Talk:Iran newspaper cockroach cartoon controversy

Grammar Edit

I hope despite the lock on editing someone might edit the grammar. Parts of the article are unreadable. Aestiva 00:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The broken English and the persistent weak edits has placed this article far below the standards of Wikipedia. It needs a thorough clean-up. The article suffers from bad contributions and edit warring from a few users who lack even the most rudimentary English skills. Omid.espero (talk) 09:46, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Article title

I moved the page per title suggested by Alex Bakharev [1], which is more appropriate. Thanks. Atabek 16:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The title is not neutral. It was ONE cartoon, not "cartoons" and it was perceived as being anti-Azerbaijani, its POV to say that it actually was.Hajji Piruz 16:28, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the suggestion made by Alex Bakharev should be followed. Yes, the cartoons were anti-Azerbaijani, that's why the center of protests were Azerbaijani-populated towns. I think it's important to identify these ones, because there were also other Cartoon protests in Iran over unrelated issues. Atabek 16:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed the unsourced POV about involvement of Republic of Azerbaijan or Turkey (this is even more ridiculous claim) in these protests. Atabek 16:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It was one cartoon, so why is the title plural? Also, its POV and non neutral to say that the cartoon were actually anti-Azerbaijani, as the cartoon was drawn by an Azeri.Hajji Piruz 16:31, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Its video and pictorial evidence. LOL. How can you dispute video and pictorial evidecne?Hajji Piruz 14:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)\

Youtube is personal video database. I can upload any lip which I want, produced, forged, faked, etc. The same with pictures if we don't have neutral sources proving that.--Dacy69 14:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

It does not matter who drew it. The nature was insulting to Azeri ethnicity, as protests revealed. There is nothing anti-Iranian here, just gotta speak the truth. Atabek 16:33, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Dacy, thanks for addition of sources. I think there is a duplication of text in the article, so we need to resolve that. Thanks. Atabek 16:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

yes, please I tried to regroup it. Go ahead. Important to prreserve all neccessary citations.--Dacy69 16:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The title still needs to be changed to make the article NPOV. I also took out unrelated portions of the AI quote, which is talking about other incidents that are unrelated to this. The AI report is the annual report, talking about several different events. The cartoonist was also an Azeri, I dont see why Atabek inserted "allegedly".Hajji Piruz 17:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I'll also add more information later.Hajji Piruz 17:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I see no problem with current edit. Then we can add other events (which out of tthis article scope) on page Iranian Azerbaijan and mention cartoon issue very briefly there.--Dacy69 18:37, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

No, now that this subject has its own article, its not to be spammed anywhere else, thats the point of giving events their own articles. All other mentions have to be removed and redirected here.Hajji Piruz 18:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Not removed, but linked to this page, sort of like with Musavat being pan-Turkist claims being inserted on every Azerbaijan-related page. We should also make a more comprehensive page on linguistic rights of Azerbaijanis in Iran, where other details, including events around Bazz castle shall be mentioned.Atabek 19:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Piruz, you are not establishing rules in Wikipedia. It has own and standards. Moreover, I mentioned someone changes the name of the article without discussion. That's it!!! It needs intervention of admins.--Dacy69 20:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Dacy69, you changed the name of the article without discussing it either. LOL. By the way, my proposal for changing the name is this: "Iran (newspaper) Azeri cartoon controversy", that way it matches this title "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy"Hajji Piruz 20:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I have not changed any names. I just edited page which was opened by third party mediator.--Dacy69 20:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

It was not an "Azeri cartoon", it was an anti-Azeri cartoon, that's why there were protests all over South Azerbaijan. Grandmaster 05:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

This is the only neutral title: Iran (newspaper) cockroach cartoon controversy

It also matches the title of a similar article: Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.

This title is NPOV, describes the situation, and works for everyone. Again, it also matches the title of another similar article (the Mohammad cartoons).Hajji Piruz 05:26, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No, it does not describe the nature of the controversy, i.e. anti-Azerbaijani character of the cartoon. It was not just a controversy over an Iranian newspaper, it was controversy over anti-Azerbaijani cartoon, which the title should reflect. Grandmaster 05:37, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Its an NPOV title which matches the title of an almost identical other article. Saying that the cartoon was anti-Azerbaijani in the title suggests that the cartoon was meant to be anti-Azerbaijani. Thats highly POV. The current title is very appropriate. The controversy was over a cockcroach cartoon published in the newspaper "Iran", the article title currently presents all of this in a neutral fashion.Hajji Piruz 05:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It is a matter of fact that the cartoon was anti-Azerbaijani, that’s why Azerbaijani people protested it. The title proposed by you covers up the nature of the controversy, and thus is not acceptable. Grandmaster 05:43, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Again, I will refer you to the title "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy". Grandmaster, the title is supposed to be NPOV. Its the content of the article that matters, and no one can say that anything is being hidden in the article.Hajji Piruz 05:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why article on Muhammad cartoons controversy, contains the subject of issue "Muhammad", while Azeri cartoon controversy, somehow omitted the word "Azeri". So included that and moved the article to properly reflect the subject matter. I don't understand why there is an attempt to misrepresent the issue by omitting the word Azeri and thus pretty much contradict the Amnesty International report. Atabek 08:39, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Because the cartoon was about Mohammad. As per the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, the current title is not appropriate.Hajji Piruz 14:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It was some abstract cartoon it would have not caused anything. It was related to Azerbaijanis and made them angry and caused unrest. So, title reflects the problem. And I agree fully with third party proposal. At least it neutral.--Dacy69 15:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The title needs to be neutral. I already gave you an example of a similar article title. Your POV cant impede Wikipedia's rules.Hajji Piruz 16:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The new (current) title reflects the NPOV, because: 1) the events around the publication and the following protests pertained directly to Azeris; 2) the cartoon was published in newspaper "Iran"; 3) the title is in line with the proposition made by the third party, Alex Bakharev. Atabek 17:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It was me who suggested probably the most POV-ed title, but now I think maybe Iran (newspaper) cockroach cartoon controversy or Iran (newspaper) namana cartoon controversy is better. It is not obvious that the cartoon was intended to make fun on Azeris (one side denys it) but there is certainly a cockroach and namana word on the picture Alex Bakharev 04:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Alex for commenting here, this is what I've been trying to tell them the whole time, but they have simply moved the page. I'd appreciate it if you moved the article yourself so we could end this silly dispute.Hajji Piruz 04:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

UnPOV

No POV should be used in this sensitive article, especially unsourced and unauthored charges using the word "indeed" are completely unacceptable to encyclopedic article. Atabek 08:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

hajji Piruz used unrelated image with POv statement which I removed.--Dacy69 19:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Unrelated images? I clearly showed the pan Turkic Grey Wolves symbol being used. This symbol is used by the Grey Wolves of Turkey and the Azerbaijan Republic. Its perfectly legitimate for the picture to be included. The use of that symbol is a clear indication that pan Turks, either from Turkey or the Republic of Azerbaijan or recruits in Iran, were involved in the situation. Its pictorial evidence which shows pan Turkic influence in the protests.Hajji Piruz 19:04, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No, you are stretching the point. Here we need pictures related to the event. You youself advocated this apporach. You can use pan-turkist pictures on relevant pages.I can put pictures of Iranian chauvinist, etc. Should we put picture of Putin or Bush on any related with Russian or American administration. Further, Turkic influence is Iranian government presumption - they blame everyone From israel UK, US etc. Besides, you are putting POV comment in the image.--Dacy69 19:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The picture on the left was from a protest Tabriz. LOL Dacy, I have brought pictorial proof of pan Turkist involvment in the protests. The Iranian governments suspicions are not unfounded, there are literally dozens of pictures taken by pan Turkists and posted on pan Turkist websites boasting about the pan Turkish supporters in the protests.

