Talk:Iran

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

Warning

Photos: http://www.persian.asia/photos/album —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.184.53 (talk) 17:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Warning, this article is about terrorism. There are a small number of people who may explode with anger upon viewing this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.0.95 (talk) 23:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wildlife of Iran

I was thinking of adding these few lines to the Geography of Iran (section) along with this picture (source: Iran/French/FA & Wildlife of Iran):

Eurasian Lynx

"Bears in the mountains, wild sheep and goats, gazelles, wild pigs, wolves, jackals, panthers, Eurasian lynx, and foxes abound. Domestic animals include sheep, goats, cattle, horses, water buffalo, donkeys, and camels. The pheasant, partridge, stork, Eagles and falcon are native to Iran."

Detailed modern genetic analysis makes quite evident that modern day Persians are a Lost Tribe of Israel. Common words in the Persian language with Hebrew and also common names Jewish names such as Sulaiman, Daud, musa are to found in modern day Persia. Also Israel and original home of the Jewish people Babylon is next to Iran. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.43.168.82 (talk) 20:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

SSZ (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Please remove the picture of the Lynx. The map of Iran was in just the right place. We don't need a picture for everything mentioned on th page. There are enough pictures in that section.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 21:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to remove the picture for that reason. Just move it around. I have rephrased the last paragraph as per recommendation below.SSZ (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I moved this section because it was at the top of the page and I feared that if someone added a comment a day or two after the last comment no one will see it. Please except my apologies if any trouble has been caused.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 14:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you keep the order for the interventions on this talk page because what you say is valid for ANY interventions. (logic)SSZ (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

When you put the Jungle picture in the article and said it had been discussed I think you were referring to this section. First of all I would like to say that it is a lovely picture and I would like to complement Argooya on his photographic skills. However I would like to point out that the average number of images per section is 3.9 (including introduction). This includes the massive number of images (thirteen) in the history section, which raises the average almost a whole image per section. I think six pictures are too much for 7 paragraphs, one of which is only a couple of sentences. It also pushes the map of Iran down so half of it is in the history section. This time we can't move it around because there is no more space. I did consider removing another picture, but Damavand is a natural feature symbolic of Iran and a satellite image in afew featured articles like Canada. It seems that the Lynx picture is proffered and it would be unfair to have three images relating to the environment and natural features. Removing the map of Iranian provinces is out of the question and it or a map similar to it has been in the article since I first joined under manu_kian_maheri 3 or 4 years ago. The Azadi Tower is also a symbol of Iran like the Eiffel Tower or the Statue of Liberty so I thought we should keep it. So, only three options remain: We either lengthen the geography section (but the article is too big already and this is difficult), or we could make a separate section for the wildlife section and move the Lynx picture there(I think this is a bit radical),or finally, and more sensibly we could just remove it. Anyway all of you know that the jungle only covers a small part of Iran and if we need another picture in the geography section I strongly suggest that it depicts a mountainous or arid or semi-arid area. If you see a problem in my logic please say so. I would also like to say that the sentences on wildlife are now a lot better and that it is a valuable piece of text in the article,Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 14:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

First I did NOT put the picture of the Jungle in this section or anywhere else. You keep confusing me with someone else - second time this happens! :-) Secondly, I agree that the Jungle picture needs to be discussed FIRST on this talk page (like for ANY picture). I wouldn't vote for its inclusion on Iran's page because it is "too generic" and mostly because we have enough pictures already. I would personally move it to Geography of Iran instead. Kind regards, SSZ (talk) 15:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry AGAIN! I don't know why I mistook you for someone else again. My sincere apologies.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 08:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

NO problem. SSZ (talk) 12:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Bordering Countries

It say that Iran borders Russia and Kazahkstan, I can see this being true if you count the water border of the Caspian Sea, but in the Caspian Sea Article, it doesn't say anything

Tanneropia (talk) 00:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)Tanneropia

Needs better pictures

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/08/iran-archaeology/iran-photography (Cyrus tomb) http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/08/iran-archaeology/iran-photography (Persian griffin) http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/08/iran-archaeology/iran-photography (Persepolis) http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2008/08/iran-archaeology/iran-photography (Persepolis) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.144.241 (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

dating back to 7000 BC.

Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 7000 BC And Human settlement on the territory of Iran dates back to at least 9000 BC.

(Amirmk (talk) 00:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC))

Yeah but who's gonna find that among that amount of redundant rubbish under history section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micronie (talk • contribs) 11:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

• As for 7000 BC, I made a similar remark on this talk page (now archived) which remained unheeded. Consider, for instance, the relatively recent findings in Darreh-ye Bolāghi, which belong to the Bakun period, corresponding to the 5th millennium BC. For details consult: Iran: Darre-ye Bolāghi, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. --BF 17:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Media Supertask

dear super task your I cannot open the link http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9371723 but the other one states "petty Median chieftain subject to the kingdom of Mannai in modern Iranian Azerbaijan; later tradition made him the founder of the Median empire. " It says that he was first a subject of Mannai but then managed to establish (his own) Median empire. Also in the Irnian books is he recognized as the establisher of the Median empire. The confusion comes [put simply] because it is assumed that after a period Median throne got conquered( by the Scythians probably), but the Median royal clan again defeated them. See Diakonov on the History of Media.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 01:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC) See my talk page for more--Babakexorramdin (talk) 10:55, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

---

This sentence might need further investigation: "Iran is home to one of the world's oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 4000 BC" - the site at Göbekli Tepe is said to be from 10.-11.000 BC - and that's the responsible archaelogist who says so..

