Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethnic politics of Khuzestan

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Rename to Politics of Khuzestan and keep for now. Although it shows POV, I can't see that it was forked solely with that intention. The main Khuzestan Province article would be too big and unbalanced with this included. If the issues aren't cleaned up quickly feel free to bring it back here. Yomanganitalk 11:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic politics of Khuzestan

Article is a clear POV fork, non-encyclopedic, contains much WP:OR and parts fail WP:V. If we look at the Talk:Ethnic politics of Khuzestan we find that the article was about the Ahvaz Bombings which now has an article, and all the useful informations here are already at Ahvaz Bombings, Khuzestan, History of Khuzestan, and Arabs of Khuzestan. When it was started it should have taken to Wikinews. Anything that is WP:V here should be moved to the articles I mention previously. This article is not needed and there is no similar article like it anywhere in other resources or encyclopedias and the title is WP:OR. Khorshid 10:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I agree Khorshid, too. This subject doesn't look to need to have an article, in addition its information are mostly in the articles like Ahvaz Bombings, Khuzestan, History of Khuzestan, and Arabs of Khuzestan, though this article is mostly analytical and may contradicts "No original research" policy.So I think it'd better to be deleted.--Soroush ☺talk | ☼Contributions 11:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep I am not an expert on this topic, but it seems that wikipedia should have an article to capture the ethnic tensions that are documentable in this region. Ahvaz Bombings and Arabs of Khuzestan could be merged to this article. If you want to rename the article to say "tensions" rather than "politics" I would be ok with that. According to Amnesty International [1], Much of Iran's Arab community lives in the province of Khuzestan which borders Iraq. It is strategically important because it is the site of much of Iran’s oil reserves. Historically, the Arab community has been marginalised and discriminated against. Tension has mounted among the Arab population since April 2005, when scores of Arabs were killed, hundreds injured and hundreds more detained during and following demonstrations. The demonstrations were undertaken in protest at a letter which came to light allegedly written in 1999 by a presidential adviser, who denied its authenticity. This appeared to set out policies for the reduction of the Arab population of Khuzestan, including resettling Arabs in other regions of Iran, resettling non-Arabs in the province, and replacing Arabic place names with Persian ones MPS 17:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Few points: 1) Please show evidence of ethnic tension between Arabs and other ethnic groups in the region (such as Persians, Lurs, Bakhtiaris, Qashqais, Afsharis, etc.) 2) Why should Ahvaz Bombings and Arabs of Khuzestan be merged here when it should be the other way? i.e. Merge what is WP:V here (very little) into Arabs of Khuzestan. 3) WP is not a soapbox or a political platform and the way you quote Amnesty (and bolding such a huge portion of text) is clearly evidence of this POV. 4) The Amnesty report is not neutral and it contains factual inaccuracies. Also the Amnesty report only shows tension between Arabs and the regime. In case you didnt know, there is tension between ALL Iranians and the regime. This is NOTHING to do with so-called "ethnic tension", "ethnic politic" or "ethnic conflict". Again WP is not a soapbox, not for advocacy, not for propaganda, and not to prove a original claim or point. Khorshid 17:39, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - POV fork-y. --Wooty  Woot? | contribs 23:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the article is well-sourced, and is a valid topic. Any POV problems can be fixed, deletion is not the solution. Khoikhoi 00:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per MPS. I also add that I remember seeing a documentry on Al-Jazeera regarding this, confirming what Amnesty International said. The local Al-Jazeera station there was shut-down by the iranain government for reporting this. Jidan 01:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article can be dealt with in the Khuzestan province article or Arabs of Iran. Virtually all the sources here are from separatists sites. Easily a country like former Ba'athist iraq can support a small group and that small group can setup a website and then propogate their political POV which is definitely not neutral. BTW is there is an article on Berber ethnic politics in Algeria? I think the genocide against Iranians by Arabs can also warrant an article. So these sort of articles are not helpful to anyone and are too POV oriented to have any neutrality. I do not see any valid reason for this article since it is all POV so far. --alidoostzadeh 04:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete how many Ethnic politics of... articles are there? Articles like this can easily be just POV. At best include a section in the Khuzestan or Arabs of Khuzestan article. This article actually seems more like a modern history of Khuzestan article. Khuzestan article is the best place for this.Khosrow II 05:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Khoikhoi. E104421 10:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Khosrow II --Pejman47 20:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Khorshid. Kaveh 20:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Looks like a POV fork and a huge chunk of the article is nothing but obvious (and certainly not neutral) promotional material for separatist political groups, most of which don't even seem to meet the threshold for verifiability. Accordingly, there are several other standard and generic articles about this region and/or the peoples of this region. metaspheres 20:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

*Keep We have to develop "Ethnic politics of Khuzestan" article, instead of removing it. Human rights related articles have to be kept before all else.--Karcha 22:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your block on me has prevented me from making an important point on the deleting of the Ethnic Politics of Khuzestan article [2]. As this block extends beyond the deadline for the deletion, I would like you to pass on my points.