The funny thing is that pan Turkists acknowledge this. Again, they were the ones that took and posted the pictures on their pan Turkic websites. How are you going to deny the pan Turkic involvement? I have brought pictorial evidence.Hajji Piruz 19:22, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, if we gonna use that kind of pictures from as you told pan-turkic site - first: we should not put any our comments, second: I have the right to put other pictures from demonstration, beated people, etc. If this is what we agree - then it is balanced, and you can go ahead, I will put mine.--Dacy69 19:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you threatening me with some sort of Wiki retaliation? Thats pictorial evidence of pan Turkic influence. You can use your POV all you want, but that wont change the facts.

Your telling me that I cant put in a picture that shows pan Turks in the protests but if I do, there also has to be a picture about the police beating people? LOL, WOW.Hajji Piruz 19:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I am not threatening. I am simply trying to put some standards. For me, current outlay is ok with picture of cartoon itself. It is you who is making POV on pan-turkist involvement and put your own comments in image. So, either we keep it as it is or we gonna use other pictures. In the second case, I believe, we should first of all, use pictures of demonstrations. It is primarily related to the article. Make a choice.--Dacy69 19:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have evidence, pictures. Yes, you did threaten. Your POV means nothing here. The picture itself is proof. That symbol is used by the Grey Wolves and its party, the MHP. There is no denying that there was Grey Wolf involvment, the picture is on the web for everyone to see, and it should be in this article.

Dont threaten anyone, it wont get you anywhere.Hajji Piruz 19:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The picture added is a fake collage, not even professionally made, but assembled of two separate photos in Photoshop. This is not an encyclopedic material. Atabek 21:16, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Read the summary of the picture, I attached both pictures together to show that the symbol is also used by the MHP Grey Wolves. The Picture with the showing the Grey Wolves in Iran is from the Associated Press.Hajji Piruz 21:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I undid the collage, there should be no more problems.Hajji Piruz 21:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Where do you see the red flag with 3 crescents on the left picture? Why are you trying to damage Wikipedia with this kind of completely unacceptable POV? Don't you realize that you're insulting your own people and history doing so? Atabek 21:45, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you not see the hand symbol? It is the symbol of the MHP party and its ultra-nationalist militant wing, the Grey Wolves. There are MHP election posters showing this hand gesture. Its like the Nazi salute for them, they use it all the time. It represents the legendary wolf that supposedly led the Turkic peoples to conquer the world.

See, this is why I included the other picture, because I knew you would say "well how do you know this is the Grey Wolf hand symbol".Hajji Piruz 21:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

This is absolutely ridiculous. Then we should prepare a collage picture of Adolf Hitler with Swastika and images of Holocaust and post it on all Iran related pages, as Nazism was also based on pan-Aryan ideology and Iran official denies that it happened. Any correlation? The collage must be removed. Atabek 23:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Nazism has nothing to do with Aryan (the Asian Aryan). Why dont you read the Wiki article Aryan. There is no collage in the article. Also, the picture shows the protest and it shows some protesters clearing making the pan Turk hand gesture. Why are you trying to hide this information?Hajji Piruz 23:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes, it very much does. In fact just sufficient to check Aryanism page with all appropriate references. Especially with denial of Holocaust by Ahmadinejad and adoption of Swastika by Hitler, the connection is very very close. Atabek 23:44, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Yea, Hitler took the term Aryan and and the Indian religious symbol the swatiska and said it meant all blue eyed blond haired people, but thats not his fault, thats the fault of people like Darius the Great and people thousands of years ago who used the term Aryan...Atabek, this is pretty hilarious. Thanks for lightening up my day.

Wikipedia has a lot of articles you could read and learn about this matter.Hajji Piruz 23:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for admitting the similar ridiculousness of the collage you make in a very hopeless attempt to link protests in Iranian Azerbaijan to Republic of Azerbaijan or Turkey. Given that, both countries expelled SANAM activists and shut down broadcasts of anti-Iranian television, your attempts are simply laughable. Neither country can take responsibility for what freedom activists do in Iranian Azerbaijan, as much as Iran cannot take responsibility for actions of Nazis during World War II. Atabek 00:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

What? I never pointed the finger at anyone, I merely posted evidence depicting Grey Wolf activists protesting. Why does that upset you so much? And by the way, there are many politicians in the Republic of Azerbaijan that have Grey Wolf leanings. Elcibey for example was a Grey Wolf sympathizer and appointed a Grey Wolf in his government. I'm done with this conversation, its off topic. This is not a forum, take this via e-mail if you wish.Hajji Piruz 00:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You can't even visualize the sign that they show with their fists :) And the sentence "The symbol is used by the Grey Wolves of Turkey and Azerbaijan Republic, and may hint at foreign influence in these protests" without source :)) is a complete POV. I am not removing this unsourced invention yet, just for visitors to have a good laugh at unencyclopedic your POV pushing. You don't understand something, with this kind of POV you're attacking not people of Republic of Azerbaijan or Turkey, but your fellow Iranians who fight, get arrested and killed for their cultural freedoms within Iran. Atabek 00:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I changed the wording, there should be no problem now, as there is no definitive statement being made as to require a fact tag. Interesting comment, I'll keep that in mind.Hajji Piruz 02:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you realize what you're doing by still keeping POV text accusing Turkey or Republic of Azerbaijan. Please, cite official Iranian news or government source which ever made such charge pertaining to these specific events. Otherwise, the quote will go, it's doing nothing but inciting hatred due to your POV. Atabek 06:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

UnPOV 2

Hajji Piruz/Azerbaijani, you're wasting your time pushing the POV from personal blogs, unscholarly and unencyclopedic sources and other hate-mongering nationalist inciting material here. All those will be eventually removed from here as they simply fall short of Wikipedia standards. I am working on Pan-Aryan collage meanwhile. Thanks. Atabek 23:54, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Can somebody translate what the child is saying

I have put the cartoon. Can somebody translate what the child is saying. Is it a poem or what? What language it is? Is it important that the child and the roach talk using Latin letters rather than Arabic/Persian script? Alex Bakharev 08:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Soosk means cockroach, and the cockroach is saying "What?" in Azeri.Hajji Piruz 14:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Just a quick note, soosk means cockroach in Farsi, not Azeri. The "what" part is in Azeri. Atabek 17:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Sources

Sources for such controversial article should be neutral. So, any Iranian or Azeri sources should not be here. However, if we are coming to agreement to use Iranian sources, then Azeri should be also in place.--Dacy69 02:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a 1 year old political/protest event article. For Iranian government opinions, Iranian sources can be used. The Iran-Daily source simply says that Afrough suspected pan Turkists and the Iran-Focus source simply says the crowd got violent (I can bring western sources for this too, its fact, they threw stones and damaged public property, such as buildings). Pan Turk sources are used also with regards to the slogans. The rest are Western sources or pictures. I fail to see what is wrong with the sources.Hajji Piruz 14:50, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Images about to be deleted

The images associated with this article will all soon be (and one already is) targeted for deletion due to the fact that they do not have the appropriate fair-use rationale tables included.--Mike18xx 07:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding sources: Abbas Maleki is not just a Harvard Fellow - he is a former Iranian Govermenment Minister, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5263800.stm) and hardly the expert outsider suggested by his Harvard affiliation. His logic regarding an American involvement would flunk Logic 101. "George Bush has not explicitly ruled out" does not stand as evidence of involvement - it is pure speculation by a biased source.

The quote from Ruel Marc Gerecht was taken from a book written in the mid-1990s, and can hardly be said to say anything specific to the subject of this page.