Jan Eskildsen ¨¨¨¨ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.57.196.2 (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Iran in the Dutch Empire

Hello everyone! There is a discussion at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map, because user Red4tribe has made a map of the Dutch Empire (Image:Dutch Empire 4.png) that includes significative parts of Iran. Would you like to comment? Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

New Map http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dutch_Empire_new.PNG http://www.colonialvoyage.com/ square=tradingpost (Red4tribe (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC))

Still OR, POV and unsourced (yours is not not a credible source). Please discuss stuff at Talk:Dutch Empire#Request For Comment: Map. This was just a request for comment, not a discussion. Thank you. The Ogre (talk) 16:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

the map is not correct, not only with regard to Iran but also elsewhere. In general the situation was like this: 1- there were lands which were controlled by Dutch, for example the Netherlands but also Batavia (Java). 2- There were "handelsposten" along the coasts that were controlled by the Dutch, but the "achterland" were not controlled. finally 3- there were places which were not under Dutch control but the Dutch were there for trade for example places in Iran and Japan.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 01:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

New Images & Policy

1. Mr. Samadi has proposed this picture for the demography section:

Changes in population of Iran

I think it is good and I propose to replace the pyramid of age with this picture (basically same info but easier to understand.)

2. Somebody else wanted to replace another picture: Generally speaking and for the future do we want to keep consensus as a rule before uploading new images on Iran's page? Please share your views, otherwise I will assume we keep it as it is now: that is, to discuss any new image on this talk page FIRST so people can comment on it. SSZ (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no specific opinion as to whether the picture proposed by Mr Samadi should replace another one. However, if it is decided to add the proposed picture to the main text, I suggest that the 6 zeros of the population numbers be suppressed; to compensate for this, either along the vertical axis or in the caption be mentioned that the numbers along the vertical axis are in units of 1000,000. As it stands, the six zeros are redundant and unnecessarily take too much space. --BF 21:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. we should replace 80,0000,0000 with "80K", 70,000,000 with "70K" and so on. However, I let Mr. Samadi change his file and upload the new image (if he wants to).SSZ (talk) 07:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will change it. But, when I want to create that image, I followed the pattern used in these images: Image:US Population Graph - 1790 to 2000.svg & Image:Historical population of NYS.png. These images are used in Demographics of the United States & New York, respectively. Thanks. --M samadi (talk) 07:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear M samadi, the examples to which you refer are in my opinion not really conform the prevailing standards: not only do the six zeros convey no meaningful information, they are even visually disturbing (this fact notwithstanding, please note that the lengths of the numbers amount to one-third of the total length of the actual diagram along the horizontal axis, which make the diagram to look rather disproportionate). SSZ has suggested to make "80,000,000" into "80K", etc. Firstly, "K" stands for "Kilo", $10^{3}$, so that "80K" would mean "80,000" (incidentally, the standard symbol for "Kilo" is "k" and not "K"); "M" (and not "m"), denoting "Mega", $10^{6}$, is the symbol to be used. Secondly, it is not necessary to let "M" follow all numbers, which would be replacing one redundancy with another; letting the highest number (in the present case "80") to be followed by "M" would suffice. However, since a good number of people would not know what exactly "M" stands for, I suggest one of the following two options: (1) Add a vertical text to the vertical axis, such as "[Million]", or (2) indicate in the caption that "population numbers are in units of 1,000,000", or something similar. Incidentally, the diagram proposed by M samadi very nicely shows three distinguishable population-growth rates, corresponding, roughly, to pre-revolution, war-years and post-war-years periods; it seems that the rate of the post-war years nearly coincides with that of the pre-revolution years. M samadi: could you please determine (numerically, using linear regression) the slopes of the last-mentioned three straight lines and indicate the results in the caption of the figure? Kind regards, --BF 09:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Which one do you prefer? Image:Iran Population 1880-2005.JPG or Image:Iran Population Change 1956-2006.JPG? I can adjust other settings such as color or gridlines. But one of them includes the estimated values since 1881. I used the persian version of the latter in this article --M samadi (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear M samadi, my preference goes to the first diagram (i.e. the one covering the period 1880-2005) for the simple reason that it is more complete and therefore more valuable. One suggestion however. Although personally I have no problem with the number representation along the time axis, I can imagine that some people might have problem with it. Consequently, I should like to suggest that you present years in intervals of twenty years so as to create space for numbers to be presented in the usual manner (in this way, only the years 1880, 1900, ..., 2000 will be shown). There is also the possibility of showing the numbers obliquely (let us say at 45 degrees). Could you please also make the dots (or circles) slightly larger so that the distinction between the interpolation curve and the actual data points becomes more evident? One other thing: you might also consider the possibility of showing the derivative with respect to time of the interpolation curve as an inset — the rate of growth or of decline (specifically the locations of near discontinuities in the rate) invariably signify social/economic/natural events that one can easily identify. For instance the kink at 1978 really coincides with the pre-revolution time when many people were staying at home (because of the strikes), and consequently, well, procreating. I very vividly remember that time, when almost every woman seemed to be either pregnant or mother of a new-born baby. Further, by the end of the WWI, Iran suffered from a severe famine (which was partly, but not entirely, a result of profiteering of some merchants and middlemen). I believe the kink in the data points just past 1920, signifies this famine (although counter-intuitive, when humans are faced with mortal danger they reproduce more, apparently to save their race/genes). With kind regards, --BF 14:15, 8 May 2008 (UTC).

Thanks for your suggestions. I agree with your idea about oblique numbers. Because if I present years in intervals of 20 years, the end of the x-axis (year 2010) remains without number that is a little unsuitable. I will also increase the size of dots in the diagram. But about the line slope and attributing the changes to events, I think there is not enough space in the diagram to present so much information. I think it is better to analyze the graph in the article. Do you have any idea about the color? white is better or gray?--M samadi (talk) 14:41, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear M samadi, I go for grey (preferably light grey) as it creates a nice contrast with the background which is white. As for the inset, the north-west part of the 1880-2006 diagram is empty, in contrast to the 1956-2005 diagram, so there is some space for an inset. In any case, please do whatever you feel most comfortable with. Kind regards, --BF 14:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC).

