Talk:Ethnic minorities in Iran

Sectarian, not ethnic

Often times different groups of people (primarily Kurdish, Arab and Azerbaijani Turk) groups attempt to portray Iranian goverments (mostly Pahlavi and the Islamic Republic) as being Persian chauvinist (in the case of the Pahlavi dyansty) or carrying on a policy of Persianization (as some claim the Islamic Republic does). Iranian ethnicity is two fold: religion and culture. Since the Safavid dynasty took control religion has been the primary definition of Iranianess. That religion is Shia Islam. There is no doubt that Sunnis are a discriminated minority in Iran. The ethnic groups that are primarily Sunni (Kurds, Baluch, and Turkoman) are routinely left out of the economy and politics. However, distinctly Shia groups (Azeris, Lurs, some Kurds, and Persians) are well integrated into the economy, politics and the military. Most of the ruling elite in the country (whether it be Pahlavi or Islamic Republic) are of ethnic minority origins. The Azerbaijani Turks seem to be the most prevelant amongst the ruling classes; most notably, Khamanaei, the Supreme Leader of Iran.

Can anybody explain why the article refers to Arabs as a tribal, rather than ethno-linguistic group? And is their inclusion this way part of the attempts to Persianise the Khouzestan page on this site? Thanks - AMcD

This is a small attempt to salvage what was important in the silly article on Persian Chauvinism. It is haphazardly written and needs much change + plenty more detail. Refdoc 21:05, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I moved it today from "Policy towards ...", thinking teh subject deserves a broader treatment than just from the policy point of view. Refdoc 23:40, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Beware of correctness of this article

I am an Iranian of Bakhtiari origin. This article makes it sound like I am an ethnic minority in my own country. It talks about 67 ethnic groups in Iran --something that I have never heard before and I really doubt if it is true, and where you draw a line between groups who are so close in many ways-- but it doesn't mention that of all Iranian groups (those who are of original Iranian tribes, not non-Iranians such as Arabs and Jews) each one of them feels they are just as much Iranian as other Iranian groups. We marry among each other we share the same culture and we feel we belong to the same origin. I am surprised to see how this article makes it sound like various Iranian groups view one another as if they are from different origins. -213.176.80.98

First, as mentioned above - the article was written haphazardly and needs editing. I do not agree though fully with what you write , Roozbeh. I think Iran is unique in several ways - it is probably more ethnically diverse than many other countries of similar population size and yet - so much unlike many failed experiments e.g Soviet Union or Yugoslavia - a strong common cultural identity is obvious throughout Iran. I struggled to capture this in a short article but I think the current article is hinting in this direction. It will obviously need +++ work. What I would really like to know - is this common identity the product of recent (i.e last 100+ years) history or much older? Also the common identity is not always equally strong and there are separatist tendencies - have always been and it would be surprising in a country of the size of Iran if not. Even a cultural monolith like Germany had attempts in Bavaria and in the Rhineland to become independent at various times in the 20th century. The question is what to make out of them. One response would be to refuse even mentioning them - and being by result being somewhat economical with the truth, the other would be to overstate them - to paint Iran as a country full of struggling minorities, desperate to shake of the central yoke - wich would absolute nonsense. - Wrt to Bakhthiaris remove them, if you like. I added them as I thought rural/nomadic Bakhthiaris are so distinct in culture/dialect that they are worth mentioning. Maybe I am wrong. Refdoc 11:05, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please note that I have not written the above comment. It was an anoymous comment that was written on the article itself, but I moved here. I'm fine with the article. roozbeh 11:38, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)

I was astonished to see the comment unsigned. I see you have now added the IP address. Thanks Refdoc 12:00, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Iran's Ethnolinguistic Diversity

take your pan-tukism ideas elsewhere. Iran is a mesh of different ethnic groups with many differing view points. Most (wether tukic or persian etc) are totally aligned with the Iranian national view point. Other groups are not totally integrated 100% - namely kurds and arabs and balouchis to some extent- this is due to their own national aspirations or tribalism. And yes, the iranian government does operate a policy of persianisation.

Here is the summary of the facts from Ethnologue.com

Languages of Iran [See also SIL publications on the languages of Iran.] Islamic Republic of Iran, Jomhouri-e-Eslami-e-Irân. 67,503,205. National or official language: Western Farsi. Literacy rate: 70% to 75% among those 6 years old and over (1995–1996 Iran Statistical Center). Also includes Eastern Farsi (1,000,000), Hulaulá (300), Tajiki, Turkish (2,570), people from Afghanistan (3,000,000), Kurds from Iraq (120,000), Shi'a Arabs from Iraq. Information mainly from E. Drower 1939; R. Macuch 1965; I. Garbell 1965; T. Sebeok 1969, 1970; G. Doerfer et al. 1971; R. Oberling 1974; D. L. Stilo 1981; R. D. Hoberman 1988a, b. Blind population: 200,000 (1982 WCE). Deaf population: 3,978,055. Deaf institutions: 50. The number of languages listed for Iran is 77. Of those, 75 are living languages and 2 are extinct. Living languages

..