1. The article was created as the information contained within it was judged to be too lengthy for the Khuzestan article alone: [3]
2. This was done with consensus of editors, although the name was changed from "ethnic conflict" to "ethnic politics" as "conflict" was judged too strong and POV and anyway it was recognised that the issues were of political importance.
3. A lot of work has gone into the article from people of all POVs, with the involvement of Iranian editors, and it has not been the subject of any lengthy edit war, despite the sensitive nature of the subject. This work will be lost if it is simply deleted without a merger with other articles - which I think is Khorshid's intention. It is worthwhile noting that Khorshid has made no attempt to edit the article.
4. The issue of minority rights in Khuzestan is of significant public interest [4] [5] and deserves a separate article, with details on the actors involved.
Please pass on my comments to the AfD page, so people understand the context of why the article was created.
1)There is not just Khuzestan article - there is also Arabs of Khuzestan (where most of the Arab stuff that is WP:V - not separatist propaganda - should go).
2)Both are POV and violate WP:OR. No credible evidence is there to prove this. What sources is there only shows tension between Arabs and regime, and this is same for all Iranians.
3)I have no bad intentions. Most of the article is not WP:V and violates WP:OR like the separtist political groups. What is WP:V should go into Arabs of Khuzestan where almost all the Arab information already exists and to History of Khuzestan. Terrorism info should go into Ahvaz Bombings. Since those articles already exist this article is only a POV fork and this is against WP policy.
4)UNPO and British Ahwazi Friends Society, the two links you provide, are not only not neutral they promote separatist agenda and false history. There is fact and then there is propaganda and they are 100% not fact. Also those links dont discuss "minority" rights but "Arab" rights and the current article only talks about Arabs. There are a ton of minorities in Khuzestan beside Arab. And like I said there is already Arabs of Khuzestan (which be renamed Khuzestani Arabs). And it is funny that you now agree that Arabs are a minority yet before you claimed Arabs are majority in Khuzestan! Can you make up your mind about it??? Khorshid 11:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also if we are to take your comment seriously can you please explain this: Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Ahwaz???? All I can say is WP:POINT and this policy is applied to this article too with the "sources" you provide. Khorshid 11:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (To Khorshid)

Amnesty International has highlighted a number of human rights abuses against Ahwazi Arabs in Khuzestan. In 2005, these included:
The persecution of Arabs in Khuzestan http://web.amnesty.org/wire/October2005/Iran
The alleged killing of at least 31 people in unrest in April 2005 http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130172005?open&of=ENG-IRN
The arbitrary arrest, possible torture and incommunicado detentention of Arab writer and journalist Yusef Azizi Bani-Torof http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130202005?open&of=ENG-IRN
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130322005?open&of=ENG-IRN
The incommunicado detention of Taher Mahmoud Tamimi, Mohammad Jalali and at least 37 others in a government crack-down following unrest in April http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130482005?open&of=ENG-IRN
The incommunicado detention and possible torture of close relatives of Arab tribal leader Hajj Salem Bawi http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130512005?open&of=ENG-IRN
The incommunicado detention and possible torture of Hamid Qate'Pour (teacher), Emad Rafi'i (teacher) and Mohammad Hezbawi (also known as Hezbaee Zadeh) (newspaper editor) http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130592005?open&of=ENG-IRN
Four Arabs arrested during demonstrations during El Al-Fitr in 6 November http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE130762005?open&of=ENG-IRN
Amnesty has also claimed that "hundreds" of Arabs were arrested in 2005 during a crack-down on anti-government demonstrations.