I uploaded the new image and used it in the article. --M samadi (talk) 22:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. The image looks wonderful. Kind regards, --BF 22:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I would have prefered a color picture instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.242.209 (talk) 17:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we talk about current issues on this page and other events linked o Iran?

Is it possible to discuss current events in Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Iraq and the Gulf in relation to Iran. I think US war preparations are very relevant and should be talked about on the page with a link to a whole new page.

This article for example could be used as a source and it explains the link between tensions in Lebanon with war preparations against Iran and Syria. [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.162.131 (talk) 00:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

It is by no doubt a prophoganda article. If what you have to write is nothing like : Iran naturally should be the world 1st scientific superpower, or that the history of iran is more glories than those of all other countries so it will be useless to try writing it here, it will soon be deleted.

You should also avoid writing about that iran executing and executed teens who were blamed for being too provocative-even when it had no factual basis. Don't remind the traffic problems this 1st world country have or that their supreme leader, kaminnai, declare at 1980 that he is willing to put iran on fire if it will strength the islam, and that their great present president doing is best to get into an apocalyptic nuclear war with Israel and that he is being supported by many Iranians. You should also avoid telling that about 150,000 academics are leaving this country each year or about anything else that have no good sources-i.e., those of official iran government .

Demographics & Homosexuality

Here's a thought: the country's president claims there are no homosexuals living in Iran. I think at some point this should appear under demographics as this is not common among other countries and it clearly identifies a unique situation in Iran. In contrast to a different statistic, literacy rate for example, I think this piece of information on Iran is deserving of attention. Not to mention the fact that homosexuality isn't even touched under the main articles of demography or Iranian people.

If an expert on this topic cannot be found, I believe the statement by the country's president should be used to substantiate this.

Reference: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hATGOzv6YSmgeMY1zdYbdpyrG2cw

68.144.98.178 (talk) 14:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

This is an opportunity for me to mention a matter or two that to my opinion have not been touched upon in the media. Before doing so, it is appropriate to remind ourselves of what the President has said:

"No gays in Iran, says Ahmadinejad", YouTube.

Explicitly, he said: "We in Iran do not have gays like in your countries".

Firstly, I am not an Ahmadinejad apologist, but believe that integrity demands that I should say what our sound-bite media fail even to try to understand. The qualification of Mr Ahmadinejad, namely "like in your countries", is the key component of his response. To appreciate this, one has to realise the cultural differences and the social background of in particular Mr Ahmadinejad. (I grew up in Iran and consequently know the nuances that are relevant for this understanding.) The perceptions of almost all Iranians who have not had experience of living in Western countries are informed by two implicit assumptions: Firstly, that all homosexual men were paedophiles, or pederasts. Historically, one may argue that pederasty entered into Iranian culture following Alexander's victory over Iran; to understand the extent of pederasty in Iran, in particular during the Qajar era (those who are familiar merely with the poetry of Iraj Mirza must be well-aware of the extent of this phenomenan — somewhere he says, in the most elegant verse, Khodā-yā bach'che-bāzi khod che kār ast - Ke bar ān ālem-o āmi do-chār ast?, which very roughly translates as: O God what is pederasty for an occupation - In which both the learned and the common men are involved?), but also in other eras (Soltan Mahmood Ghaznavi had a boy lover named Ayāz) (read the poetry of Vahshi Bafghi whose mere residence in Qazvin has made that to say that someone is from Qazvin has become an euphemism for saying that that person is a pederast), one has to read the excellent book by Afsaneh Najmabadi, Women with Mustaches and Men without Beards: Gender and Sexual Anxieties of Iranian Modernity (University of California Press, 2005). ISBN 0-520-24263-7. Insofar as I am aware, pederasty remains rife in today's Afghanistan, another outpost of Alexander's army, and that is the major reason why the Taliban régime insisted on young men wearing beards and banned Western-style haircuts for men (ask any journalist who has spent some time in Afghanistan, and they will tell you the stories of some powerful men fighting with each other for gaining the favour of a young boy with whom they may have fallen in love). Secondly, Iranian society being a patriarchal society, it is unable to recognise that gay women can even exist. Now, given the above-mentioned two cultural assumptions, when Mr Ahmadinejd said that "We in Iran do not have gays like in your countries", in my opinion he was just expressing his cultural prejudices, that unlike in your countries, where homosexuals have a life of their own, in Iran they prey on children.

As for the execution of gays in Iran, I am only familiar with the case of Mahmoud Asghari and Ayaz Marhooni [2]. Before going into details, I must declare that I am principally against capital punishment, no matter what the crime may be that precipitates this punishment. Insofar as I know, these two men were not hanged for being homosexuals. The actual story behind the hanging of these two men was first published in the German magazine der Spiegel and I have my information from this story; surprisingly, der Spiegel never has attempted to refer to this story in their later reports (conform the line that Iran were an axis of evil), in spite of the fact that to my best knowledge they have never retracted the story (I read der Spiegel almost every day). Mahmoud Asghari and Ayaz Marhooni's crime had been to prey on a five-year old boy and practice sodomy on him for three years; they did that by blackmailing the boy over this entire period. After three years, one day this boy had decided to decline to submit to the perverted demands of these two grown-up men and told about this vile crime to his father who had immediately reported the case to the local police. Subsequent to this, the local court convicted these two men to death by hanging for raping a minor over a period of three years. (To say that these two men were hanged for homosexuality, is therefore tantamount to falling prey to the above-mentioned Iranian prejudice that equates homosexual men with paedophiles.) Since death sentences in Iran have to be approved by the authorities in the highest court in the capital city, the case was subsequently sent to Tehran. In principle, Tehran would commute the death penalties to life sentences had these young men not had previous criminal convictions. However, investigations in Tehran had revealed that these two men had once been arrested for offences related to smuggling drugs as well as theft. As a result, they did not show leniency and approved the death sentences handed out by the provincial court. Thus came to pass that these two young men were sadly hanged. According to der Spiegel, the entire village had been jubilant after these two young men had been hanged, for having been rid of two perverted men; the father of the victim had been offering people in the village sweets, exclaiming that it had been the best day of his life (this is called rough justice, as also practised in the USA where family members of victims are invited to witness executions and where after these executions the family members of victims express their jubilant mood for having witnessed the justice to have been done — please talk to Clive Stafford Smith [3], and he will confirm this account which I have from him through one of his television documentaries). As I mentioned above, all these details were published in der Spiegel — perhaps by searching the Internet, one can retrieve this report. The question arises as to whether Mahmoud Asghari and Ayaz Marhooni had been minors at the time of committing their crimes. According to Iranian law they were not (please read the Iranian Constitution, available on the website of Majles, the Iranian Parliament, (English), (Persian)). However, Iran being a signatory to the international conventions pertaining to human rights, one can make a very strong case that Iranian constitution is on this particular issue in conflict with Iran's international obligations. In other words, in principle Iran's case must be dealt with by the International Court of Justice, for some of her internal laws being in conflict with the corresponding international laws to which she is a signatory. So long as this has not been done, executions of Mahmoud Asghari and Ayaz Marhooni remain consistent within the Iranian judicial system, as these men had been raping a minor over an extended period (intent of abuse of a minor is hereby proven beyond any reasonable doubt), during which period they were considered as legally fully mature individuals, and therefore answerable to law's demands, according to the explicit definition of the notion of maturity by the Iranian Constitution.

