The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to post-1978 Iranian politics, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on this article (except in limited circumstances)
Changes challenged by reversion may not be reinstated without affirmative consensus on the talk page
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
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
Iskandar323: your edit added that This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity". Following my notification here, it appears you changed it to the two co-leaders would marry in an act that was framed as being for the benefit of the organization while adding this BBC source to it? How does the BBC source support this was "a matter of revolutionary necessity"? ParadaJulio (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or that this was framed as being for the benefit of the organization? ParadaJulio (talk) 15:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ParadaJulio: Why are you deleting the subject's marriage? This in the infobox and lead; it needs to be in the body. See MOS:INFOBOX and MOS:LEAD. This is core biographical information and the obvious need to have it in the body is pretty simple stuff. The only mystery here is why anybody would delete this. The last person who did so is a now blocked disruptive editor. I hope you have a very good explanation as to why you are repeating the actions of said disruptive editor. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC is the source for the same information in the lead. The quote is the New Yorker. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ParadaJulio: Please, elaborate on why you are objecting to changes here. What you are doing here, jumping to accusations without any substantive discussion of content, is not tolerable. MarioGom (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikivoicing that "This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being 'a matter of revolutionary necessity'", which is based solely on one source, contradicts WP:NPOV. Alex-h (talk) 21:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only one source is cited here, but as it has been discussed in other occasions at the MEK talk page, there are quite a few reliable sources stating the same. Either that it was an ideological marriage, that the marriage was needed to deepen the "ideological revolution", etc. We can discuss if there are enough sources or if there are contradictory sources, but this is hardly an WP:NPOV issue, when we're talking about something reflecting in reliable sources. MarioGom (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And regardless, these would be reasons to delete the supplementary sentence about the precise reasonsing for the marriage, not the core biographical information of the marriage itself - however, since it was a deeply political/ideological marriage, that is referenced in almost all the relevant sources too. Here are more relevant sources for your perusal (that's three ideological explanations, one cult/wife-swapping):
Rajavi, as the head of the organization, launched an “ideological revolution”, banning marriage and enforcing mandatory “eternal” divorce on all members, who were required to separate from their husbands or wives. He married one of the new divorcees, Maryam Azodanlu, who became, in effect, his chief lieutenant and took his name.[1]
At the Neshest it took Rajavi five days to convince members of his main revolutionary demand - that they should divorce their spouses. He wanted to ensure that members’ sexual identity would be denied and thus bring about their complete devotion to himself as their leader... Massoud and Maryam Rajavi were married in February 1985. Members were given an ideological explanation: “Maryam chose to divorce her husband in favour of her marriage to the Mojahedin’s ideological leader so that she could work with him as cooperating leading partners.” (Cohen, 2009, pp.32-39)
the Mojahedin had metamorphized from a mass movement into an inward-looking sect in many ways similar to religious cults found the world over. This metamorphosis rapidly crystallized in early 1985 with Rajavi’s new marriage...Until then, Mojahedin activists had known Maryam Azodanlu as merely the younger sister of a veteran member, and the wife of Mehdi Abrishamchi, one of Rajavi’s close colleagues…proclamation also mentioned almost in passing that Maryam Azodanlu and Mehdi Abrishamchi had recently divorced in order to pave the way for this 'great revolution...It smacked of wife-swapping, especially when Abrishamchi announced his own marriage to Khiabani’s younger sister... (Abrahamian, 1989, pp.251-255)
Iskandar323, you cited the same Guardian source twice. Which of these additional sources support the text This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity"? And please provide the page numbers from Abrahamian's and Cohen's quotes, I have not been able to find them in those books. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you have page numbers. You still haven't explained why you reverted the entire edits, including the core biographical information, instead of just partially reverting the part that you thought was not supported. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You wikivoiced This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity", even though it's a statement from a single source.
You provided other sources for the statement, but they also don't seem to support it.
Without resorting to further unnecessary hostility, elaborate on what (WP:NPOV) information you think the article is missing. ParadaJulio (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The details of the subject's divorce, as already mentioned in the infobox, and yet currently absent from the body, which provides zero explanation as to how she transitioned from one marriage to the next. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is mentioned in the infobox is that Maryam Rajavi was married to Mehdi Abrishamchi from 1980 to 1985, and to Massoud Rajavi from 1985 (dis. 2003). Apparently she also has a daughter. We could create a section about =Personal life= with this kind of neutral information like in Massoud Rajavi's article. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you could and should have done that at the time nearly a week ago if all you objected to was the explanation, instead of what you did, which was blanket reverting core facts. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Prior discussion was necessary to identify the precise problems with your edits. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What? If you cannot identify any precise problem with an edit, you should not revert it. What you are describing, preemptively reverting just in case you later think of a reason, is highly disruptive. MarioGom (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing "disruptive" about following WP:CYCLE, which allows communication between editors, and particularly when Iskandar was wikivoicing information from one source and adding new sources that did not support that statement. ParadaJulio (talk) 12:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. It is disruptive when you revert and do not clearly explain why. It took a long conversation to gather the rationale, and that is a waste of time for everyone. MarioGom (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were conflated problems with Iskandar323's edits and a discussion was required. In the future (and when possible) I will try listing each individual issue separately, but the WP:BURDEN is on the editor making the changes (not on the editor who’s trying to disentangle them). ParadaJulio (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You barely even pointed out a problem. Your obfuscating communication style is the primary problem in this thread. You could have easily tweaked my edits, but instead you reverted and wasted time byavoiding explaining your actions. You need to A) AGF (big time) and B) be an actual collegiate editor who tries to work with other editors, not waste their/community time. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