I'm not confused anything, but i think the confused one is you. Spend more time for reading and learning instead of disparaging everything--Karcha 16:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Spend more time for reading and learning instead of disparaging everything" I have warned you before about making this kinds of attacks. Khorshid 16:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per E104421, Khoikhoi, Karcha Zaparojdik (talk · contribs) 21:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any reason why you did not login when adding your comment here? Khorshid 19:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: politics should not influence history. Unfortunately some with ultra-nationalist, anti-Arab ideology want to influence this respectable forum that should be an educational tool. Arabs of Iran as a non-dominant, ethnic, linguistic and a national minority have never had the opportunity to express their identity in a Persian-dominated Iran during both, the monarchist or the current clerical regime. So it is just to allow this minority a few lines in Wikipedia. It is utterly undemocratic for the Persians to push for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alsaid (talk • contribs) — Alsaid (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

KEEP Please: Ahwazi-Arabs are indigenous to the area of Khuzestan. They date back before Islam. About 5000 years ago, long before the Achaemenid left Russia and headed toward the Iranian plateau, a Semitic nation by the name of Elamite lived in Khuzestan. They have left us signs of their blooming civilization in the ruins of Susa, Ghagharzanbill and other parts of Khuzestan, Lurestan and Fars. The Old Testament mentions their name for the first time. So we the Arabs of Iran are decedents of the Elimite. Kasravi, a well respected Iranian historian, in his book titled “500 years history of Khuzestan” writes "but it is certain and there is proof for it that during the Parthian era Arab tribes were living in provinces of Kerman, Khuzestan, Bahrain and Fars". Kasravi refers to the Tabari history book, the first Muslim historian whose work is still universally accepted and writes ‘Aam (banu-Am tribe). This means during the Sasanid era, Iran had many kingdoms, of which Aghlim al-Ahwaz (province of al-Ahwaz) was one. Other historians such as Mohammad Ibn Jarir al-Tabari, Batota and ibn Athir travel books as well as many other historians such as bin abi Yaaghobi, ibn Haghol, Estakhri, Nasser Khssrow, ibn Balkhi, el-Kamil, Habib al-Sair, Askendar Beg, Najm al molik Ghafari and others reference the existence of Indigenous Ahwazi Arabs in Eghlim (region) of al-Ahwaz or Arabistan, in one way or the other. So to say there are other ethnic groups live in Iran, it may be true but they are not indigenes to the area. In fact up to the discovery of oil in Khuzestan in 1908, the area was 100% was inhabited by indigenous Ahwazi-Arab tribes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alsaid (talk • contribs) — Alsaid (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep - The subject is noteworthy and is an issue of growing media interest due to human rights issues and unfounded claims by the Iranian regime that Western governments are responsible for unrest in the province. If there are concerns about the title, then it should be changed. A section is also needed on the province's Mandean community, which is also subjected to discrimination and state terrorism. But as the Arabs are the largest ethnic group, they naturally receive the most coverage. The issues go well beyond recent bomb attacks. Additionally, the article as it stands has 64 references, mostly Amnesty International but also including Bloomburg, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Al-Jazeera and other reliable news sources. Therefore, the claims of breaching WP:OR and WP:V policies are questionable - indeed, this article is one of the most heavily referenced on Wikipedia.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 21:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is amazing yakhi. Just before you were saying Arabs were minority and now you say again that they are majority. "this article is one of the most heavily referenced on Wikipedia." < LMAO Is good to have ppl like you around. Dont ever change. Khorshid 23:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Arabs are a minority in Iran and a majority in Khuzestan.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 23:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ahlan wa sahlan yakhi. That sounds more like the ahwaz we all know and love. But regretfully your comment is not WP:V Khorshid 23:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've no particular objections to this, only that the reason why the article was originally created was because it was decided by consensus that the Khuzestan article was getting too long. A separate article was created for the issues surrounding ethnic unrest in the province - not just the bombings, but also the geopolitical issues and human rights concerns. There have been other spin-offs from this article since then - eg Anti-Iranianism, which goes into greater detail about claims of British involvement in the province's ethnic politics.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 23:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason to merge with Khuzestan since there is Arabs of Khuzestan and Ahvaz Bombings. Anti-Iranianism is like Anti-Arabism or Anti-Semitism it is not about exact locations but general topic. saying "ethnic politics of Khuzestan" is POV and WP:OR. A wise man once says "Gimme a @#$# break!" =P Khorshid 23:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep and possibly rename it to Human rights in Khuzestan (or another alternative), the idea behind the article is valid, but "ethnic politics of" can seem POV. So let's rename it to "Human rights in..". Every country and some region articles in Wiki have their own "Human rights in..." articles, so it would be simply normal that Khuzestan has its own human rights article. Baristarim 23:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So you think every Turkish province should have a "Human rights" article even tho Human rights in Turkey already is there just like there is already Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran? What about Human rights in Turkish Kurdistan?? This is getting out of hand. Khorshid 23:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think that the human rights related issues relating to minorities such as the Arabs be transferred under a new section on ethnic groups in Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran? Or perhaps a new article on Ethnic Minority Rights in Iran, to cover all minorities? I don't really mind this, but I think it would be a mistake to put human rights issues under Khuzestan (which I think is more appropriate for historical and geographical data) or Arabs of Khuzestan (which should be anthropological rather than political). Also, I am not sure where information on regionalist, autonomist and separatist groups goes, if this article was to be deleted. There should be something there as this is an issue that has been evident for decades and is particularly important at present.