Talk:2024 Iranian presidential election

Clarify
Need to clarify. Does the next president serve until the end of Raisi's regular term or is it a new four-year term? I am quite suspicious over the insertion by the IP in the infobox. Borgenland (talk) 15:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Missing info
, please provide the exact quote in that supports your claims of Jalal Jalalizadeh being a candidate in this election. I have been reading the article three times and clicking ctrl+F in a futile exercise to corroborate this. Borgenland (talk) 16:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Women
what does it even mean https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2024_Iranian_presidential_election&diff=prev&oldid=1226930033&title=2024_Iranian_presidential_election&diffonly=1 Baratiiman (talk) 17:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)


 * It's already duplicated in the candidate box. Better for you to put a footnote stating that she's a woman. Borgenland (talk) 17:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Colors
The Front of Followers of the Line of the Imam and the Leader official color is black, however in the 2013 election inbox a more neutral color was selected for their candidate. Should Alireza Zakani's color be changed to a more neutral color like orange or some other color? Same question, should Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf's color be changed to another color such as yellow/gold as reflected in the 2013 election article to be more distinctive from Pourmohammadi's green color?

Below I'll list a proposal of candidate colors so that they're more distinctive and easier for readers to discern.


 * I perfectly agree with you, especially with the colors of Ghalibaf and Pezeshkian. I suggest we flip the color of Jalili with Hashemi. (check the 2013 election article) Oganesson007 (talk) 20:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I'll wait for further consensus before formally switching colors. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @TDKR Chicago 101 i think Pezeshkian and Pourmohammadi need to be swapped, green has historically always been a reformist color. Rhraj (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Good thinking! I think that's a good idea to follow precedent. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I respectfully disagree. Purple is a perfect color for Pezeshkian, as it was also Rouhani's color (the main reformist candidate in 2013 & 2017 elections. Pezeshkian is the main, official candidate of the reformists and Zarif, the key member and a minister of Rouhani's government, is also anticipated to become the minister again if Pezeshkian wins). Green on the other hand is more related to principlists, as it was Raisi's color in 2017 and 2021.
 * My take is it's much better to keep the colors consistent with previous elections (2013, 2017, and 2021). Oganesson007 (talk) 03:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Oganesson007
 * except Rouhani is rather center, in 2013 as you can look up reformist candidate is Mohammad Reza Aref, not Rouhani, it was a strategic vote for reformists, it's even mentioned in the reformist article on Wikipedia.
 * You can look up Rouhani's party Moderation and Development Party
 * Zarif himself was a reformist figure who worked extensively in the ministry of foreign affairs during Khatami's presidency.
 * He was rather a reformist that Rouhani used.
 * Green goes back to the Iranian Green Movement.
 * But all that is irrelevant because #01989c light blue has been selected and used in the last two days in the meetings. Rhraj (talk) 14:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Jalili should be green
 * See Persian Wikipedia
 * Also look at this from the edit request below AlexBobCharles (talk) 16:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Reformists Front section has been sabotaged
Pezeshkian is being quoted and referenced wrongly, he never said to vote for others nor that he's only there to promote it. Rhraj (talk) 12:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I think Iran International which is known to be very hostile toward Iran, misquoted him, as of you see the full statements in it seems he meant it in  a more literal sense of the word "principle" instead of  a political faction AlexBobCharles (talk) 12:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also if you check the source he meant that its better to vote than not vote, not that vote for other people. It seems that the person who wrote these is not fluent in Persian and misunderstood AlexBobCharles (talk) 12:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The more i read the article, the more i see errors like this.
 * The article needs to be checked AlexBobCharles (talk) 12:45, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * why do you delete the source? "What he means" is not what he's said
 * he did not say he is melted in supreme leader this isn't steven universe he said he is melted in velayet Baratiiman (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Read the source
 * بنده رهبری را قبول دارم؛ اصلا ذوب او هستم
 * رهبری means Leader
 * He didn't say ولایت فقیه AlexBobCharles (talk) 15:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Baratiiman
 * Sources like Iran Intl are biased and politically motivated. They tend to mistranslate and misquote. He's quoted by Iran intl regarding morality police that "he'll talk with them", while what he exactly said was "This force and plan is darkness, people who don't wear hijab are our children too, we shouldn't hit them or treat them badly, like my children i will talk with them"
 * This them is referring to people not the police.
 * This is only one example of how badly certain media mistranslate and misquote him. Rhraj (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If it is any consolation to you, @Baratiiman (who was largely responsible for such incoherent edits that led to the article needing a cleanup tag) had been flagged multiple times for tons of crappy grammar and POV language (a fondness for bashing rather than criticising for example) yet they insist on editing poorly in a classic case of WP:IDNHT. On another note, how the devil does a person melt? Borgenland (talk) 14:17, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Polling numbers
Should they be adjusted to remove the undecided/other vote or to take into account that in all polls? Right now the oldest one doesn't take it into account but all subsequent ones do. 193.210.194.248 (talk) 13:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Other candidates and Second round
Should Pourmohammadi and Ghalibaf's votes be included in the infobox too? They aren't independent and have parties backing themAlexBobCharles (talk) 11:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't see why not. David O. Johnson (talk) 11:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Also how will the second round be formatted?
 * Seems we need to use 2 infoboxes AlexBobCharles (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