Kind regards, --BF 13:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Your insights into Iranian culture and history lend a great deal to this section. What does seem to stand out of your otherwise seamless expression is that you support the idea that pederastry was introduced by Alexander. This idea seems a little naive, don't you think? And linking homosexuality with pederastry is a rather shallow explanation of why the Iranian religious leaders and by extension Iranian society deem homosexuality a morally repugnant issue. Nina137.111.47.29 (talk) 07:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nina, firstly, thank you for your compliments. Secondly, since you write pederasty as "pederastry", I am inclined to believe that you may not be familiar with the history of pederasty so that an apology from you, for having accused me of naivety, might not be amiss. You do not need to read any history of pederasty; read, for instance, Socrates' Apology by Plato, and you will realise that the people involved must have been totally preoccupied with pederasty; every paragraph contains some details about some boy lover (someone who finds paedophilia abhorrent, will find it difficult to read these texts). Look at the illustrations on ancient Greek vases, eating plates, etc., and what you see is some grown-up man engaged in a sexual activity with some under-aged boy or young man (all illustrations depicting a young boy having a hen, a rabbit, or some other house animals in his hands, is a depiction of a boy after a sexual encounter with a grown-up man — at some stage a law had been passed in Ancient Greece whereby men who in their young age had received money for their sexual encounters with old men were barred from high office, on account of having engaged in prostitution, and hence use of house animals as "rewards"). You may also consider to read the history of Sparta. I personally am not aware of anything even remotely approaching these things originating from Ancient Persia. Look for instance at the illustrations on the ancient Persian vases and glassware, and what you see consists of illustrations of flowers, birds, hunting scenes, and similar things. Read Xenophon's Cyropeadia in order to see how a Persian prince was educated. I am not saying that incidents of pederasty in Ancient Persia can be ruled out, but that it cannot have been part of Persian culture; that it must have been viewed as an unacceptable way of life. Compare this with incest, which occurs within all societies and cultures, despite the fact that it is unacceptable in all societies and cultures. You must realise that Zoroastrianism is a very tough religion. If Judaism, Christianity and Islam are tough on matters sexual, then one has to realise that the three have their roots in Zoroastrianism.

You subsequently say:

"And linking homosexuality with pederastry [sic] is a rather shallow explanation of why the Iranian religious leaders and by extension Iranian society deem homosexuality a morally repugnant issue."

What can I do with this statement? Your statement contains a value judgement, whereas nowhere in my above text had I attempted to introduce a value judgement! I just wrote on the perceptions of the overwhelming majority of Iranians (those who have not been exposed to alternative viewpoints) concerning homosexual men; it is utterly irrelevant whether this explanation is "shallow" or deep — I had not set out to introduce philosophically deep notions, but record my personal observations of a culture that I believe I know well. Kind regards, --BF 14:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear BehnamFarid, I appreciate your responses. I am unfamiliar with the variations of the word pederast because it is seldom used in my particular culture, but thank you for educating me in this domain. My suggestion that you supported the idea that pederasty was introduced by Alexander came from the general feeling that in my view the position reflects a mildly narcissistic view of Persian history. I apologise if this is incorrect. This is why I later used the word shallow, to suggest that if there are more complex reasons for the current view of homosexuality in Iran that they could have been elaborated with a little more care, as your references to depictions of pederasty in ancient greek artwork have done. Then, however, I would have most likely have made a reference to the fact that many erotic roman artworks, for instance, have been destroyed by more puritanical governments between now and when they were created. Regardless, it was not meant to be an attack at all, but rather a request for elaboration. My prime motivation for wanting a distinction drawn in this area (between the prevalence of the activity and the underlying pathological reasons for it) is that to suggest that one particular culture can not manifest such a dysfunction leads to (in my view) a danger that the practice might be much more rife than previously thought, and therefore untreated. I was mindful that you were making a reference to what many Iranians think, although the part that I questioned was where you said that "it could be argued that pederasty entered Persian culture... etc". It could be argued by one person, which is not to say that it is a valid thing to say that it is the motivation behind the majority's views on the subject. It would have perhaps held more weight for you to say that it was your personal view that it was why the majority felt that way, as it would implicitly let everyone know that you work under the assumption that there is no such thing as an historical fact. Nina137.111.47.29 (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nina, thank you for your kind response. One linguistic remark concerning your statement "I apologise if this is incorrect." Apologies containing conditional words, such as "if", are not apologies, even though they are almost invariably mistaken as apologies. Consequently, I am not certain whether you apologised at all.

