriate article make sure it is as neutral as possible. Thank you. --Anonymous editor June 28, 2005 21:49 (UTC)

Date Confusion

The article states that "In 1980, Ahmadinejad was the head representative of IUST to the student gatherings which led to the Iran hostage crisis". But the hostage crisis began in November 1979, so this date cannot be correct, unless the editor means to say that Ahmadinejad only met with this group after the hostages had already been seized. In any case, it needs to be cleared up. --Blainster 28 June 2005 18:03 (UTC)