Both sources were taken from the same Asia Times Online article, which patched together Maleki the Iranian government minister and Gerecht, a leading American neocon in favor of preemptive war against Iran. Any author who puts those two together to make one argument has serious issues. I suggest that this section should be removed - it is pure speculation.

POV and OR about foreign involvement

Houshyar before edit warring on the article, you shall provide references to prove that Turkey or Azerbaijan Republic are involved in these protests. So far yourself and Hajji Piruz both failed to produce such. And in this light, your continued POV pushing in the article contributes to nothing but confrontation and is absolutely unencyclopedic. Atabek 07:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Check this link [2]. The same picture as the one inserted into this article, but the caption does not say that they are foreigners or "pan-Turks". It says that they are Iranian students. Grandmaster 12:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The article does not saying anything about Turkey and Azerbaijan influencing anything, it simply says that there are Grey Wolves in both countries who use the same symbol (the Wolf symbol with the fingers).Hajji Piruz 14:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Behmod is another your meatpuppet removed one quote while reinserted another which has no direct link with the event and should be removed from page. This quote contain no primary evidnece to cartoon event.--Dacy69 16:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

WTA

To those inserting the word terrorism to sum up Iranians who fight for their cultural rights, first of all, read WP:WTA, per this rule this word shall go. Secondly, terrorist is a small group of people committing attacks, you can't brand thousands of people protesting humiliation on crowded streets of Tabriz as terrorists. The human civilization lost 54 million people to Nazism/Pan-Aryanism in the course of World War II, nevertheless no one calls pan-Aryan ideology as terrorist. Atabek 18:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Category

I need a clear explanation for what you added that category without any discussions. by the brought sources, you may find that there was no hidden agenda and all the stuff seemed like a misunderstanding. --Pejman47 18:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why you're removing the sources citing only the category. On the same page some users included even YouTube video, which technically violates Wikipedia rules about copyright, yet you didn't touch those and tend to concentrate on legitimate references from Guardian Newspaper and Prospect Magazine. I mean, there are also personal blog references there, why not remove those? Atabek 19:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Reference abuse and misunderstandings

I don't see why personal blog references are being added to this page. It's absolute violation of WP:NPOV and WP:OR. To be honest, it's rather funny and sad to see the sudden group attraction of Pejman47, Behmod, Houshyar, and others to this article and attempts to revert the references, photos, misrepresent information in all ways possible. I guess you don't realize that apart from the attempts to misrepresent own history and create more enemies, your actions are only contributing to understanding of what kind of reality and future awaits Azeri Turks and other minorities in Iran. Thank you for confirming the points made in press by what you call "foreign interference". I think a more prudent approach would be reaching out to your own people and embracing them, instead of trying to POV challenge their ethnic identity or misrepresent their history. Atabek 19:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Before accusing us of re-writing the history. Please once again read your text books --behmod talk 20:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Still certain editor persist in pushing POV and use non-neutral sources. I removed. Plus Seymour quote has no proof of direct involvment in the events.--Dacy69 20:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

I suggest from now on to discuss any new changes in the article instead of inserting POV statements. Once reference approved we can go ahead. It is not easy task in the light of completely opposing view but still we need to work on it. Plus - I suggest any new editor come here first instead of appearing from nowehere and making reverts without discussion. I further suggest to use non-Iranian, non-Azeri sources.--Dacy69 20:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

reliable unbiased sources must be used be it western or eastern, e.g. I don't consider amnesty international as a unnatural source in any case related to Middle East. But you have a good point, we should not use personal websites. --Pejman47 21:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Excuse my curiosity here when you say "I don't consider Amnesty international as a unnatural source in any case related to Middle East" - first of all what do you mean? Secondly, how are you qualified to judge AI, an internationally recognized body specializing on human rights world-wide and Iranian rights in particular? I mean, we have references in the article from iranfocus.com :) and you're calling AI as not an impartial source? Atabek 23:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

first thing you must take in to consideration is that Amnesty international is just an NGO not related to UN or anything else serious:), based in U.S. and the people who writes its reports are just like me and you, that is people who read news and then give their interpretations on it, that's all of it. It has no reporter on any country or for most parts of its report, it doesn't do any research. In past some of its errors is revealed and there is signs that in some cases it has acted like puppets of certain powers. --Pejman47 08:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Of course, AI is an NGO, exactly unrelated to UN and opposed to US government, so it makes it independent. I don't see why the opinion of AI is being removed, just because it does not fit certain POV. This form of "hiding the truth", when there are videos and photos of protests and beating by police all over the Internet from reliable sources, does nothing more than further insulting Azerbaijani people. Wikipedia is not Iranian state news agency, it's an encyclopedia which is supposed to present evidence from all reliable sources, and let the reader make own judgements. Atabek 13:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Slogans

Do we really need to bring slogans into this article? Some of them are really annoying (Even after the attempt of the Azeri to English translator to make them a little smoother). Writing these quotes is just spreading the hatred and I am going to remove this part--behmod talk 21:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I did that --Pejman47 21:29, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Good job on slogans, those were useless and intimidating anyway. I suggest though adding back AI report, it's a legitimate source and does not insult any ethnicity. Atabek 23:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with recent changes, but AI should stay - it is reliable neutral source.--Dacy69 01:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Also - image was removed without discussion. I am restoring it.--Dacy69 01:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

It was not removed without discussions, it is going to be deleted and you can not keep it on the article. --Pejman47 08:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Image copyrights will be discussed separately. However, turning to the issue of AI report, it shall be included, as it's NPOV. Atabek 13:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Amnesty International is a reliable source and should be included. - Francis Tyers · 13:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Cartoonist's apology & was it a real ethnic conflict ?

The apology of the cartoonist is in Persian language. Summary of what he said and what Iranian cartoonists said about that cartoonists apologyis as follows :The Persian slang has many loan words from Azeri-Turkish, like Qarashmish (chaotic in Persian), Yer be Yer ( even ; as in "we are even" ) and so on ... The expression " Namana" ,that is used in Persian Slang, is used when a person is encountered with a surprising task and want to reject it , something like "What did you said ?!" (Plus surprise and rejection).In the cartoons the cartoonist can't use the text and there is no other way in cartoons other than using such a words.
Changing the government from reformist to conservative , the potential for revolt was high and the reformists forces in the government help the revolt in the cover "insult to the Azeri ethnic"... So that's more complex than considering it a mere ethnic conflict.--Alborz Fallah 12:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you need to translate and put everything you just said in English into the article, its very important.Hajji Piruz 18:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Grey Wolves

The participation of the Grey Wolves in the protests should be mentioned. The Grey Wolves are linked with Turkey's MHP party and their outfits in the Republic of Azerbaijan, where they have a lot of influence (Elchilbey, a Grey Wolf sympathizer himself, even appointed Grey Wolves in his government).

The Grey wolves are the militant terrorist wing of the MHP party, they also operate in several places across Europe, attacking Armenians and Kurds and other "anti-Turks". They are known to do things like this.

I have brought pictorial as well as video evidence showing the Grey Wolves at the protests. Their participation should be mentioned, its highly significant. And no, contrary to what Atabek says, citing a Youtube video as a source is not a copyright violation, just as citing a book isnt.

It is also clear that the Republic of Azerbaijan wants there to be turmoil in northern Iran:

"The recent deadly unrest in Iran's predominantly Azeri northwestern region - an area acknowledged as ripe for covert operations - has raised concerns in Tehran not only of foreign hands in action, but also of its resurgent oil-rich, US-friendly neighbor the Republic of Azerbaijan. And in an address to the majlis (parliament), Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei - himself an Azeri - suggested a link between developments in the northwest and a recent announcement that US President George W Bush's administration was seeking a multimillion-dollar bill in Congress to promote democracy in Iran. There is great interest in America, Israel and the Republic of Azerbaijan in pushing an agenda of ethnic warfare in Iran," said Evan Ziegel, a historian of the Islamic Revolution of 1979. "But let's recognize that this project is being amply assisted by Persian chauvinist knuckleheads who are willing to play into their hands."

