Jump to content

Talk:Iranian Revolution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Iranian revolution)
Former good articleIranian Revolution was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 29, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 3, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
January 11, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 8, 2004, September 8, 2005, September 8, 2006, April 1, 2009, February 11, 2011, February 11, 2012, February 11, 2013, February 11, 2016, February 11, 2017, and February 11, 2019.
Current status: Delisted good article

Revert with odd edit summary

[edit]

LouisAragon, if you can 'find a plethore of sources that dismiss the "broadening of education and healthcare" stuff', why have you not done so? If you disbelieve that the broadening of education and healthcare 'is a IRI project, and not a continuation of the Shah's policies', why have you not challenged this with evidence to the contrary? There ought to be a mention of the Revolution's effect on domestic policy in the lead, and a one-sentence summary of a section of the main text is hardly burdening the lead with excessive text. Stara Marusya (talk) 07:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The two sources didn't support that statement anyways [1]. It was also quite vague, as it claimed this alleged "success" occurred "in recent years", yet the two cited sources were from 1994 and 2008, that's certainly not recent. The second source ironically didn't even talk about improvements under the IR, but the opposite, such as women "using their appearance and sexuality to fight the regime" and "Prospects for young people are not good and many graduates are lucky to get jobs as taxi drivers." --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hijab as a life-or-death issue

[edit]

Since Hijab in Iran is a pivotal issue for Khamenei, it is logical to make it so in the article. 2601:C4:C300:2890:A5F3:AE3C:9723:E346 (talk) 17:10, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 September 2024

[edit]

Iranian RevolutionIranian revolution – Change to sentence case (WP:AT). Not consistently capped in sources - per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS. See here. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Cinderella157 (talk) 03:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support lowercase per n-grams, which shows that it was majority lowercase when the article was created capped in 2003, and there's a minor trend to more capping since then, likely affected by WP, but not approaching a strong majority or the MOS:CAPS criterion of "consistently capitalized" in reliable sources. Dicklyon (talk) 04:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I've always seen this written in capitalised form. GoodDay (talk) 09:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per nominator's own ngrams which show a clear preference for capitalization. SnowFire (talk) 19:57, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment per MOS:CAPS: "only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia [emphasis added]." Ngrams tend to over-report capitalisation since they do not distinguish things like headings, captions or the titles of works in citations that normally use title case. Allowing for this, we see a slight majority for the capitalised form but not a substantial majority required by MOS:CAPS. Cinderella157 (talk) 22:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]