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your last question is already answered: Arabs of Khuzestan. If they are WP:V. The first point about ethnic groups in Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran is valid - it should go there (as long as no OR) but not have its own article like "ethnic politics of so-and-so province". Thats OR. Khorshid 00:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just read the article, and I will change my opinion a little bit. I still think that the idea behind the article is valid, but I have to agree with Ahwaz that there might be something more than simple human rights issues.. I can also hear Khorshid's comments that some of the stuff about human rights can go into Human rights in Iran article, but I think that there is enough info about it that it could have its own article. But considering that there are some other issues talked about in the article, I think some other names could also be appropriate. I just proposed "human rights in.." because it is a quite universal word that can cover many things with subsequent sub-sections with different titles. So I don't know.. Depending on what other content can be added "human rights in khuzestan" or even the original name "ethnic conflict in Khuzestan" can be appropriate, I just thought that human rights could have been a less inflammatory compromise for a title. But the idea beneath is definitely valid in my opinion. Baristarim 02:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The title is OR. Show me evidence of "ethnic politics of Khuzestan". Khorshid 00:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I never liked the title - it can be changed, in my opinion. One editor originally created the article as "ethnic conflict in Khuzestan" in order to put relevant content from the Khuzestan article in its own article, but there was consensus that this was too strong as there has never been a suggestion that there is communal violence between ethnic groups in the province. It was changed to "ethnic politics" without much thought. But no-one really knew a better alternative. It is more than a human rights issue, but indigenous grievances touch on the area's historical autonomy, inequality, linguistic rights, civil rights, geopolitics, etc.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When the political groups are moved to Arabs of Khuzestan you dont have much left. Whats left (the Amnesty stuff) is moved to Human rights in Islamic Republic of Iran easy. Terrorism info is moved to Ahvaz Bombings. Khorshid 00:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just rename it Politics of Khuzestan (there are plenty of "politics of ..." articles on Wikipedia), so that wider political issues can be taken into account - including election results, political traditions, etc? I can see that just transferring the political stuff to Arabs of Khuzestan will continue to generate problems, with users arguing that too much importance is paid to just Arabs and that Arabs are being defined solely in terms of opposition to the Iranian regime. Such issues are often more complex. Taking the "ethnic" element out of the title need not lead to the removal of current political content, but could broaden it to include broader issues. What do you think?--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 00:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You see problem there is Iran is not like USA where state/province has autonomy. Iran has strong centralised government and provinces do not have any kind of autonomy (we can argue that one or two have it but thats something else - khuzestan has no autonomy). All the political groups except one are separatist and based outside Iran and some of them are not even verifiable. So Politics of Khuzestan makes no sense because there is no autonomous poltical system and also there are no ordinary political groups of Khuzestan, just one that is Arab in Iran (has no power), one that is "pro-federalism" outside Iran, and the rest are separatist/terrorist. So they belong in Arabs of Khuzestan. Khorshid 01:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't agree with the conflation of separatist and terrorist. I also think that there are political forces that are particular to Khuzestan - certain personalities, the way the place is governed due to its geographical and strategic significance, etc. While Iran is highly centralised, each province has a different set of political dynamics - this is what makes Iran, a highly diverse country, such a fascinating place. I think there should be articles on the politics of each major province and perhaps Khuzestan could be a good starting point.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to hear what other ppls have to say about that. My issue is that it will be mostly an Arab article with focus on south Khuzestan, like this one. In fact the only difference would be the change in titles. Khorshid 01:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily. The electoral politics and governorship of Khuzestan are not adequately covered by an ethnic focus. A broader article will make it less about ethnicity and more about politics, of which ethnicity plays just a part. Why not change the title to Politics of Khuzestan, clean up the article and see whether the problems you have raised have been addressed. If there are still problems by 20 December (a month after the conclusion of this AfD), then open up a new AfD and we can look at other ways of organising the material.--الأهواز | Hamid | Ahwaz 01:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There can be no arguments for deletion for any article because of its shortness since we have many more shorter articles about fictional Pokemon and Star Wars characters and planets, so as long as the title is correct, there is no reason why any article couldn't exist. If there is a "main article - sub-article" relation with another article, the correct remedy is to introduce a few sentences in the main, then put a "see also: X" at the end of that section. POV issues can always be addressed in the article itself, and title should be NPOV, but deletion, no. Baristarim 03:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ethnic_politics_of_Khuzestan