Thats the entire quote from atimes, Dacy69 only quoted part of it when he posted it into the article.

Anyone who knows about the Grey Wolf operations in northern Iran would know that these large protests were not simply started by people who were pist off about a cartoon with a cockroach who spoke Azeri and Persian. Grey Wolves for years now have been handing out their pan Turk propaganda pamphlets, going and starting protests infront of the Armenian embassy, go to Babak's Castle and start trouble (I also have pictures of Grey Wolves at Babak castle making their wolf hand sign.Hajji Piruz 18:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

If citing YouTube videos is OK, I suggest that you review these [3], [4], [5], [6] - I don't know how appropriate it is to label thousands if not million people protesting there as terrorists. I suggest that we also discuss the quote from Luttwak, CSIS, and it's quite in place here. Also AI quote should go back in the article per Francis Tyers' comment. Atabek 18:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

What do those video's have to do with what I wrote? Also, the Grey Wolves are a terrorist organization. Not all of the protestors were Grey Wolves. Here is some information about CSIS:

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a Washington, D.C.-based foreign policy think tank. The center was founded in 1964 by Admiral Arleigh Burke and historian David Manker Abshire, originally as part of Georgetown University; this relationship was severed in 1986 because of perceived academic incredibility at CSIS.

It has generally had a right-wing, neoconservative tilt in its studies and reports.

Hajji Piruz 19:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I re-added the fact that Grey Wolves were involved in the protests (there is video as well as pictorial evidence, how can you guys still deny this). The Grey Wolves were an integral part of these protests. The Grey Wolves also come to Babak castle and make trouble, as well as causing trouble for Iranian Armenians and making trouble in other ways. The Grey Wolves have been involved in Iran for more than a decade doing things like this and inciting protests. The Grey Wolf involvement needs to be shown.Hajji Piruz 13:37, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry but how is the "Grey Wolf" movement a terrorist movement. Please supply evidence that suggests so such as bombings, killings and so on. Please also supply evidence concerning how many countries recognise them as a terrorist organisation. I would hardly call "causing trouble" an act or terror. Targeting civilians no matter what group or motavation is an act of terror.Tugrulirmak (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Logic behind relaying blame or POV pushing

The videos [7], [8], [9], [10] are the protests against cartoons and one of them on the mother language day this year. And I am not sure what's the credibility of calling CSIS a newcon organization, or AI (wow are they neocons too? :) an unacceptable reference, when there are references from Abbas Maleki, who obviously cannot be impartial in the matter. Now about POV pushing and laying blame on Republic of Azerbaijan or Turkey. Here are few points which should make clear that's not reasonable:

• 1. Republic of Azerbaijan itself deals with separatist issue on its territory. There is no reason on either official or unofficial level for the country to support separatist tendencies in Iran, provided that both countries recognized each other's territorial integrity.
• 2. Government of Azerbaijan both officially and unofficially had good relations with official Tehran, and rejected officially all proposals made by Washington about placing bases in Azerbaijan. In fact, Azerbaijan has also deported some people associated with separatism in Iran.
• 3. Turkey is the last country to support separatist tendencies in Iran, due to the problem of Kurdish separatism, which affects actually both countries. In fact, official Turkey shut down Azerbaijani separatist TV stations broadcasting to Iran.
• 4. Pan-Turkism ideology does not exist in the form of any organization recognized as terrorist, while official Tehran is known and documented to support at least one Lebanese-based organization recognized internationally as terrorist.
• 5. Hundreds of thousands of protesters on streets of Tabriz, Qoshachay, Orumiyyeh or other towns inhabitted by ethnic Azeris do not simply follow handful of terrorists. Such claim sounds absurd. Rights of minorities in Iran is generally recognized issue on the list of human rights issues of Iran. There is nothing wrong in exposing the truth about those, as they help for Iranian society to deal with the problem rather than making it exposed to foreign detractors. Hiding the problem results in foreign support. That was exactly the problem with Turkey in Kurdish issue. Masking and hiding discontent and human rights issues does not solve the problem.

Thanks. Atabek 23:44, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow, good POV and OR, very intersting, but really, it cant have an affect here unless we all want to break Wikipedia's policies. Oh, and by the way, the CSIS info I posted is from Wiki's article on the organization.Hajji Piruz 00:00, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Pan-Turkism ideology does not exist in the form of any organization recognized as terrorist: this is not true.Pan-Turianian idiologists are organized in the Grey Wolves movement and are secretly supported by the Turkish and by the Azerbaijani governments.Some Pan-Turanians even filled the ranks of important ministers in both countries.Gray Wolves are regarded as terrorists in many countries, for example by the German government.See this official paper.

That looks like a great source, is there an english version?Hajji Piruz 16:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you need an English version if it is a comprehensible source for you to even claim that it's great :). Anyways, the report provider above forgot to sign in again as another IP anon sockpuppet of User:Tajik [11], [12] and [13]. It seems like Wikipedia enforcement on this front is not strong enough to protect from violators and/or cite their supporters. Atabek 16:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Page move

The page should be moved to "Iran (newspaper) cockroach cartoon controversy", Alex Bakharev also supports it:

It was me who suggested probably the most POV-ed title, but now I think maybe Iran (newspaper) cockroach cartoon controversy or Iran (newspaper) namana cartoon controversy is better. It is not obvious that the cartoon was intended to make fun on Azeris (one side denys it) but there is certainly a cockroach and namana word on the picture Alex Bakharev 04:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Hajji Piruz 19:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. The cartoon insulted Azerbaijani people, therefore the name should reflect the fact. Grandmaster 06:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

There is absolutely no evidence that says the cartoon was meant to insult anyone. The cockroach also spoke Persian, why werent Persians offended? Its all about perception. The title should reflect only what is known.Hajji Piruz 12:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The "Azeri" in the title has POV implications about the nature of the cartoon. We can't label the cartoon, that's POV. I've moved the page to a NPOV title "The Iran newspaper cockroach cartoon controversy" based on AlexBakharev's suggestion. AlexanderPar 00:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The cartoon was insulting for Azerbaijani people, that's why hundreds of thousands took the streets. The title should reflect the fact. Do not move the page without consensus. Grandmaster 06:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The page was moved in the first place without consensus, and yes, there is a consensus. The previous title was proposed by Alex, and he recanted and also said it was POV, and said that the current title is better, as it reflects the reality better.Hajji Piruz 06:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The move is the result of POV-pushing, there was no consensus on the page name, despite the claim above. Alex Bakharev has actually indicated [14] that he is not an expert on the matter to decide the name of the page. Atabek 18:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Amnesty International

Amnesty International is not a WP:RS, all their reports are based on opposition and separatist groups' "he said, she said", without double-checking the facts. Do not add it back. AlexanderPar 23:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Please restore AI quote in the original form. No need to add the words like "claims", etc. We need to present all the views accurately, and in this case Iranian government is much less reliable source than AI, as Iranian government is one of the worst human rights offenders in the entire world. See this too: [15] Grandmaster 06:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Amnesty International, HRV, etc are not reliable sources, they're activist organizations that take the word of dissident and separatist groups who have an agenda at face value, without double-checking the facts on the ground, and they have been proven to be wrong on multiple occasions. When the source is not reliable, a clear attribution like "X claims Y" is needed. Regardless, this article is not about human rights, we don't have human rights reports on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy about the cultural rights of Muslims, their sensitivities, and what not. Please take your soapboxing to Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran. AlexanderPar 10:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Stop suppressing the info. Both organizations are reliable sources as Francis explained to Piruz. This article is not a soapbox for official Iranian propaganda, which blames the popular protest on "pan-Turks", etc. HRW makes it quite clear that it is a common practice in Iran to accuse people who speak up for the rights of Azeri people as "Turkish spies". Whether you agree with these reports or not, their existence is a fact that cannot be suppressed. Grandmaster 12:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Could you not see the pictures and video of the pan Turk Grey Wolves at the protests? Is it not funny how the pan Turk websites were among the first to upload pictures on their websites, showing off? Do you need me to give you the links again? HRW is wrong, there are university Azeri courses and summer school Azeri courses.Hajji Piruz 16:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

We are not entitled to include our personal interpretations of pictures, that would be an original research. We can only quote authoritative sources. Grandmaster 05:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

That was not "Iran Newspaper" !