Now you suggest that historical evidence with regard to the practice and/or prevalence of pederasty in Ancient Persia might have been destroyed by the puritanical. This is theoretically possible, however one cannot put any value on speculations in discussing historical events; no serious historian relies on speculation in the absence of at least a single supporting historical evidence. You may be aware that the former Secretary of Defence of the USA, Mr Donald Rumsfeld, once brazenly expounded on the subject matter of "unknown unknowns". "Unknown unknowns" have no place in historiography. Many things are theoretically possible, but we cannot talk about them in any serious academic discourse regarding history, as opposed to fiction. Above all, if your argument were even plausible, Iranians must have destroyed many other historical documents related to the practice of pederasty, which they have not. Two examples. First, here is Shah Abbas I having a wine-page in his arms: [4] (for details, please consult Shah Abbas I; please read in particular the caption of the figure). Second, here is the boy-lover of Soltan Mahmoud Ghaznavi, Ayaz, accompanying Soltan Mahmoud: [5] (interestingly, Shah Abbas I is also in the company; the two must have been kindred spirits). You should realise that this painting is on display in Tehran Museum of Contemporary Arts (before objecting to me that none of these boys is really a boy, that they are grown-up men, I recommend you to acquaint yourself with the conventions of the miniature drawing - further, Safavid artists were fully informed about the art of perspective; absence of realistic perspectives in Persian miniatures has a great deal of symbolic significance - Safavid painters were the first impressionist painters). The homo-erotic poems (all directed towards young boys) of Saadi, Vahshi Bafghi and Iraj Mirza, to name but three poets, are widely available and read by many. In contrast, as I wrote earlier, I am personally not aware of even a single artefact from Ancient Persia that would even remotely suggest homo-eroticism, let stand pederasty. You cannot accuse me of suffering from visual impairment, since we can together visit any museum that you may suggest, and I shall be able to draw your attention to various artefacts related to this practice. I repeat my earlier statement, that I cannot imagine Zoroastrianism tolerating pederasty in any form or under any circumstance. In my opinion, pederasty is an abominable predilection of Ancient Greeks par excellence and it was introduced into Iran following Alexander's invasion of Iran (my use of "It could be argued" was meant to avoid offending the sentiments of the Greek individulas visiting this page - to my best knowledge, not a single person who has studied the subject matter disputes the fact that pederasty was a Greek predilection). I emphasize once more, theoretically, sporadic incidents of paedophilia in Ancient Persia cannot be ruled out.

Lastly, I do not entertain any "narcissistic view of Persian history", this as evidenced by the fact that I never denied existence of pederasty in Iran subsequent to invasion of Alexander; as should be evident, the latter period also constitutes part of Iran's history. I do not know the views of the young generation of Iranians, however the views of the generation of Mr Ahmadinejad are informed by the perception that all homosexuals are in reality paedophiles in disguise. Something close to home perhaps. Oscar Wilde who is mostly known as "homosexual", was in fact a pederast (his Wikipedia biography says also as much - in this biography, he is, amongst other things, quoted as saying "Today I bade good-bye, with tears and one kiss, to the beautiful Greek boy... he is the nicest boy you ever introduced to me."). This shows that the Victorians, as well as Edwardians, saw things exactly as the generation of Mr Ahmadinejad see. It seems therefore that here in the West many of us must be suffering from an acute form of historical amnesia. Frankly, I consider a large portion of our journalists as plainly illiterate individuals (even when they are not acting as subservient mercenaries). Kind regards, --BF 16:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC).

ps) Please in writing my user-name do not put space between its two constituent parts. Thank you. --BF 16:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Iran & the Zionist media control

I would like to know if we can mention this problem on Iran's page since it affects the perception of Iran at all levels, internationally, as well the sources on which this information is based:

• Youtube video 1/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6YtxHFtX8c

• Youtube video 2/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsaeIeTGNhQ&NR=1

• Youtube video 3/3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RircMzkEUtM&feature=related

:-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.59.46.144 (talk) 19:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia IS NOT a mean for the propagation of xenophoby, inter ethnical hatred, religious hatred or any other type of discrimination regarding sexual orientation, culture, language, skin color, etc. Please feel free to erase your previous post.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.208.174.72 (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

• I don't see any "hatred towards the Jews" in this video. It is a factual description of who owns what in the American media, confirmed by many sources, including the Jewish Encyclopedia itself. I think it is important to know. SSZ (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

If wikipedia were designed to exhibit not just fact but the millions of ways that these facts are presented, with each varying nuance, wikipedia would be as bloated as a particularly bloated pufferfish. Nina137.111.47.29 (talk) 07:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Photos

Photo of the head of the state is not commonly used in such articles. See for example: France, Austria, Italy etc. I replaced the photo with Ebadi's one:

• Ebadi is a notable Iranian.
• We need a photo of an Iranian woman (not just men) in the article as well.
• Iranian opposition groups need to be visible on the page and not just the rulers.

Please add your comments if you have any. Thanks. Sangak ^Talk 08:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Then let's have both pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.242.209 (talk) 16:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The head of state is the main guy...so...he should be on the iran page instead of another person with less power than him. She's just not powerful enough(not because she hasn't accomplished much, but, there isn't enough room in the article for anyone apart from the main guy)Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 21:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC) 78.39.206.50 (talk) 07:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

A few points

There r a few points I want to discuss:

1. the title "Late modern era" (which i must admit was my idea) suggest that Iran's modern era is coming to a close. A more appropriate title may be recent history.

2. I have opposed the picture of the lynx in it's relevant section and i'll repeat why again:

• It pushes the other pictures down where they shouldn't be
• There are already a lot of images on the iran page
• A picture of iranian wildlife is not needed
• There r enough images in the geography section
• I will be removing the sentence on wildlife(see next point)

3. The sentence or two on wildlife are of no real quality because

• The first bit sounds like a poem!:b
• It's just a list of animals
• It isn't referenced
• It looks odd, and a sentence or two shouldn't make a paragraph

so i will remove the sentence until someone writes a better sentence.

