Talk:Mojahed (newspaper)

Iran Low‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Image and incident with France

There seems to be a disagreement about the image and an incident that led to the banning of the paper in France.

Concerning the image, I think the general purpose of the newspaper, which was to promote the political idealisms of the group, should be the focus. This is the reason why I think I have chosen a more neutral image.

About the incidence in France, I also think that there needs to be wider explanation (from both sides) of what happened since this would also be more neutral.

This is the reason why I restored the previous version. Fad Ariff (talk) 14:18, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert[1] seems to have removed certain well sourced content without explanation:

you removed "while non-MEK newspapers became categorically outlawed". I checked the source and on page 250 it indeed says "Members were forbidden to read non-Mojahed newspapers."
you removed "French government declared the newspaper illegal on its soil in 2003, due to "a risk to the public order because it incites its readers to murder the main leaders of Iran who are likely to make an official visit to France". But this also checks out and the book is available on google books.
you removed "Anthony Hyman wrote in 1990 that the newspaper is "devoted to the personality cult of Masud Rajavi, the leader of this authoritarian party"." But I checked the source and it indeed says "Its popular weekly publication Mojahed, banned in November 1980, briefly produced underground in Iran, reappeared in exile from December 1982. It is devoted to the personality cult of Masud Rajavi, the leader of this authoritarian party."

You explained "I also think that there needs to be wider explanation (from both sides) of what happened since this would also be more neutral". But you did the opposite. You removed one side and replaced it with the other. How is that neutral? I will restore this information now.VR _talk

As for the image, I think we can include both images.VR _talk 04:51, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you delineate how MEK members being told not to read non-Mojahed newspapers is related to the Mojahed (newspaper)?
The source by Howard is published by Zed Books, which is a self publishing company. As such we should at least limit its use to less contentious stuff.
Ervand Abrhamian says "In criticizing the regime's political record, the Mojahedin moved the issue of democracy to centre stage. They argue that the regime had broken all the democratic promises made during the revolution…" In the next paragraph, Abrahamian writes "The paper Mojahed brought together many of these accusations against the regime in a series of long articles …". You are saying that the second paragraph is not related to the first, but it seems to be.
The Hyman source seems highly WP:UNDUE not only about what it says about the Mojahed but also about what it says about press in Iran being "very critical of the government" (press in Iran are governmental mouthpieces). You need more sources to add something like that to Wikipedia. Fad Ariff (talk) 16:53, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, because that gives historical context to why the newspaper was important. For example, Goulka says (p 70) "MeK leaders permit group members to listen only to these stations and to read only internal reports and bulletins, such as the MeK-produced Mojahed newspaper and other approved texts. Violators are punished."
- The source by Howard is published by Bloomsbury Publishing, which doesn't look self-published to me. The book has been cited 60 times according to google scholar[2]
- The first paragraph says nothing about the newspaper and the second paragraph says nothing about "moved the issue of democracy to centre stage." I don't see how they're related.
- Anthony Hyman does appear to be a scholar of some standing. His article was published by Index on Censorship. And you certainly quoted him out of context, what he actually wrote was "None of the five are really independent of the state, all being broadly pro-regime. However, they are far from being mouthpieces of the government, often being very critical of the government or of policies." This was also published in 1990, and the press freedom situation has changed drastically in Iran since. In any case, what does this have to do with Mojahed?
- Finally, do you have any objections to adding the image "File:Let'sCreateAnotherVietnamForAmerica-Persian.jpg" to the article? We can add it to the body if you wish. It seems way more informative than the cropping you uploaded. VR _talk 05:59, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  The Hyman material is published in an academic journal by a career Middle Eastern specialist. Ergo, debating its reliability is a bizarre discussion. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]