• The fact is that it was "Iran - e - Jomee" (Friday Iran). That was some kind of a "Sunday (only) newspaper " that was published in the weekends (Friday) and had limited copies : about one tenth of the Iran newspaper itself (about 20000 copies at all).One of the controversies was the fact that almost none of the protesters had ever seen the cartoon itself and they reacted only after the national Iranian TV broadcasted against the newspaper and the court closed all of the "Iran" publication company including "Iran newspaper" and "Iran sepid" (newspaper for visually-impaired Iranians written in Braille code ) and etc ...
  The bulk of protests took place after Iranian government meddling and in some places the government itself organized basiji militia for protesting against the newspaper , maybe for making a pro-Azeri gesture or maybe because of fear of influential Iranian Azeri's or maybe other unknown reasons...--Alborz Fallah 06:53, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

HRW and AI

I don't understand why Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reports are being purged out or diminished in the article, when those are the most legitimate human rights organizations on the issue of abuse of ethnic and cultural rights in Iran. Same with CSIS, which is just labeled as "neo-con", while we have Iranian sources unrestrictively cited and impressed upon the reader. It seems like source from the country with abysmal human rights record is somehow more credible than from HRW or AI. Atabek 16:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Labeling countries as "abysmal" is out of Wikipedia's policy.--Alborz Fallah 18:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not the country, but its human rights record which is abysmal. This is an international designation used by various international organizations ranging from Council of Europe to PACE to United Nations, etc. Atabek 18:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Anyway ; using the word is provocative and counterproductive .I think changing it would be rational.--Alborz Fallah 19:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a talk page, so it's OK to cite the words used by international organizations. We are not putting them on the main page at least not without discussion. Thanks. Atabek 20:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

for houshyar

You are arguing that Asia Timew quote which I intorduced has some inappropriate word. I rephrased it ussing word nationalist which is already used in the text. If we remove this once then we should remove another quote whoch uses word nationalists from Baku--Dacy69 13:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

grey wolf

This section is based on non-neutral biased sources. therefore removed.--Dacy69 14:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Non neutral biased sources? Its based on a video from youtube and a picture showing the Grey Wolves. How are pictures and video non-neutral sources?Hajji Piruz 14:33, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

What is Youtube? I can upload their video. As for picture - first of all, one picture can't prove such a great plot - this would ridicule whole evidence structure in any decent academic article. Secondly, picture credibility should be proven. Thirdly, pls. provide real neutral sources proving this linkage in particularly to this event, then picture might second it.--Dacy69 14:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Its video and pictorial evidence. LOL. How can you dispute video and pictorial evidecne?Hajji Piruz 14:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I provided links to 3,4 YouTube videos above, showing that POV and OR pushed here blaming Republic of Azerbaijan are baseless. Nevertheless, the POV was being pushed. I wonder if the editor now claiming YouTube videos as non-neutral source ever reviewed those, to see that hundreds of thousands of protesters on the streets of Tabriz cannot be all Grey Wolves, "fascists" (as claimed above), or agents of Republic of Azerbaijan. It seems that the contributor has a hidden agenda of targeting specifically Republic of Azerbaijan on every topic, sometimes sounding rather radical even for an ordinary Iranian contributor, all of which are not so hostile about this particular country. Hmm, well I guess, we should assume good faith after all. Atabek 14:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Stop making things up. No where does it say that all the protestors were Grey Wolves, and no where does it say that the Republic of Azerbaijan or Turkey were involved. You guys are trying to suppress information, its pretty obvious.Hajji Piruz 14:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Making things up? How about this [16], just scroll above it's still on this page. I haven't editted the article recently to suppress any information, from what I know despite suggestions made by Francis Tyers, there has been some OR and POV pushing in form of removing AI and HRW references, and going as far as implying those globally credible human rights organizations as biased source :). Please, assume good faith and don't take the path of battling along national lines, I don't think there is ground for that between Azerbaijanis and Iranians, unless there is another "hidden" agenda. Atabek 15:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Pls. provide neutral sources and then we will talk.--Dacy69 14:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Video and pictorial evidence is neutral. The section says nothing that isnt fact. A) Grey Wolves were involved in the protests, B) the Grey Wolves are a pan Turkic organization which operate in Turkey and the Republic of Azerbaijan, C) The Grey Wolves are active in terrorist activities through out Europe and other places.Hajji Piruz 15:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

A) So far no valid pictorial or video evidence of Grey Wolves' involvement was presented. Anyone can show a sign (especially as broad as Grey Wolf hand sign with index and small finger up, which is used all over the world for various other reasons) during the protests. This does not imply connection or involvement of any figure, especially when Azeri protests were as massive as were back in May 2006. For example, Nazis adopted Aryan ideology and symbolics, which, combined with modern Iranian president's denial of Holocaust, establishes somewhat clear association between Hitlerism and Aryanism. Nevertheless we don't see people claiming connection between Iran and Third Reich, despite the fact that Reza Shah Pahlavi has abdicated exactly for such suspicions.

B) Before inserting unsubstantiated POV, you may want to provide some research on influence or modus operandi of "Grey Wolves" in Azerbaijan or Turkey, i.e. their bases, financial support from either government or private sources. I see no such evidence provided so far.

C) Please, provide references in the form of list of attacks and formal convictions made. Otherwise, this looks very much along the lines of OR and POV. Atabek 21:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

A) No POV or OR.

B) Your denying that the Grey Wolves operate from Turkey and the Republic of Azerbaijan?

C) Two sources are listed saying that the Grey Wolves are a terrorist organization. The Grey Wolves are also considered the unofficial militant wing of the MHP.Hajji Piruz 21:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

A), B), provide sources.