4. We should remove the shirin ebadi photo because of the reason explained in the relevant section of the talk page

5. i was thinking that 2 images relating o the achaemenid empire isn't right. after all there were 5 dynasties in this period of time. Or maybe im wrong on this one?

Pronunciation

In the standard Persian pronunciation, there is no [ʔ] at the beginning of the word (it can only occur after a consonant or between a vowel and a consonant). Alefbe (talk) 19:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Amazing photographs of Iran

Dear all, I suggest that someone contact Shahram Razavi and asks him to donate some of his amazing photographs of Iran to Wikipedia. Here are some relevant links:
— Amazing Iran, — Tehran - Maga Capital of Iran, — Reflections of a Vibrant Iran, — Contemporary Iranian Architecture, — Old Tehran & Iran photos, — Armours, Costumes, Uniforms, Flags, etc., — Imperial Iran of the Qajar Dynasty, etc.

Kind regards, --BF 21:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It is a good suggestion, but till that time, can we add a link to one or more of those websites in "External Links" of the article?--M samadi (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Dear M samadi, please do that by all means. As you can testify, some of the photographs in the above-mentioned links are simply breathtakingly beautiful. The only problem with these links is that they correspond to pages where people leave comments. Incidentally, you may also consider HORIZON's page and sets on flickr. This is one of his many impressive photographs: [6], taken from this page: [7]. Kind regards, --BF 20:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

History images

I thought a bit after my edit and remembered that non of the featured articles had an image of a conquerer in it. We could replace it with a Seleucid picture but they are mostly coins. Perhaps a Median picture? It's not right that the achaemenids should have 2 pics and the medians noneArdeshire Babakan (talk) 18:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

As I mentioned in my edit-log of two days ago, no sane person in Iran refers to Alexander as "The Great". It is culturally simply not acceptable to call someone as "The Great" who has devastated a nation and her cultural heritage. The first thing this little devil did was burning out Persepolis. Yet, this was the way Alexander was called in the main text on Iran up till two days ago. In Iran Alexander is called Eskander-e Maqdunieh, which is "Alexander of Macedon", and he should be called as such in Iran-related articles. I have thus called him "Alexander III of Macedon". Incidentally, as I was writing this note, I checked and it turns out that in "Persepolis" some demented person has written the following text: "... the Persepolis captured and partly destroyed by Alexander the Great". In our times, such and similar acts of barbarism are called War Crimes and the perpetrators are not called The Great, and humanity has not changed much over the course of the past millennia: even the oldest historical records known to us call war crimes as war crimes and war criminals as war criminals. What is so great about a barbarian of first order carrying out an act of barbarism? Some taste and some judgement would not be out of place here on Wikipedia! --BF 12:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't make this personal. Remember Neutral Point Of View. In English he is referred to as the great. This isn't about what iranians call him.

"Neutral point of view is a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles, and of all article editors."

Anyway, the morals of it isn't the issue here. It's a history section, not a bloody lecture on human morals. If you want you could talk about this on the alexander page. Anyway this section was about picturesArdeshire Babakan (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Ardeshir Babakan, I recommend you to learn some language and manners, in both of which you fail abominably. If I am not mistaken, once earlier I had an encounter with you in which you proved equally rude and insolent. What is "bloody lecture" meant to mean? First learn some manners, then participate in discussions. We are not here in a gutter! You give a bad name to Iranians and I feel already sick of having encountered you twice, experiencing you in both cases as the same loutish indiviual. Last time you apologized and I accepted. This time you need not waste my time. --BF 19:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Just because I used "bloody" to emphasise my point doesn't mean that i am rude. You are the rude one.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandilisation

Isn't it great how almost any attempt to add mention to relevant political or foreign policy issues is removed, edit warr'd or defaced by Pro-Iran patriots if it makes Iran look bad in any way? Notice there is not a single mention of Hezbollah, involvement in Iraq, international diplomacy, or allegations of State Sponsored Terrorism on the entire page, despite it all of them being a major factor for how the rest of the world views Iran, as well as providing relevant encyclopedia data? Alexander (talk) 10:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC) You forgot to add the word "murder" to the word torture. Sources Olya's Story and Prisoner of Tehran. Elonce (talk) 18:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

There is definately too much pride mixed up in this article.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 18:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

"In Search of Cyrus the Great"

The interested may wish to view the following:

• A short sample of the documentary film In Search of Cyrus the Great, directed by Cyrus Kar, in production, hosted by International Committee to Save the Archaeological Sites of Pasargadae (9 min 58 sec).

Kind regards, --BF 13:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Quick action required

I have left two messages here [8] that show the urgency of an editorial action to be undertaken. --BF 15:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

History of Iran Timeline picture

I was editing the entire history section and I think it is hard for non-Iranians to understand or read the whole thing without this timeline. My suggestion is to add this picture to Iran.

What is your thought?

SSZ (talk) 22:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that readers don't have to understand much of Iran's history from the main article. Just a basic overview is enough. Unfortunately the section is a lot more than a basic overview, and that there is too much information. So, I think that if readers want to learn what the image shows and the current history section says they should read the history of Iran PAGE. So, I disagree.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I get your point and agree to a certain extend but would it not help to downsize the history section if we add this picture, since there are hyperlinks on this image to all periods of the history in Iran? SSZ (talk) 22:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I am not satisfied with colors. I think some light colors instead of red and yellow may be better.--M samadi (talk) 04:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The history section about Aryans is wrong

In the history section it says "Proto-Iranians first emerged following the separation of Indo-Iranians"....now first of all is that true? I mean who says that Indo-Iranians got sepeterated that early? I mean its the same region and the same land. Why is that a seperation? It's like saying the Americans in the east are seperated from Americans in the west. I mean yes there far. But are they seperated? Or part of the same region?......