Arabic, Gulf Spoken [afb] 200,000 in Iran (1993). Southern coast; Khamseh nomads live in eastern Fars Province; other Arab nomadic groups in several southcentral provinces of Iran. Alternate names: Khaliji, Gulf Arabic. Dialects: Al-Hasâ, Khamseh. Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic Arabic, Mesopotamian Spoken [acm] 1,200,000 in Iran. Khuzestan Province, southwest side of Zagros Mountains, along the bank of the Shatt al Arab. Alternate names: Mesopotamian Gelet Arabic, Classification: Afro-Asiatic, Semitic, Central, South, Arabic

Armenian [hye] 170,800 in Iran (1993). Northern Iran, Azerbaijan Provinces around Khoi, Shahpur, Ahar, Tabriz, Tehran, Esfahan, Shiraz. Alternate names: Haieren, Somekhuri, Ermenice, Armjanski, Armani, Erâmani. Dialects: Eastern Armenian, Agulis, Astrakhân, Jolfâ (Dzhulfa), Karabagh Shamakhi, Khoi-Salmst (Khvoy), Urmia-Maragheh. Classification: Indo-European, Armenian

Azerbaijani, South [azb] 23,500,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 290,000 Afshar, 5,000 Aynallu, 7,500 Baharlu, 1,000 Moqaddam, 3,500 Nafar 1,000 Pishagchi, 3,000 Qajar, 2,000 Qaragozlu, 130,000 Shahsavani (1993). Population total all countries: 24,364,000. East and West Azerbaijan, Ardebil, Zanjan, and part of Markazi provinces. Many in a few districts of TehranTehran. Some Azerbaijani-speaking groups are in Fars Province and other parts of Iran. Also spoken in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Turkey (Asia), USA. Alternate names: Azeri, Torki. Dialects: Aynallu (Inallu, Inanlu), Karapapakh, Tabriz, Afshari (Afshar, Afsar), Shahsavani (Shahseven), Moqaddam, Baharlu (Kamesh), Nafar, Qaragozlu, Pishagchi, Bayat, Qajar. Distinctive linguistic differences between the Azerbaijani of the former USSR (North) and Iranian Azerbaijani (South) in phonology, lexicon, morphology, syntax, and loanwords. Teimurtash (7,000 in Mazanderan; possibly the same as Teimuri, Timuri, Taimouri) and Salchug (in Kerman Province) may be dialects. Qashqa'i may be a dialect. Part of the Qizilbash merchant group speak the Afshari dialect, which is strongly influenced by Persian. The dialect spoken in Syria is different from Kirkuk of Iraq, and may be closer to Turkish (Osmanli) than to Azerbaijani. There is a gradual transition of dialects from Turkish to Azerbaijani from central to western Turkey. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani ...

Balochi, Southern [bcc] 405,000 in Iran. Southern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Makrani (Lotuni). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi Balochi, Western [bgn] 451,000 in Iran (1986). Northern Sistan va Baluchistan Province. Half are settled in cities and villages, half are nomadic. Alternate names: Baluchi, Baluci, Baloci. Dialects: Rakhshani (Raxshani), Sarawani. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Balochi

...

Fars, Northwestern [faz] Scattered in isolated pockets of Fars Province. Dialects: Close to Sivandi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Central Iran Fars, Southwestern [fay] Central Fars Province: Somghun, Papun, Masarm, Buringun, Kondazi, Davâni, others. Alternate names: "Tajik". Dialects: Related to Lari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars

...

Farsi, Western [pes] 22,000,000 in Iran (1997). Population includes 800,000 Eastern Farsi in Khorasan, Gilan, Tat, Bakhtiari, Lur. Population total all countries: 24,316,121. Throughout Iran. Most heavily concentrated in central, south central, and northeastern Iran. Also spoken in Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, India, Iraq, Israel, Netherlands, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Sweden, Tajikistan, Turkey (Asia), Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, USA, Uzbekistan. Alternate names: Persian, New Persian, Parsi, Irani. Dialects: Ketabi, Tehrani, Shirazi, Old Shirazi, Qazvini, Mahalhamadani, Kashani, Esfahani, Sedehi, Kermani, Araki, Shirazjahromi, Shahrudi Kazeruni, Mashadi (Meshed), Basseri, Yazdi, Bandari. The literary language is virtually identical in Iran and Afghanistan, with very minor lexical differences. Zargari may be a dialect used by goldsmiths (also see Balkan Romani in Iran). Dialect shading into Dari in Afghanistan and Tajiki in Tajikistan. Many of the dialects may be separate languages. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Persian

...

Kazakh [kaz] 3,000 in Iran (1982). Gorgan City, Mazanderan Province. Alternate names: Kazak, Kazakhi, Gazaqi. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Western, Aralo-Caspian

...

Khalaj, Turkic [klj] 42,107 (2000 WCD). Northeast of Arak in Central Province. Alternate names: Khalaj. Dialects: Not a dialect of Azerbaijani, as previously supposed. An independent language distinct from other extant Turkish languages (Doerfer 1971). Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani

...

Khorasani Turkish [kmz] 400,000 (1977 Doerfer). Northeast Iran, in the northern part of Khorasan Province, especially northwest of Mashhad. West dialect in Bojnurd Region; north dialect in Quchan Region (probably the largest), south dialect around Soltanabad near Sabzevar. Alternate names: Quchani. Dialects: West Quchani (Northwest Quchani), North Quchani (Northeast Quchani), South Quchani. Midway linguistically between Azerbaijani and Turkmen, but not a dialect of either. Oghuz-Uzbek in Uzbekistan is reported to be a dialect. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkish

...

Kurdish, Central [ckb] 3,250,000 in Iran. Northwest Iran, primarily Kordestan, West Azerbaijan provinces, areas north of Kermanshah. Mukri is spoken around Mahabad, and Sineyi (Sine'i) is spoken around Sanandaj (Sine). Alternate names: Kordi, Korkora, Kurdi, Kurdy, Sorani, Mukri, Mokri, Sine'i, Wawa. Dialects: Mukri, Sanandaji (Sine'i, Sina'i, Sineyi), Southern Jafi, Pijdari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish

...