Color of Pezeshkian
The color of the Pezeshkian is #00989D You can see this color in Persian Wikipedia

In English Wikipedia some of the editors edit this color and chenge it to wrong colors. HosseinKh87 (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Sources for results contradict each other
Right now, the Al Jazeera source lists Ghalibaf's vote total as being 3.38m. However, the Iranpress source lists Ghalibaf's figure as 3363340. It looks like the Iranpress source has a typo, replacing the 8 with a 6. Looking at Persian Wikipedia, they are using ISNA as their source for the election results, and that source is in line with the Al Jazeera source. For that reason, I'm going to edit the vote counts to be in line with Al Jazeera and ISNA, and I'm going to replace the Iranpress source with the ISNA source. If anyone here has any concerns, let me know. JasonMacker (talk) 22:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2024
The color of Jalili is: #005022, per this. 46.143.20.167 (talk) 09:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Accepted source on good faith, as I cannot read the language. Geardona (talk to me?) 00:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will note that the source says nothing about Jalilis color.
 * They inferred it from the header color. AlexBobCharles (talk) 13:11, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Why is the turnout of the first round in the lede?
It's fine to have a mention of it within the body of the article, but I dont see why it should be mentioned in the lede. The main election was the second round, which had a turnout of 49.68 % according to the article. Yet, thats not mentioned in the lede. If there are no objection, I'm going to swap the sentence on turnout from the 1st round to the 2nd round. JasonMacker (talk) 21:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Quality problems
This article is currently tagged for three quality problems: copyediting/encyclopedic tone; and sourcing.

The use of a high number of non-English sources seems unavoidable, but fluent Persian language speakers would be needed to judge the reliability of the sources.

Just browsing rapidly, the copyediting/encyclopedic tone mostly seems OK, apart from WP:RELTIME (what "has" happened", what people "have" done - in the immediate past), although there are some difficult cases such as A chatbot is trained by the debates by Iranian regime to answer questions. National Cyber Center has given AI assistants to nominees.[63][64][65]. There are many possible intended meanings of these sentences, and whatever the intended meanings are, these are extremely interesting from any point of view (e.g. lunacy, FOMO, naive faith in technology) and have to properly sourced and written in unambiguous English.

Boud (talk) 22:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I was the one who inserted the tag and have been trying my best to fix the article. The main culprit in these questionable edits is @Baratiiman, who has been flagged earlier in this talk page and has a history of inserting similar drivel in other Iran-related articles but continues to insert such ludicrous material despite multiple warnings in what appears to be a case of WP:IDNHT. Borgenland (talk) 01:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't see much problems remaining in terms of copyediting/encyclopedic aspects, though I haven't completely checked the whole article - I've just browsed. The Persian-language sources mostly seem to come from major news sources, but that's just an impression from a browse of the URLs and not a serious assessment.What sections remain of most concern in terms of copyediting/encyclopedicness? Boud (talk) 11:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The offending user has scattered their edits throughout the article, but there is residue that remains despite cleanup, mostly in sources where Persian-language references are cited. Among those in need of checking are:
 * Passages in electoral systems referring to voting requirements and surveillance of candidates.
 * Overseas voting
 * Campaign: Offending user was mostly responsible for the overcite and the clumsy splitting of the section
 * Debates: Offending user's previously unfixed edits bordered on partisan language, WP:COMMENTARY, WP:NEWSPAPER (ad verbatim statements on some occasions) and campaigning for certain candidates
 * Criticism: Offending user was responsible for the first paragraph, which despite fixes still contains a vaguely written first sentence with undefined actors.
 * Incidents: Offending user was responsible for the second paragraph, which despite fixes again still contains vague and undefined actors.
 * Aftermath: Need to copyedit the Senior Khomeini adviser thing
 * Domestic reactions: Sentences referring to accusations against Mokhber, Kayhan and the second paragraph need to be rechecked for veracity.