That part goes on to say, that they "Are traced to the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex"......Didnt the Aryans come from India? I mean they had the language of Sanskrit, they followed Hinduism (or an older form of it) they had the swastik symbol, they believed in different manifestations of gods (or possibly multiple gods), India had a name like Aryaverta (which means land of the Aryans) and there is mention of Aryan heritage in Indian religious scripture. So didn't they come from India?

It also says that "Proto-Iranian tribes arrived in the Iranian plateau in the third and second millennium BC"....But if they seperated from Indo-Aryans then that means their part of the same Indian family. And if their part of the same family then they might have been there BEFORE the second or third millennium BC, because many Indo-Aryans might have been their before that date........ARYAN818 (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

the thing about Indo-Iranians is indeed hypothetical. We know that proto-Iranians and the people who moved to the Northern india shared some common mythology and that their ancient languages had the same roots. We know this because of the written sources which we have. We do not have sources from other indo-european groups which are as old as these,. But other evidences show that also Slavs and Balts shared this similarity and we do not know much about other Indo-European groups. So it remains in the hypothetical phase. I, personally, do not believe in an Indo-Iranian entity. But there are facts: The people that moved to the North India was originated in Southern Russia and central Asia. This is also believed to be true about the proto-Iranian tribes (though some theories believe that they were originated in Northwestern iran, well maybe but I do not think it is right). thease are dominant theories and I tend to agree with them. In any case Aryans did not originate in india nor did they followed Hinduism. In India lived the dark skinned people and much of Indian philosophy and wisdom like Ayurveda is attributed to them. Also the caste system is attributed to them. The arriving Indo-Aryans (who were related to the Aryans= proto Iranians)adopted the already existing system and somehow modified it. they put themselves on the top of the caste system etc... Look at the dark skinned Tamils etc... They are Hindus but are not Aryans or Indo-Europeans any way!--Babakexorramdin (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Combo reference list

The article reference list is too large . I think it's better this way . What do the other editors think ?--Alborz Fallah (talk) 17:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Great Idea.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 12:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

On the Cyrus Cylinder

For some the following may be news: Cyrus Cylinder to be returned to Iran, Cultural Heritage News Agency, Tehran, June 25, 2008, [9].
--BF 19:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

HELP FOR EDIT

the page is locked, can anyone undo this edit: [10] --Wayiran (talk) 08:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Images in the Pre-Islamic Statehood section

I think we have one too many images in the Pre-Islamic Statehood section. Three paragraphs and a quote are sandwiched between two images.Ardeshire Babakan (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

On the Epic of Köroğlu

In the event that someone is familiar with the history of the above-mentioned epic, it would be relevant to introduce some appropriate details into the pertinent Wikipedia entry (i.e. here: "Epic of Köroğlu"). The river Aras is central to this epic, and as the following remarkably beautiful stage production shows, the libretto is in Persian.

A short section of a stage production of Köroğlu, an opera by Uzeyir Hajibeyov, YouTube: [11] (10 min 55 sec).

With kind regards, --BF 02:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC).

The interested may consider the useful remarks, by User:Arkankipcak, placed here: [12]. --BF 14:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC).

what about the 1988 massacares

why are they not even mentioned?!?! this screams hypocrisy

The current history section is big and we are trying to cut down on it. However,it is hypocritical if we talk about Saddam's chemicals and not about this. I will make sure that it is mentioned in the History of Iran article. Thank you for raising this point. (If anyone wants to know more about it here is the main article)Ardeshire Babakan ^{اردشیر بابکان} (talk) 12:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The polulation of Iran and CIA world factbook ?

The article says 70 millions in 2007 while CIA world factbook says 65,8 million (2008 estimate).

The «gap» is over 4 millions. Why this big difference ? --Ezzex (talk) 12:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC) --78.39.206.50 (talk) 07:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The difference could be the number of Iranians living outside Iran; in such case, Iran counts all Iranians, whereas CIA counts all people living inside Iran (it is well-known that around 6 million Iranians live outside Iran). On the other hand, I am rather surprised by both numbers, as my understanding was/is that Iran's population was/is approaching 80 million. One possibility (not as unlikely as it might appear at first glance) is that the number of people living inside Iran is 70 million; adding the above-mentioned approximately 6 million, one obtains the number that I have variously heard as being the total number of Iranians. In such case, CIA must have mistakenly considered the 70 million as being the total number of Iranians and for calculating the number of people living inside Iran have subtracted the above-mentioned approximately 6 million. Whatever the case may be, it is remarkable that specifications of published data are so incomplete (nowhere is it specified what precisely "population number" signifies) that one can so lightly come into problem in accounting for nearly 6 million people. --BF 08:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The value 70,472,846 is according to Iran National Census which considered only Iranians living in Iran.--M samadi (talk) 04:47, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear M samadi, thank you for the information. It follows that CIA must have mistakenly considered the number mentioned by you, i.e. 70,472,846, as including the number of Iranians living outside Iran. This is exactly the second possibility to which I have referred in my above text. Clearly, such a miscalculation is not very intelligent of an Intelligence Agency, far less of a Central one. Kind regards, --BF 06:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC).

new template

I happened to stumble upon this template.