Kurdish, Northern [kmr] 350,000 in Iran (1988 Stanzer). North and west of Lake Urmia, extending to border with Azerbaijan. Some small communities live in the Caspian region (Mazandaran, Kalardasht [Fattah 2000]). Khorasani Kurmanji speakers live east of the Caspian Sea, in northern Khorasan Province, bordering Turkmenistan. Centers include Quchan and Bojnurd. Alternate names: Kurmanji, Kurmancî, Eastern Kurmanji, Kordi, Kurdi. Dialects: Khorasani Kurmanji. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish

...

Kurdish, Southern [sdh] 3,000,000 in Iran (2000 Fattah). Western Iran, Kermanshah, Ilam provinces; Eastern Iraq bordering these provinces including Xanaqin. Also spoken in Iraq. Dialects: Kolyai, Kermanshahi (Kermanshani), Kalhori, Garrusi (Bijari) Sanjabi, Malekshahi (Maleksh ay), Bayray, Kordali, Feyli, Luri. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish

...

Laki [lki] 1,000,000 (2002 Fattah). 150,000 monolinguals. Population includes 10,000 Nahavand Lurs. Western Iran, Ilam, Lorestan provinces, cities of Aleshtar, Kuhdesht, Nurabad-e Dolfan, Khorramabad. Alternate names: Leki, Alaki. Dialects: Lexical similarity 70% with Western Farsi, 78% with Luristani (Khorramabadi), 69% with Northern Luri (central rural dialects). Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Kurdish

...

Lari [lrl] 80,000. Ethnic population: 100,000. Throughout Lar District, South Fars Province; Shiraz; United Arab Emirates. Alternate names: Larestani, Achomi. Dialects: Lari. Verbal system is quite distinct from Western Farsi. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Fars

...

Lasgerdi [lsa] In Lasjerd, Semnan Province (40 km southwest of Semnan). Dialects: Related to Sorkhei. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Northwestern, Semnani

...

Luri, Northern [lrc] 1,500,000 (2001). Ethnic population: 1,700,000 (2001). Western Iran: Central and Southern Lorestan, Northern Khuzestan, Southern Hamadan Province, the southern edge of Markazi Province, some regions of Ilam, and possibly a small population in eastern Iraq. Populations also in Khorramabad, Borujerd, Andimeshk. Alternate names: Lori, Luri. Dialects: Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, Nahavandi, Andimeshki, Bala-Gariva'i, Mahali (Rural), Cagani. The major Northern Luri dialects (Khorramabadi, Borujerdi, etc.) are found in Lorestan and Khuzestan. Some local regions in Ilam Province (Posht-e Kuh) are said to speak Northern Luri dialects. Mainly south Kurdish dialects are spoken in Ilam Province (Fattah 2000). Also, according to Fattah, there are a small number of villages in Iraq, where a dialect of Northern Luri may be spoken. Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity of Mahali dialect 80% with Western Farsi, 69% with Laki, and 73% with Bakhtiari (Haflang); Khorramabadi dialect 85% with Western Farsi, 78% with Laki, and 75% with Bakhtiari (Haflang). Similarity to Western Farsi is due to language shift, but also to lexical borrowing. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri

...

Luri, Southern [luz] 875,000 (1999). 300,000 monolinguals. Ethnic population: 900,000. Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province (Yasuj is center of Boyerahmadi, Dehdasht is center of Kohgiluyeh), eastern Khuzestan Province (Kohgiluyeh), Northwestern Fars Province (Nurabad is center of Mamasani, Shul is center of Shuli), Shiraz. Alternate names: Ruliy, Lori-ye Jonubi, Luri, Lur, Lor, Lori. Dialects: Boyerahmadi, Yasuji (Yasichi), Kohgiluyeh, Mamasani, Shuli. Southern Luri is on a continuum between Bakhtiari and Western Farsi "dialects" such as Bushehri and Fars Province varieties. There is a non-Lur tribe in Fars Province called Kurdshuli, which is reported to speak a Southern Luri dialect. Their winter quarters are at Qasr-e Dasht near Sivand, which is 70 km from Sharaz on the Shiraz-Esfahan road (Ivanow 1959, unpublished). Close to Kumzari. Lexical similarity 75% with Western Farsi, 80% with Bushehri dialect of Western Farsi; Mamasani dialect 75% with Bakhtiari, Boyerahmadi dialect 86% with Bakhtiari. Classification: Indo-European, Indo-Iranian, Iranian, Western, Southwestern, Luri

...

Qashqa'i [qxq] 1,500,000 (1997). Southwestern Iran, Fars Province and Southern Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Province. Shiraz, Gachsaran, and Firuzabad are centers. Alternate names: Qashqay, Qashqai, Kashkai. Dialects: Very close to Azerbaijani. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Azerbaijani

...

Turkmen [tuk] 2,000,000 in Iran (1997). Northeast, mainly in Mazanderan Province, along the Turkmenistan border; important centers are Gonbad-e Kavus and Pahlavi Dezh. Alternate names: Torkomani. Dialects: Anauli, Khasarli, Nerezim, Nokhurli (Nohur), Chavdur, Esari (Esary), Goklen (Goklan), Salyr, Saryq, Teke (Tekke), Yomud (Yomut), Trukmen. Classification: Altaic, Turkic, Southern, Turkmenian

These data showhs that about %36-38 percent of Iran is Turk/Turkic, while %40-44 percent is Pers/Persianised however Persian is "lingua franca" in Iran throughout these groups.