C) Read WP:WTA: "In line with the Wikipedia Neutral Point of View policy, the words "Extremist", "Terrorist" and "Freedom fighter" should be avoided unless there is a verifiable citation indicating who is calling a person or group by one of those names in the standard Wikipedia format of "X says Y". In an article the words should be avoided in the unqualified "narrative voice" of the article." Atabek 22:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The Consortium News source also says that there were Grey Wolves members in the Azerbaijani government in the early 90's, so I inserted that in some instances there were Grey Wolves in the Azerbaijani government. Now there should be no problem.Hajji Piruz 23:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, Isgandar Hamidov the leader of Grey Wolf Party in Azerbaijan was a Minister of Interior in 1992-1993. He was in jail also for 11 years from 1993 till 2004. Atabek 00:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I added the info about the Grey Wolves party in Azerbaijan.Hajji Piruz 00:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the relevance of devoting the whole section on Grey Wolves in Azerbaijan, there is a separate page of Grey Wolves, where these can be put. The fact that Grey Wolves were active in Azerbaijan in 1992-1993, still does not explain why hundreds of thousands were protesting against persecution of their cultural and linguistic rights in Iran in 2006 and 2007. As shown above, Grey Wolves leader was in jail for 11 years, and is not even active in politics any more. Elchibey died in 2000. It seems like you're trying to blame someone unrelated and remote in history and hence hide the essence of the topic, well documented on monthly basis by AI and HRW reports. Actually, this form of POV pushing is only justifying and reinforcing Elchibey's and Grey Wolves position, as it establishes a prima facie evidence of social persecution against Azeri rights and freedoms in Iran. Atabek 05:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

We have discussed thousand times. We should only include information which is directly relevant to cartoon event. If we put info on Grey Wolves I can include information about Revolution Guard , etc. It has no place here. Secondly, youtube and other personal database is not reliable sources. --Dacy69 13:38, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, if Azerbaijani people were so happy with the state of protection of their cultural rights, why would hundreds of thousands take the streets in Iranian Azerbaijan? And if it is nothing but a Grey Wolf conspiracy, then Grey Wolfs are a real strong force in Iran that can influence hundreds of thousands people. For comparison, in Azerbaijan republic Grey Wolfs never were a real force that could draw such big crowds to their rallies. Looks like they do a lot better in Iran than Azerbaijan. However, this just shows that any attempts to present the protest as a foreign conspiracy are really baseless. In fact, the caption to the picture that Piruz tries to present as a Grey Wolf rally actually reads on RFE/RL website: “A May 22 student demonstration in Tabriz against the "cockroach" cartoon that was recently published in an Iranian state newspaper”. [17] Note that we are not allowed to make our own interpretations of pictures and maps, it is an original research. We can only quote such interpretations made by reliable sources. Grandmaster 17:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Why was this removed:

Video and pictures, showing some protestors exhibiting the pan-Turkic Grey Wolves symbol while encouraging the crowds, suggesting the involvement of the Grey Wolves in the protests. Their participation may hint at possible foreign interference, as there were suspicions in Iran that pan-Turks were involved in inciting the protests.

That part has everything to do with the topic.Hajji Piruz 17:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it sourced from a reliable source? You cannot interpret pictures and videos, it is OR. Grandmaster 17:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Whats interpreted?Hajji Piruz 18:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You cannot provide your own interpretation of what is shown on the picture. Grandmaster 08:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Its clear as day, what about the video evidence? They even zoom in on it a little bit...Hajji Piruz 13:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Yourtube is personal database where I, you and others can upload clips. Plus - we need proper attribution from neutral sources which yourtube does not and can not have.--Dacy69 03:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

What does that have to do with anything? You could same the same for Wikipedia... A video clip cannot be non-neutral. The video clearly shows the Grey Wolves. If you are trying to say that the video has been manipulated, you have to prove it.Hajji Piruz 03:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You cannot add any personal comment to it. You see Grey Wolves there, others just see a group of students protesting. We can only use the description from RFE, as it is sourced. But you cannot include what you personally see there, interpetation should come from a reliable source. Grandmaster 11:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Hajji Piruz claims: "A video clip cannot be non-neutral". Untrue. Any video or image can be uploaded in YouTube and can be biased, while WP:NPOV also states:

* Types of bias include:

* Nationalistic: favoring the interests or views of a particular nation;

* Political: bias in favor of or against a particular political party, policy or candidate;

* Sensationalist: favoring the exceptional over the ordinary. This includes emphasizing, distorting, or fabricating exceptional news to boost commercial ratings;

This is clearly the case in these videos. So yes, they can be discussed as a POV or to make a point on the talk page, but not in the article. Atabek 16:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

POV and OR is against Wikipedias policies. The information is sourced and vital. Grey Wolves were heavily involved in the protests. Its a highly important and necessary part of this subject.Hajji Piruz 03:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Your OR about Grey Wolves has nothing to do with "cockroach cartoon story" and the related protests. This information is relevant to Grey Wolves page, not here. Atabek 07:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

How is it not relevant? The Grey Wolves were participants and are internationally known, why shouldnt they be mentioned?Hajji Piruz 16:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

They're already mentioned, but there is no proof that Grey Wolves were capable of organizing massive protests. All the rest of the material was strictly related to Grey Wolves without any relevance to the subject of this article, hence removed. Atabek 03:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No where does the section say that the Grey Wolves organized anything, it simply says that they participated in the protests (which is a known fact). Read the material carefully. The Grey Wolf participation is highly relevant to the subject and belongs in the article.Hajji Piruz 16:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

In response to Atabek's statement: [18] (which he has removed): Thats original research Atabek, and once again, no where in the section does it say that the protests were organized by the Grey Wolves, it merely says that they were involved, which is a known fact.Hajji Piruz 19:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Known fact? Pls. prove with appropriate sources. You again inserting information which has no relevancy to the article. we have discussed such sources as youtube.--Dacy69 14:41, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

How is it not a fact? You deny Grey Wolf participation? I'll bring the evidence if you ask me too (its actually already here). Also, I still see the same thing being said "has no relevancy" and once again I would like to ask, how is it not relevant? Thanks.Hajji Piruz 04:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

On waves of protests over the many Southern Azerbaijani cities tens of thousands of people participated in demonstrations. Mentioning members of imaginary Grey Walf or other political non entities not only is irrelevant, but misleading. Alborz Fallah in this discussion even claims that governments own guards (Basij) were the main instigators! This sounds like a chat in Isfahani tea house rather that discussion in Wikipedia. Where are the fact? Many Azeri activists are still in prisons over the protest.--Mehrdad 16:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I was mentioning the demonstrations that was directed against the imaginary insult to the Azarbiajani Iranians , to show that the government is in the side of the people and not against them .Although your idea of the tea-house legends is not suitable for Wikipedia's milieu , but let me inform you about the problems of gathering people in massive demonstrations in Iran , that is sure different from Australia , and may involve severe damage to the protesters ... That means there have to be an element of governmental agreement in any huge demonstration in Iran .--Alborz Fallah 20:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

After a big break several editors restored non-related greywolf information to this page. As we discussed this information presented here has no link to tyhis particular event.--Dacy69 (talk) 16:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't delete sourced information. It is sourced, that's all that matters. You haven't been around in almost three months and the first thing you do when you come back is make dozens of reverts including this one.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 17:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Eupator, as it has been discussed before, Grey Wolf stuff is irrelevant in this context. The existence of such group in Iran or their participation in massive protests is not established by any evidence. Moreover, the material you're readding in the section has to do more with Grey Wolves article than with this article. The images used as reference in last paragraph of the section do not at all relate to newspaper protests and are NOT an evidence of their involvement. Atabek (talk) 08:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't quite remember where, but I remember you trying to use an image as a source and lets not talk about youtube videos. You are removing sourced information because you think that it does not relate, may I remind you that there is a policy called wp:OR. Total of 9 sources was removed, thats unacceptable. VartanM (talk) 09:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

VartanM, when you revert an article, you're supposed to discuss specifics of the section material you're removing or readding, provide a valid rationale. I don't see that in your comment above, except for pure WP:OR justification. But since you deem to be knowledgeable on the subject you're reverting, may you provide us with evidence and facts as to how the material relates to the topic and how linked images at all related to Newspaper cockroach story? Atabek (talk) 09:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I defiantly remember this one. According to this I don't have to discuss what I'm reverting. As long as I leave a comment I'm good to go. [19]. But non the less I explained why. Perhaps you should read my above comment again. I really don't like repeating myself, its late and the monitor is hurting my eyes. I don't believe I wished you Happy New Year. Nappy New Year Atabek. Let the peace reign in this new year. VartanM (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No, VartanM, you're supposed to provide rationale for readdition of material in a revert, otherwise, it's clear from your responses above that you don't even know how those references relate to the topic. It's clear as a day that none of the references in this section relate to Newspaper protest at all. Please, discuss them specifically, and explain why they should be in the article. And Happy New Year to you as well, looking forward to hear your comments on each one of those 9 references, when your eyes are comfortable of course. Thanks. Atabek (talk) 09:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Atabek, the burden of explanation on why the sources are not reliable are on you. Ali's comments below do just that. VartanM (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