Mazanderani

Persian

Kurd

Kurd

Gilaki

Lur

Balochi

Azerbaijani

Turkmen

Qashqai

Uninhabited

Arab

Arab

Talysh

I'm going to put it in the article instead of the File:Iran peoples.jpg image.Ardeshire Babakan ^{اردشیر بابکان} (talk) 12:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC) These maps could not ne more wrong. Does anyone with a small knowledge of Iran really thinks that more than half of Hormozgan province is Arabic?! This maps are originally copies from a Russian atlas wich aimed at disinformation about the region. Copying this wrong map should stop somewhere.--ماني a.k.a. [[User:Mani1]] (talk) 11:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

pronunciation

Why there are two pronunciations given in the article: /irɒn/↔? And what the hell is the arrow supposed to mean? — Emil J. (formerly EJ) 13:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Strange Change

I couldn't find out what is the problem with this edit, But it caused some text and an image to be hidden in the article. I reverted that edit. Can anyone explain the problem?--M samadi (talk) 14:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The edit erroneously replaced empty tags <ref name="..." /> with start tags <ref name="...">. These lacked the corresponding end tags </ref>, and the parser apparently recovered from this error by ignoring the text up to the next <ref> tag. — Emil J. (formerly EJ) 14:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Iran xref Strait of Hormuz

2008 Current Events

In the last week of July 2008, Operation Brimstone brought dozens of US and foreign navys’ ships together off the US East Coast for joint exercises and practice in littoral operations (such as would be used in the shallow waters off the coast of Iran).

As of August 11, 2008, more than 40 US and allied ships are reported en route to the Straits of Hormuz. One US carrier battle group from Japan will complement two more which are already in the Gulf, for a total of five battle groups, not counting submarines.

Speculation based on the vessel listing indicates a possible intent of mounting an economic blockade against Iran.

Memzilla (talk) 14:55, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Here are raw links to the citations (they only show up under the 'edit' page):

1: http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=38478

2: http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5499

3: http://europebusines.blogspot.com/2008/08/massive-us-naval-armada-heads-for-iran.html

The last one (3) is far from reliable, and should be edited out if the section is to be added

~ John —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.65.94 (talk) 18:56, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Request for Image of ordinary life in Iran

Can someone upload a photo of children playing / in school etc. Please also make it available for other languages to use. Thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's picture

Every country page on Wikipedia has a photo of the country's current President. Why doesn't the Iran page have a photo of its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iuri.lammel (talk • contribs) 23:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

date audit

Mixed US and international formats; please advise if the international that I chose is not to your liking. Tony (talk) 08:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong info

In the infobox is stated that several languages which are named there have "constitutional recognistio". It is vague information. According to the article 15 of the Iranian constitution all local and tribal languages and dialects (ca 20) can have their literature thaught at school. This is explained in the text. No need to add an incomplete and wrong sentence into the infobox while the text explains it better.--ماني a.k.a. [[User:Mani1]] (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Mr. Mani we have had this talk before and as I said there was a consensus about this. In the article 15 is clearly to be read that these languages literature can be thaught at school and their usage in the mass media broadcasting and press are recognized. In addition there are some other articles which state that provinces can have their TV and Radio and should have the means to promote the regional cultures. The article 15 is what we call constitutional recognition. In many countries, many languages are recognized and are legal without a consutitutional legal basis. In Iran there is such a case. In other countries, usually federal countries, the language status is bound to a certain administrative unit. This however is not the case in Iran. It is what we call non-territorial consititutional recognition. Please be kind and let it be as it is in the infobox. Any reader can distinguish the status of persian as the official language and the regional languages.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 01:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Although I know there have been some misunderstanding between babak and mani , and I know taking side with one of them may be not so welcomed from the other side , I do think babak is right here . Indeed there is difference between official status of local languages in Iran , compared to neighbor countries such as Turkey that does not recognize any official state for any language other than national language . In Iran , as many as 35 local TV stations broadcast in local languages and many publications in local languages are available , so I think it should be mentioned in the info box .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

And to add , there is similar information in info- box of Pakistan, India,Turkmenistan --Alborz Fallah (talk) 16:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)and etc .

Dear Alborz Fallah, in my opinion stuffing too much information (like that sentence) into an infobox while the same sentence can be mentioned in the text make the infobox complicated and it looses its function which is giving a short and fast overview in a simplified manner. We should not let our political agendas stand in the way of these basic facts of writing a clear encyclopaedia. Also the term "constitutional recognition! of the regional languages such as! Azeri, Kurdish, and Mazandarani, and Gilaki" is a vague and wrong formulation. What do you mean by "constitutional recognition"? Are those languages allowed to be used in official governmental documents of the region? Are they used in the foreign correspondences of certains provinces? What does this term which is made up by a certain user here mean? How can a country have "constitutional recognition" for languages "SUCH AS"!? What are those languages? In Iran at least 20 languges and dialect are in use as spoken language. Do all of them fall under this case? If so this case also should be mentioned (not in the infobox which will become too heavy.) So, I am asking you not to add this vague and incorrect sentence in the infobox and do not cause further confusion for the people of the world about our country and its official language which already exists abundantly.--ماني a.k.a. [[User:Mani1]] (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

constitutional recognition is not vague. It is very clear. And let me be sincere, I do feel insulted by you. It is exactly my filed and I have explained to you exactly and honestly what does this mean, but because of your personal grudges against me you come again and again with some excuses. So constitutional recognition is not vague. It means that they are recognized by the constitution. This makes it important and worth to be mentioned in the infobox. There are countries which recognize regional languages by other than 'constitution' . But answer to your question: As I said all these languages in Iran have a non-territorial status. There are countries like Spain which say for example that catalan should be used in the official documents of the Catalan local administration etc... But other provinces use other languages. This is not the case in Iran. There are countries which have more than one offical languages like Kazakhstan etc... These have non-territorial basis too. In contrast belgium has two official languages too, French in Wallonia and Dutch in Vlaanderen. This we call teritorial statuses. In Iran we have constitutional recognition of non-offical languages on a non-territorial basis. I will be glad to answer your questions if there are any questions? --Babakexorramdin (talk) 23:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I told you not to talk to me. That message was not intended for you, because as my experience shows you have not enough knowledge of the matter. You feel glad!! to answer my auestions!!? PLLLEASE.:)) I advise you to go read some books on Iran first, before trying to edit anything further. It will save the time of the users here. Do not expect any further answer from me.--ماني a.k.a. [[User:Mani1]] (talk) 10:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)