Çağatay Göktürk Turkey

Article needs developing

There is a policy of Persianisation in Iran, which is aimed at maintaining Persian hegemony and the primacy of the Farsi language. I think this article needs to explain in more depth the intricate and complex history of cultural, ethnic and linguistic identity in Iran. Yes, some minority groups identify strongly with Iranian nationalism, but equally there are some - such as the Kurds and the Arabs - that do not necessarily share this identity and who are attempting to win autonomy or even secession. Whether you think this is a bad thing or not is beside the point. There remain those who feel ethnically separate and this is an important issue, perhaps too painful for the supports of the theocracy or the monarchist opposition to acknowledge.

Sentence rewrite

I propose changing "The current governmental policy can be characterised by a mixture of celebrating and furthering cultural diversity under a joint Iranian national umbrella, while holding down (occasionally violently) political separatism. Some ethnic minorities have reported racial or religious discrimination."

to "While the Iranian constitution clearly states that linguistic and cultural minorities have equal rights, some ethnic minorities, such as Jews, Arabs, Balochis and Kurds, complain of racial or religious discrimination [citation needed]. The government has also held down (occasionally violently) political groups that mobilise around ethnicity."

As I think it reflects on actual stated policy - as set down in the constitution - and also introduces themes explored in the rest of the section. I think the current wording is vague and POV and needs changing.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Paragraph change

This is, in my mind, original research and not a neutral point of view: "While, many of these ethnic groups have their own languages, cultures, and often literature, their languages and cultures are essentially regional variations of Persian and are all native to Iran, similar to the relationship between Welsh, Scottish, and English cultures, which are all similar and are native to Britain. Despite their overwhelming similarities, in modern times, their differences occasionally emerge as political ambitions, largely as a result of provocation from outside powers. One of the major internal policy challenges during the centuries up until now for most or all Iranian governments has been to find the appropriate and balanced approach to the difficulties and opportunities caused by this diversity, particularly as this internal diversity has often been readily utilized by foreign powers."

This plays down the cultural differences within the Iranian population and portrays them as some foreign-instigated unrest, which is the Iranian government's line. Iran is, in fact, a heterogeneous society. It would be unique - in fact miraculous - if Iranian society was naturally harmonious. In the current climate of political repression, I think it is accepted that ethnic unrest is more than just a British plot but a sign of underlying social, economic, political and cultural problems. Certainly, this is the basis for UN General Assembly [1] and EU Parliament [2] resolutions on the matter, which have all recognised that ethnic minorities are subject to persecution by the government. So I propose the deletion of the above paragraph and its replacement with something more objective, which recognises that Iran is a diverse country where there have been grievances and accusations of persecution based on ethnicity and religion.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Why Are We Undermining Our Unity?

Persian refers to all citizens of Iran or Iranian nationals before 1935. Since then, we have been referred to as Iranians by the West. Hopefully there are no disagreements here.

Confusion arises from the fact the there is no English word or equivalent for the people that we refer to as "Fars". Translating this word into English as "Persian" leaves the impression that the Persian speaking Iranians are somehow more Persian than others! I am puzzled as to why we are creating such divisions in our country, particularly when all Iranians have played an important role in our country's history.

To alleviate these problems, I propose using the correct term "Fars" to replace the word Persian when referring to anything to do with ethnicity in the English language, and be adamant about the use of this new word.

It is also worth mentioning that "Fars" is only a reference to Iranians who are from regions of Iran with no secondary language. These regions have substantially different traditions and varying historical significance and fitting them into a single ethnic group creates a misleading majority who seem to have played a more important role in Iran's history.

A simple new word, at least in the English language, would eliminate much of this unnecessary and couter-productive clarifcation of Iranians.

Regards, Behrou Ghazizadeh
Toronto, Canada —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.210.40.154 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 15 January 2007.

Statistics

These statistics should be given in the article (at least the first category):

Ethnic groups: Persians 35%, Azeris 37.5%, Gilaki-Mazandarani 8%, Kurds 7%, Arabs 3%, Baloch 2%, Turkmen 2%, Lurs 2%, other 1%(based on CIA data)

Languages: Persian and Persian dialects 35%, Turkic languages 37.5%, Kurdish 9%, Balochi 1%, Arabic 1%, other 2%

Religions: Shi'a Muslim 89%, Sunni Muslim 9%, Zoroastrian, Jewish, Christian, and Bahá'í 2%
Badagnani 19:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Template

This template: {{Asia topic|Ethnic groups in}} should be added to the article. Badagnani 19:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Houshyar - RV without review

Houshyar did you even look at what you're reverting? I reformatted all references that were already there to look properly with citations and added 1 more references. I removed that reference now, so please, discuss your edits now in here, exactly as you said in your previous revert. Here is the reference which I want to add, bring your preferrably scholarly arguments to oppose CSIS expert:

According to Edward Luttwak of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washigton-based think-tank:

"out of Iran's population of 70 million or so, 51 per cent are ethnically Persian, 24 per cent are Turks ("Azeris" is the term used by the regime), with other minorities comprising the remaining quarter. Many of Iran's 16-17 million Turks are in revolt against Persian cultural imperialism; its 5-6 million Kurds have started a serious insurgency; the Arab minority detonates bombs in Ahvaz; and Baluch tribesmen attack gendarmes and revolutionary guards... Persian nationalism is a minority position in a country where half the population is not even Persian." (Edward Luttwak, "The Middle of Nowhere", Prospect Magazine, London, May 2007, Issue 134)

Discuss your edits in detail here, otherwise, your reverts without discussion will require some attention from arbitration and mediation. Atabek 22:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Dont make POV edits (such as changing sentences to fit your POV, changing words to reflect your POV, etc...), and dont change the article drastically without discussion.Your quote from the Prospect magazine is highly POV, as it is written by a neo con in a neo con magazine, in a time when the neo cons want war with Iran. He is not a scholar and a non-biased one at that to make such determinations about Iran. He is a biased anti-Iranian government necon. It is his personal opinion and should not be included in Wikipedia, especially because he really has no credentials in this field (these are the same type of guys that said Iraq and WMD's).