This whole Grey Wolf thing is OR and cites no reliable sources. The claims about existence of Grey Wolfs in Azerbaijan republic are not relevant to this article, and interpretation of pictures is an original research. If this is to be added to the article, it should be based on some reliable third party sources supporting this claim. Otherwise it cannot be included per wiki rules. Grandmaster (talk) 13:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

This is the first time I am reading this article and I am suprised that some people are tying to forment ethnic hatred here. Specially, Atabek and Grandmaster? There was pan-Turkists involvement in the protests, but not all protestors were pan-Turkists. For example approximately 20,000 to 50,0000 protesters, there was a group of pan-Turkists (minority of protestors) who shouted: "Persian tongue is the tongue of Dogs", "Kurds are our guests", "Armenians, Russians, Persians are the enemies of all Turks".. Note there was also legitimate protestors who had vent anger against the regime or the newspapers. But the pan-Turkist/Greywolf type protestors should also be mentioned. You can hear these shouts in the youtube vidoes and they are listed in even pan-Turkist websites, even some that criticized these shots. Also some protestors gave the grey wolf sign as well. For example durna.se is one of those websites run by a separatist named Davud Eldeniz. I can source all these facts, from even pan-Turkist websites. We should mention a group were pan-Turkists and at least there is a source from Iran daily. Note it says "Alleged pan_Turkist involvement". I think the stuff that OR can be exluded. The Elchibey and Hamidov part are not related to the article, but they can put in an article on Grey Wolves. I am not sure why this entry was created even, but it is hard to assume good faith! I don't like political articles, but I will work to make this neutral. Meanwhile it is hard to assume good faith of some contributors, specially since their own country is not 100% utopia either. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 14:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

What does the following part have to do with this topic:

During the 1992-1993 Popular Front government in Azerbaijan, the member of Grey Wolves' ("Bozqurt") Party, Isgandar Hamidov, served as the Minister of Interior. President Abulfaz Elcibey was a Grey Wolf sympathizer himself. The Grey Wolves Party still functions in Azerbaijan, although its name has been changed to the Azerbaijan National Democrat Party.

I don't really see how it is relevant to this article. What is the purpose of such edits? If it intended to prove that Azerbaijan had something to do with these events, it is clearly an OR and is against the wiki rules. Grandmaster (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I Mentioned that already. The Elchibey, Hamidov part should be moved to an article on Grey Wolves. I removed that part and put it already in that article. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 15:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ali Doostzadeh, may you explain us how [20], [21], [22], links earlier added by User:Hajji Piruz and now restored by yourself relate to the context presented by the sentence "Video and pictures showing some protesters exhibiting the pan-Turkic Grey Wolves symbol while encouraging the crowds, suggesting the involvement of the Grey Wolves in the protests"? To my knowledge, Alparslan Türkeş referenced in the second picture died a few years before the Azeri protests in Iran, which makes the reference even more ridiculous and unencyclopedic. Atabek (talk) 18:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, who is "us"? Am I explaining it to anyone else? I am studying the sources, and will add references from pan-Turkist websites as well as neutral Iranian websites (so it covers both sides) on hand gesture, and some of the slogans I mentioned. Note this is an important point. I am going only to bring statements which both pan-Turkist news sites and Iranian sites have confirmed. Original Azeri of the slogans will be brought from these sites and youtube videos add further confirmation. But the youtube videos are not necessary since news site (both pan-Turkist and non pan-Turkist) reported it. I think it is notable though some of the protestors did show the same hand gesture which is associated with MHP. And both pan-Turkist and neutral Iranian sites confirm this. So we can mention this hand gesture is used by the MHP political group in Turkey and show as an example of the the leaders that used it. 20 years ago, in Iran no one gave this sort of hand gesture and its source according to numerous articles is in Turkey. Again I am not saying all the protestors were like that (they were not), but some where, and so we can't delete the section. Specially Iran daily gives the governments point of view, which weather wrong or right, needs to be reported. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 19:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ali Doostzadeh, "us" is the audience of the talk page. And it's not quite neutral to add "pan-" to Turkist and leave it out from Iranian, I believe your point of view in this case has pan-Iranian context as well. As I said, you can carry out research on MHP and pan-Turkism, but it's irrelevant in context of this topic. What does hand gesture or how Alparslan Turkesh have to do with protests in Iran? Seems like this section is simply added to the page for pointing fingers without any evidence but based on a comment by some MP in Iran. And even if so, the links are absolutely unrelated to this topic. Atabek (talk) 00:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay who made you the spokesperson for the audience? :) As per the hand gesture, it is the same hand gesture as those of MHP/Alparsalan Turkesh and Greywolf. Mentioning that the same hand gestures are common amongst Greywolves in Turkey is not necessarily making a connection. Why shouldn't the reader know that the same hand gestures are made amongst Greywolves of Turkey? After all one of the slogans of the radical group was "Turkiyeh Imdad"(Turkey help us) (again I can retrieve this). Even if there is no political connection, it does show a cultural connection via the hand gesture. The fact that the hand gesture is not only used by some of the protestors, but by Turkey and other places is a true observation. It should be noted the same hand gesture is made by nationalists in Turkey. Okay there are pan-Turkist sites, pan-Iranian sites and then Iranian sites. I am not even going to quote pan-Iranian sites. But normal news sites and pan-Turkist sites. And I am only quoting pan-Turkist sites in conjunction with normal news site, so they confirm each other. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 02:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