Furthermore, Amnesty International mostly gets its information from seperatist groups, as it has no observers in Iran. It also frequently makes mistakes. just in the past year it claimed that Arabic is not taught in Iranian schools, yet anyone who has ever had an education in Iran knows that Arabic is taught in all Iranian schools. Amnesty International later apologized.Hajji Piruz 23:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why you're just blindly reverting the article without even looking at formatting that was done with the references that were there in first place. You can't even spell the name Baghirov properly and put the reference to the correct wikipage, and current version looks like grammatical and formatting disaster.

If you read completely what I wrote above, the source is CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies), not Amnesty International. The extent of Wikistalking and edit warring has, I presume, resulted in confusion of yours between the page on Ethnic minorities in Iran and the Azeri cartoon controversy in the Iran newspaper. This is a talk page for Ethnic Minorities, and there is no Amnesty International reference in this article. Moreover, for every reference to AI "apology" please, provide a legitimate source, preferrably from AI website, not from personal blog. Atabek 23:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about, this page is on my watchlist. LOL. Atabek, its amazing how at the same time your denying that an Arbcom between you and I is necessary, you continue to make comments like the above.Hajji Piruz 00:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The page is on your watchlist, but you did confuse two talk pages. Regarding ArbCom, I think the judges will make the right decision based on evidence, so I see no reason for your excitement, moreover, for your personal POV on this page, which has nothing to do with the topic of discussion. Atabek 12:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to say that I support Atabek's changes. As it stands, this entry is highly oriented to a certain POV - that is, ethnic minorities in Iran are happy creatures and any unhappiness is the result of foreigners. NPOV entails stating all significant opinions without bias towards one or the other. There is a significant body of opinion that ethnic minorities are oppressed in Iran - including resolutions by the UN General Assembly and the European Parliament. This should be represented fairly in this article.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I merged the two versions, removing POV stuff like "current governmental policy can be characterized by a mixture of celebrating and furthering cultural diversity" while improving the wording and flow of the lead and "the current policy" section.AlexanderPar 05:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

And I would like to note that I removed that same exact quote in my edit, which was reverted without review before. It sounded like an old Communist slogan about happiness and friendship of nations. Atabek 12:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

That is a good improvement, particularly the removal of the first paragraph of the current policy section. However, I disagree that governors are appointed from the province they originate from. I can't think of one governor of Khuzestan who was from the province or who was Arab.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 10:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

That maybe the case in Khuzestan and Kurdistan, but most provinces have local governors. While on the subject, this article lacks pictures, can you find and upload a free image of an Arab Iranian? We also need pictures of Azeris, Kurds and Gilakis or Mazandaranis. --AlexanderPar 10:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I have my own pictures, but how do I prove they are mine?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 10:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Use {GFDL-self} with a short description about the photo. Is the quality any good? AlexanderPar 10:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Here is a pic of two Ahwazi Arab boys [3] and some other children [4]--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 11:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

A picture of an old man.[5]--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 11:18, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice, but do you have a picture with subjects dressed up in local costumes?AlexanderPar 11:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking of something like this? Average people? An Ahvazi wedding perhaps?AlexanderPar 11:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

These are "average people". I have family pictures but don't want to upload them. This should be OK.[6]--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 11:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Last one is good, but the quality is poor. Do you have more? If not, let me see if I can find something free online.AlexanderPar 11:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

It was part of a larger photograph, so cropping led to a deterioration in quality. I don't think it is worse than the blurry Kurdish wedding photograph you linked to. As it will be reduced in size for this page, the quality won't matter too much. I have more, but don't have time at the moment to resize and upload. I will do something later.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 11:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The quality is really poor, please upload the other pictures soon, so if there no good candidate, I'l start looking for a free picture on the net. AlexanderPar 11:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the Kurdish picture is a lot worse. You can't see the costumes and it is blurry. Perhaps finding a better example of Kurdish culture should be a priority.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 12:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Not really, the kid's picture is not just blurry, it also lacks the right angle and composition. Please upload the other pictures soon. Thanks. AlexanderPar 12:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Hamid for improvements. I made a minor modification, there is no such thing as Russian-held Azerbaijan, it was called Azerbaijan SSR or Soviet Azerbaijan. There is a Wiki page on the topic. Also, I think the first paragraph of the article has a certain POV:

"However, historically the terms "Iran" and "Persia" have refereed to a confederation of all groups native to the Iranian Plateau, or the speakers of Iranian languages, whether located in Iran or not (e.g. Tajiks, Ossetians, etc.)."

Not all people on Iranian plateau speak Iranian languages, in fact, this form of definition, which I removed in my prior version, automatically excludes Azeris, Qashqais, Arabs, and Turkmens from the definition of Iranian nationality. Atabek 11:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Who is Hamid? My name is Alexander, and I made the improvements. It says "or", so there is no definitively on the definition, the first definition covers those who do not speak an Iranian languages, and are native to the Iranian plateau.AlexanderPar 12:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Just scroll above to find out who Hamid is, it's not hard. About your change, Baghirov was not a commander, just look at the link [7] that is referenced, which says: "Decree of the CC CPSU Politburo to Mir Bagirov CC Secretary of the Communist Party of Azerbaijan, on “Measures to Organize a Separatist Movement in Southern Azerbaijan and Other Provinces of Northern Iran”". What's commander? :)) Atabek 13:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Iranian languages and "or" usage, saying Iranian plateau already includes all peoples who live there. Unless you want to specifically outline those who speak "Iranian languages". Well then perhaps, it's not unreasonable to assume that Azeris, Turkmens, and Qashqais are not Iranian, right? Atabek 13:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

What "improvements" are you thanking Hamid for exactly? Regarding Iranian languages, Tajiks don't live on Iranian plateau.AlexanderPar 13:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

True, Tajiks haven't lived on Iranian plateau, but then the area that they live in actually was never known as Iran either. So that makes the sentence even more OR. Just look at my definition, which was much better, and was reverted without reason: "Iran is an ethnically diverse country, with Persians forming slightly over a half (51%) of the population. However, historically the term Persian referred to a confederation of all ethnic groups native to the Iranian Plateau." Again what's there in this definition the reverting users disagreed with? Atabek 16:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia or favourite quotations?

This article appears to be a collection of various quotations, used to promote one POV. This is meant to be an objective encyclopaedia, not a list of sayings and quotations. Please try to discipline yourself to writing objectively, with links to sources where appropriate.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I have placed a POV tag on the relevant section, since there appears to be no attempt by the author of this section to clean it up and ensure neutrality.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 12:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

No its not, its a legitimate section as it talks about foreign interference in trying to stir up ethnic conflict in Iran. Its fact, its been confirmed already.Hajji Piruz 16:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

They are not facts, they are a collection of opinions and unnamed "sources" quoted by journalists. Moreover, you are trying to promote the opinion that ethnic dissent is due to foreign influence, which is a point-of-view promoted by the Iranian government. Please try to write a balanced section that is not just a collection of opinions and journalism.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 17:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

They are facts, evidence has already proven US involvement in Iran. The US even confirmed that they did covert operations in Iran.Hajji Piruz 18:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

They are not facts, they are opinions and unnamed sources in newspapers, which are a long way short of verifiability. Show me one official statement from the US that they are behind ethnic unrest. Then add it to the article. In addition, rewrite the section into proper text and not just a list of quotations. I've never seen any encyclopaedia simply list quotations like this.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Your argument works both ways Ahwaz. What you call evidence can also be called "selected opinions". Was it not the opinion of the Bush team that Iraq had WMDs? Regardless, Haji Piruz is not off the mark: [8][9].--Zereshk 12:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe I have selected opinions from newspaper columnists and journalists quoting unnamed sources for this article. But if you are happy that these are verifiable and that an encyclopaedia article can simply consist of a collection of selected quotations to support a POV, then perhaps you will permit me to extend the "current policy" section to include allegations of ethnic cleansing of Ahwazi Arabs and the bombings of Balochi villages. There is plenty of informed comment in the media on this, which is far more verifiable than the "evidence" provided by User:Azerbaijani.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 14:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that descriptive texts should be added to these quotes to improve these sections. That can be done. I have plenty of sources to corroborate these quotes. It's not a secret that western countries highly favor the splitting of ME countries along ethnic lines as a guarantee for controlling them. They did it to the Ottomans and Yugoslavia, are doing it in Iraq ([10][11][12][13]), and are planing it for Iran. --Zereshk 16:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

If you have proof that all ethnic unrest is due to a US policy to split up Iran. Instead of portraying opinion and unnamed sources as fact or stringing together a series of unrelated events to form a novel conspiracy theory, try finding a government document or official speech. Incidentally, for all the atrocities committed by the Serbs, we've seen a Yugoslav state ruled by Serb chauvinists replaced by five new democracies. Also, Iran is very much in favour of a federal Iraq, even though it would oppose such a federal system on its own territory.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 16:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Get your facts straight:

• Wikipedia doesnt require govt policy statements as evidence. That's why we have journalism. To report things.
• Is there an official policy statement calling Guantanamo Bay torturing as "torture"? No. Likewise, there never will be an official policy statement regarding the instigation of ethnic unrest in Iran, because it would constitute an official violation of the UN charter. The UN specifically mentions "any recruitment, in particular mercenaries, against sovereign States to be completely inadmissible".
• "Iran is strongly opposed to all attempts to partition Iraq or impose a federal system that allows for regional autonomy.". Iran simply doesnt want to have a Republic of Kurdistan next to its borders.[14]
• Bringing democracy to Bosnia with "200,000 casualties and 1,326,000 refugees and exiles" is hardly a model worth following.
• It is you who has been staunchly advocating "conspiracy theories" against Iran left and right by throwing around POV terms like "ethnic cleansing" and "Arab Hurriya". Wikipedia is not your political platform, Ahwaz. Go make a website, and post all your anti-Iranian hatred there.--Zereshk 18:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

There is Journalism and there is journalism. You should know the difference from your own personal background. I don't think idle speculation and unnamed sources - which probably have a political agenda - are good journalism. An official or authoritative statement is necessary, or we can fill out the whole of Wikipedia with political gossip and choice quotes. I understand that it is your POV that all ethnic minorities in Iran are happy and equal members of Iranian society, others would object. For an NPOV article you need all viewpoints, not just Western apologists for the chauvinist regime in Tehran. Please try finding these. Oh, and please try to avoid your baseless personal attacks.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 19:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

And who's to judge what "speculation" is? You? That's why WP:V clearly states: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. It's important to note that verifiability in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research." But we've had this discussion before Ahwaz.--Zereshk 01:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