This article is absolute comedy of POV and needs editing either by third party hand (of non-Iranian, non-Azerbaijani and definately of non-Armenian origins) or by us using only third party articles/op-eds and only reflect unbiased summary/coverage of what happened without that dogmas on grey wolves, pink panthers, black horses and etc. --Aynabend (talk) 21:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure why you need to emphasize "definitely non-Armenian origin". That sounds sort of racist. But anyhow, reporting news-sites and government views as long as the site is mentioned is fine. So if Irandaily reports the view of some members of Iran's government, then that is okay, because it is not just any editorial. I concur care must be taken, but I do not view western news sources (say BBC, CNN) as any less biased. But on the grey wolf issue, note I am actually reporting from Azadtribun, a site that has the Azerbaijani flag instead of Iranian and corroborating it with a leftist Iranian site (not a pro pan-Iranist but connected to Hezb Tudeh). If I add a pan-Iranian site (which does not), then basically we have the same fact covered from three antagonistic point of view. So the methodology is fairly elaborate, that is I am using antagonistic sites (Pan-Turkist, Communist, Pan-Iranian) to confirm the same fact. Also there is only two or three western news sources that cover the same issue. Modern politics is not like history which is based on facts, but there are too many special interests involved in modern politics (many lobbies and etc.). So western news sources do not have really bias than say Turan news agency or Turkish news agency or IRNA or Armenian news agency. Thus my method of confirming the same news from thee antagonistic POVs is solid. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 00:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I am saying that because I see what of emotional postings are made here and what kind of behind the scenes collabiration is going out there. All of us are interested parties - there should be a third side view of the story. I know AzadTribun and even people who run it. If few people show funny hand signs it does not mean that all those people were followers of Alparslan Turkesh or AzadTribun. Every side, including you will push it towards what his/her kind of story. This is not acceptable. Even if there were secret services involved and there were cospiracies, let BBC, AP, CNN say it. They don't seem to have known to us collaboration either with grey wolves or with pan-farsist circles. --Aynabend (talk) 10:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that is true, there is a lot of emotional outburts here. I am ignoring them. Okay so you know people who run Azadtribun. That is sort of interesting, if you don't mind, may I ask what relationship do you have with them? Anyhow, I already mentioned that all those people were not linked to the grey-wolfs/pan-Turkists. That is why we said a group and definitely not all. I can not put an adjective like small, large, medium etc. since I do not see any sources. Also I deleted the portion that says those people (grey wolf) were encouraging the protest. But the fact that such a group existed is undeniable and has been reported in pan-turkist (azadtribun), internationalist (communst) and pan-Iranist circles. So that is a fact. As per BBC, AP, CNN, Fox news..they are also bias many times and also their news coverage is very limited. So the best way to confirm a news is just to see antagonistic news-sites confirm it. Note pan-Turkist site by itself is not reliable and I wouldn't use it to do reporting. Neither is a pan-Iranian site by itself reliable and I wouldn't use it in Wikipedia. Neither is a communist (internationalist) type site is reliable by itself and I wouldn't use it. But say for example if Turan news agency (pan-Turkist), the Dashnak news agency (pan-Armenian) and the pan-Iranian news agency confirm the same fact, then that makes it undeniable and so using multiple antagonistic sources to confirm the same fact is correct and NPOV. So I am not acting bias, since if I had reported a fact only from pan-Turkist site or a pan-Iranian site or a neocon site or a Dashnak site or Elchibey site, then it would be bias and we should have deleted it. Reporting the position of members of Iranian government is also okay, since it is not a personal opinion but an opinion of a government and it is under "alleged" since it is the allegation of the government. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 17:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know why you are asking this question, but I have once briefly met its editor-in-cheif and have visited the website occasionally if it was referenced in the texts I read. Regarding the crosschecking various sources, I am not against it, but such cross-checking should always be balance with third/unbiased source. If existence of such forces during the demonstrations are not confirmed by the third/Western sources, then I am afraid we should not use them, as they are POV. --Aynabend (talk) 18:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia policy that says western sources for confirming a news is required. Specially if it is under the title "alleged". Three antagonistic sources confirm the same forces. --alidoostzadeh (talk) 18:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

References

Cockroach controversy part 2

Maybe this is worth incorporating into the article if someone can find enough proper source material, as this site does not exactly count as NPOV: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/26503 Orpheus42 05:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Iran Azeri Cartoon.jpg

Image:Iran Azeri Cartoon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for source

New {{fact}} tags placed on the article ([23]), is requesting a source for using the Azeri word "Namana" in Persian slang.Indeed there is no published Persian slang dictionary available , but about the using of slang language in the Cartoon , there can be evidences shown .As an example, The title of the article is "What to do for the cockroaches don't make us cockroaches" (چه کنیم که سوسک ها سوسکمان نکنند) , that the Persian slang of making someone cockroach (کسی را سوسک کردن) is an slang , and also the other works of the cartoonist shows same using of the slang language . But anyway , that's rather impossible to find a reliable source for Persian slang currently . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 13:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:NOT#OR -- Meisam.fa (talk) 08:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, I know that.But Wiki's article is not the first time that the usage of that Azeri word is mentioned in Persian slang. There are other examples about for proving that like :

  However, namana is also a slang word used in Persian

  in "An Explanation for the Structure behind Actions and Reactions in Ethnic Conflicts" (page 4, [24])
  

or

"roach is looking at him saying "namana!" which in Azari means “what”. The problem with the accusations is that in the past ten years, some words have become street slang (or just slang) in all parts of Iran. Namana is one of them. Regardless of city of residence or ethnic background, the young generation has been using this word." [25]

or

"In the one in question the cockroach answers back "what?" but in Azeri (namana?) because this is the cool way of speaking slang in tehran among young people. That's it!" [26]

or

"The cockroach spoke both Persian and Persian slang. Namana, although originally an Azeri word has entered Tehrani slang and is used by the average Tehrani without them knowing the origin of the word. "[27]

Anyway, I know every source about using that word in Persian slang can be challenged by doubting the reliability of the sources , but I did do my best to show there is no dictionary of Persian language slang available to prove that word is a Persian slang one ( because of the nature of slang , and because of the Iranian lack of update researches). --Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• To add the cartoonist's own explanation , the says himself in his blog that he were using the ordinary people language [28]:

  "مهرداد قاسمفر من را خواست و گفت چند نفر از پدر و مادر های آذری تماس گرفته اند و گله کرده اند که چرا بخش کودک، زبان ترکی را تحقیر و کلام آن را از زبان سوسک ادا کرده؟ بسیار تعجب کردم چون اصلاً چنین چیزی در ذهن ام نبود، سوسک های صفحه ی اول موجودات فانتزی بودند که روی دوپا راه می رفتند، لباس سربازی می پوشیدند، مثل آدم ها حرف هم می زدند و احتمالاً از اصطلاحات محاوره استفاده هم می کردند، از منظر توهین به ماجرا نگاه نکرده بودم."

--Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

The article is about a cartoon with Persian texts. It seems to me until a Persian-English slang dictionary would be published, we should rely on Persian texts for evidence. From where have the English translation of that part of the cartoon's text come in the article? It seems it has been simply translated by somebody who knows Persian. As for "namana" thing, we should also depend on Persian texts like these among others which mention "namana" in 2003 and 2005:[29],[30]. Slangs like "namana" and "iki sâniye" (with Turkic roots) are used in Iran specially by the youth and more in Tehran. Older people might not know what they mean.--Raayen (talk) 00:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• As an Iranian Azeri myself , I want to mention an important point: The word "Namna" is a word that is ambiguous in literally Azeri : it is not in use neither in Turkish of Turkey nor in Azerbaijan republic . Here in Turkish Wikipedia about the article it says as follows:

  "Nemene" İran'daki Azerilerin ana dili olan Azerbaycan Türkçesinde "ne?" demektir ve Farsça'da kullanılmaz.
  "Namana" in mother-tongue of Iranian Azeri's Turkish means "what?" and Persians abuse it

  
  That means the "Namana" is not in use in Turkish of Turkey .literally , that is "na" + "mana" that means "What to me" , and that shows the word in Azeri itself is not a formal word (or at least a standard one), and if we want to use it correctly in Azeri , we have to say " Namana dedein?" (what did you said to me ?)
  In brief , if we can't accept that word is also a Persian slang due to lack of a Persian slang dictionary , then we can't say it is an Azeri word with that same logic at all! --Alborz Fallah (talk) 11:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Foreign interference section

There's a serious problem with the foreign interference section - it says nothing about the cartoons at hand. this is a severe violation of WP:SYN. can anyone give a concrete example of protests originating not because of the cartoons but rather because instigation? this entire section has no place in the article. MiS-Saath (talk) 08:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

Maybe I just need a little sleep, but I'm finding it very difficult to work out what this article is trying to say. I think it really needs going over. Woscafrench (talk) 03:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicity of Mana Neyestani

The article begins mentioning "the cartoonist Mana Neyestani, an ethnic Iranian Azeri." It seems to me this is contradicted in the main article about Mana Neyestani and doesn't make sense in the context of this article. Am I missing something? Myron (talk) 05:52, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Ka-Soosk.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ka-Soosk.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Iran newspaper cockroach cartoon controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070713224215/http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2007&c=IRN to http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2007&c=IRN

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)