But I didn't speak about truth, I spoke about verifiability. The may or may not be any truth in political gossip, but the opinions and unnamed sources quoted in this article are just that. Hajji Piruz calls them "facts", but his sources include an article by Seymour Hersh (!) who quotes a "consultant with close ties to civilians in the Pentagon" (which could mean anything), a POV assertion that Richard Armitage issued a "veiled threat" when he was simply talk of Iran's demographics (what threat?), an op-ed piece by a freelance Greek journalist who claims to have spoken to an unnamed CIA operative who reveals all the details of CIA operations to him (why would a secret service agent go around revealing these details) and a similarly vague Sunday Telegraph article that quotes yet another candid yet unnamed CIA agent who says it is "no great secret" that the US funds separatists. I am sure that if I added such sources to this article to back up my POV, you would be the first calling for its deletion. No-one has gone on the record, there are no authoritative statements, there is nothing but fluff. At the very least, counter-posing arguments should be put and the text made into a more encyclopaedic style.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

But that is exactly what youre doing: Passing judgments on the veracity or truthfulness of what Seymour Hersh or the Sunday Telegraph are saying. And that is against WP policy rules.--Zereshk 12:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If I am breaking WP rules, then report me to an admin. In this article, opinion is being paraded as fact and in my mind this breaks WP rules. Seymour Hersh is clearly voicing an opinion, which Hajji Piruz calls "fact". Opinions are strung together to lead the reader into making a certain conclusion: that ethnic unrest in Iran is the result of foreign governments. This happens to be the same POV as the Iranian government. Another viewpoint is that ethnic unrest is primarily due to the Iranian government's policies of ethnic discrimination and cultural repression. In order to achieve NPOV, opinions should not be represented as fact and all significant opinions must be represented. At present, the section in question is a mess. But as I said, I would prefer to deal with Hajji Piruz than you as an intermediary or his advocate.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 13:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I would like to hear from Hajji Piruz in order to resolve this issue. I find it easier to deal directly with users instead of going through a third party or advocate.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 10:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I have removed some misquotations and POV assertions from this section, but it cannot remain as a list of quotations to construct a POV. This section could be reduced substantially, with links to sources instead of quotations of entire paragraphs.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, so my attempts to make the article more concise and reduce the size of the massive quotations has been reverted by multiple users, despite the fact that all the points made are kept in the article. So, please tell me what is actually wrong with my edits. Or should this article be a collection of lengthy quotes? You want a debate on the editorial issue, so please engage in one instead of reverting everything I do to the article.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:13, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

john bradley

There is no excuse of removing John Bradley quote. It is well-respceted expert published in well-known journal. --Dacy69 19:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Prove it!--Pejman47 19:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It is Washigton Quaterly - we don't need prove its notability. All information in the source. What I will prove however during upcoming Arbcom case is what you are dioing is disruptive editing without discussion and removal of referenced info. --Dacy69 19:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

you didn't answer my question, Washigton Quaterly (note the red!) and john bradley, --Pejman47 19:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

as I know it is not at all a prestigious magazine, maybe just an article found it by searching and handpicking in Google, I have bookmarked this threatening behavior. --Pejman47 19:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hm. You have mistyped Washington Quarterly - I hope it is by mistake. One of the biggest e-library database MUSE list WQ as "an essential source of incisive, independent thinking about our changing world." [15] This Wikipedia page contain a lot more questionable sources, indeed. WQ is much more reliable source rather than some listed in this article. One of the issue which I requested to address during the Arbcom case where you are involved as well, the use of sources. Bookmark this as well--Dacy69 19:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I copy paste it from you!, look above, and still you didn't show any indication that it Johan Bradley is "well-respceted expert"--Pejman47 19:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Pls. be more specific what you copy pasted from me and where. Anyway, with WQ we sorted out. It one step forward. Now your question about John Bradley. He is well known expert - published several books, including on the Middle East [16], published in Asia Times which are amptly quoted in Wikipedia [17], WQ, gave interview to CNN, and other publications. His book in amazon.com [18].--Dacy69 21:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

John Bradley's website is here: [19]. He is well known for his Arabic language journalism. He is interviewed here [20] and here [21]--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 22:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If mere quotational format was your concern with the article, you wouldnt be deleting half the article and expunging all the sources, especially while I was adding sources and fixing the text. Your disregard of other editors is not appreciated at all.--Zereshk 15:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't delete half the article. I took out the quotes, replaced them with a more concise description and left the links (I also did this with the claims made my Amnesty), although I did take out a clear misquotations and removed a POV claim that Richard Armitage made a veiled threat when all he did was describe Iran's demography. I was blind reverted, of course.

I asked an admin about the format of quotations and he agrees that there are too many and that some could be removed, although he doesn't say which.[22]

If you think I am disregarding editors and disrupting the article, then report me to an admin.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 15:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

If you wish.--Zereshk 18:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

No you did not. You deleted all the sources I had added, and did not replace them.--Zereshk 16:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

You added this [23]. But you seemed to confuse the policies of Imperial Russia with the Soviet Union. There was not pact between the British and the Soviet Union for the spheres of influence, this related to a previous agreement. As for "Soviet tentacles", it was the October Revolution that brought the Bolsheviks to power not the Octopus Revolution!

Aside from my edits to your edits, please state your objections to my other edits, which were intended to cut down the massive quotations that make this look more like an under-graduate essay than an encyclopaedic entry.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 16:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Interesting that you claim that Bernard Lewis proposed the "Balkanisation of Iran" long before Yugoslavia broke up. Is the use of this word intended to be emotive?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 17:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Ahwaz, just look up the sources I gave. Dont argue with me what is and is not correct according to your education.--Zereshk 17:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by Dont argue with me what is and is not correct according to your education?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 17:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It means that the "under-graduate essay" has provided proper citation to references. LOOK THEM UP instead of arguing with me why Patrick Clawson uses the word "tentacles", or why Bernard Lewis said what he said. It's not your or my business to judge Lewis' statements.--Zereshk 18:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

All,

Just FYI, I only expanded the section, inlined some quotations so that Ahwaz's concern would be alleviated, and edited some sentences to be more concise. And I did this without any deletion of sources, as Ahwaz tried to do. Hope that works for all. Please, do not delete anything without first discussing it.--Zereshk 16:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

My proposed changes

Here is a list of the edits I made and the reasons I made them:

1. This [24] refers to a "veiled threat", but there is no threat in the quotation or the original article. It is a statement of fact about Iran's demography. It doesn't need to be in this article. The link doesn't work either.
2. The division of Iran into "spheres of influence" was an aspect of the Anglo-Russian Treaty of 1907, which was signed by Imperial Russia not the Soviet Union. This section either needs to be deleted or reworded.[25]
3. This is a misquotation of James Woolsey. [26] He did not say the things attributed to him; the author of the article made the statement about paying attention to ethnic fissures.
4. The Amnesty quote can be shortened. This is my suggestion.[27]
5. Most provincial governors are not necessarily members of the relevant ethnic groups of the provinces they are appointed to.[28]
6. The Bradley quote can be radically shortened without losing its original meaning.[29]
7. The same is true of the Frye quote[30]
8. I don't know what could be the problem with this edit.[31]
9. This was my attempt to make the foreign influence section shorter by removing excessive quotations and putting their content within the text. If you read it, you will see that it still contains the unnamed CIA sources (with links to the Athanasiadis, Hersh and Sunday Telegraph articles), the Russian policy towards Southern Azerbaijan and Kurdistan, the Scott Ritter claim and the meeting between Pentagon officials and an Azeri rights activist. [32] There simply isn't any need to quote large paragraphs since the meaning can be stated more concisely. However, even after these edits, I think there is a POV problem.
10. I thought the historical section should precede the current policy section for the sake of chronology.[33]

I would like feedback on each of the 10 edits and why there is an objection to each of them. If the problem is only one or two, then the rest can go in without controversy.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 16:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #1: The link is now fixed. Armitage's statement is significant. Such statements are considered by many states (such as China) as violating United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2131(XX). Also, it shows how obsessed American officials are with Iran's ethnic minorities, which is very unusual.--Zereshk 17:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Could you tell me where the threat is in his statement? It seems so veiled that it is invisible.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

It's invisible because I took the word "threat" out.--Zereshk 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #2: Reworded.--Zereshk 17:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #3: Incorrect. Woolsey actually said that: [34].--Zereshk 17:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, it was not clear in the original link.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #5: I dont think this claim can be verified one way or another. Nonlocal officials are appointed in many places. It's not a government policy. For example Ata'ollah Mohajerani represented Shiraz in Iran's parliament, even though he was not a local of the city. Being a Persian is not a criteria for appointment. You can be an Arab and be governor, as long as you support the official stance of Tehran.--Zereshk 17:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure, I agree, but it is equally not true that all governors are appointed from their own ethnic group. This is what I have a problem with in the article.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Iran's top leader is not a Persian either. So? Why must you blow this ethnic thing into stellar proportions?--Zereshk 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #7: Your version is way too short, and it does omit very important sentences. I too propose a shortened version, but not as short as yours. I propose the quote say:

"Although many languages and dialects are spoken in the country, and different forms of social life, the dominant influence of the Persian language and culture has created a solidarity complex of great strength. This was revealed in the Iran-Iraq War when Arabs of Khuzestan did not join the invaders, and earlier when Azeris did not rally to their northern cousins after World War II, when Soviet forces occupied Azerbaijan. Likewise the Baluch, Turkmen, Armenians and Kurds, although with bonds to their kinsmen on the other side of borders, are conscious of the power and richness of Persian culture and willing to participate in it."--Zereshk 17:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I still think this is unnecessarily long. It seems that Frye is trying to say that Iran's ethnic groups believe that Persians are so culturally superior they could not live without them.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

He doesnt use the word "superior". That's your take on it. I think it's very clear in what it says.--Zereshk 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

What is he saying then?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #8: agree.--Zereshk 17:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Item #9:

• "removing excessive quotations" to you is getting rid of supporting evidence that you dont like to us.
• "Sometimes the only way to get a story is to promise confidentiality," says Lucy Dalglish, executive director of Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.[35]
• Athanasiadis, Hersh, Sunday Telegraph, Scott Ritter - are completely legit sources. What's your problem? WP:V: Youre not supposed to judge what they say, as long as the source you provide from them is verifiable. IOW, it's not your position to judge the veracity of their claims. That is up to the reader. As editors, we dont make decisions for them.--Zereshk 17:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I did not suggest removing the allegations, I suggested removing excessive quotations. The links to the sources were retained along with the allegations. I actually recommended the same treatment for quotations that support the other POV: Amnesty and Bradley, for example. Stop misrepresenting me.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Youre still evading the question: why "remove" direct evidence such as quotations? How can removing evidence make the article any better? Especially since it pertains directly to the topic of the section: Foreign interference.--Zereshk 18:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

If this is about providing "evidence", then we'd have a 10MB article on this issue. My argument is that the key points can be made clearly and concisely with links to the "evidence". Quoting entire paragraphs from sources is unnecessary and is simply an attempt to give undue weight to a particular POV.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 18:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)