For perspective, also see previous concerns raised in the section Reformists Front section has been sabotaged above in this talk page.
 * Borgenland (talk) 15:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also need to verify the copyright for photos used. The offending user had been blocked before for uploading an photo and proceeded to mislead and attack editors who inquired into their provenance. Borgenland (talk) 01:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I've removed the templates about having concerns about tone and grammar. I'm not seeing any significant issues with either the tone or grammar. I can not verify the reliability of Farsi sources. But generally we don't consider sources unreliable until a user brings up a specific issue with them. I'm not seeing any specific issues.VR (Please ping on reply) 22:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I have removed the "Unreliable Sources" tag, i originally added it because a lot of the article is based on Etemadonline , which is known to have pro-reformist bias (you would even see a pop-up to vote for Pezeshkian each time you open the website). AlexBobCharles (talk) 13:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also @Baratiiman tends to only read the title of news stories and therefore they needed verification AlexBobCharles (talk) 13:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Iranian regime sued VOA in US is irrelevant
I call absolute bs

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2024_Iranian_presidential_election&diff=prev&oldid=1233073585

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2024_Iranian_presidential_election&diff=prev&oldid=1233073265 Baratiiman (talk) 03:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)


 * It’s no one else’s fault but your own if you cannot explain in a coherent way why is this relevant to this article and at the same time continue to irresponsibly insert writing so atrocious that even rightfully sourced pieces of information are flagged for possible lost in translation issues. Before calling efforts to correct your poor editing skills BS take a deep look into how much damage you inflicted in this page with your exaggerated, incoherent language and editing that has been questioned so many times by multiple editors without any effort on your part to improve on, in a classic case of WP:CIR. Borgenland (talk) 04:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)


 * the edit is valid because loss of sales is not criticism of the conduct of the election; "disabling of internet circumvention", ir that were reworded in plain English, might be relevant, but we would need to know who criticsed that. Otherwise it's an issue of the conduct of the election (unfair), not criticism. Israel: we can quote the use of "regime" in the sense of "a government that we don't like", but it cannot be used in that sense in Wikivoice (there are many different "we" in terms of Wikipedia authors and readers, and judgments of which governments "we" don't like are diverse); the Minister's comment itself is probably relevant, but would have to be summarised in proper English. Iranian-interests-section-in-US: the lawsuit/VOA/telephone sounds irrelevant; US: a brief summary of the State Dept comment would be acceptable - no need for a quote, and especially not a quote without quotation marks. Your expression absolute bullshit violates either WP:CIVIL or WP:AGF, depending on the interpretation of "bullshit". I recommend that you let  and others tidy up the article. Boud (talk) 11:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I personally would like to add further that the inclusion of Fanap is WP:UNDUE as they were most likely not the only major business to have suffered the internet outages. As for the other reactions, I am open for their restoration provided that it be made by someone fluent in both Persian and English, pending of course the provision of an alternative English source. Borgenland (talk) 11:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Update: Restored the US reaction with a more verifiable English language source. Borgenland (talk) 18:37, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Chatbot sentence for possibly recovery
I have reverted /LLMs because the meaning is unclear, allowing too many different interpretations. The sources are in Persian, so I cannot check them. The text itself violates WP:WEASEL by describing the Iranian government as a "regime", which in this context means "a government that we don't like" and we expect the reader to dislike. Moreover, it doesn't make sense as the introductory sentence to the section.I suggest that someone who has read the sources and wishes to work on a corrected version post it here for discussion before restoring it to the article. Boud (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Paging AlexBobCharles and Rhraj who could probably better understand these issues than the offending user, who by the way, has a habit of using the word Iranian regime in virtually every page they touched upon, not just here. Borgenland (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Borgenland I believe Baratiiman does WP:POVPUSH using WP:BIASED and placement of certain contents in sections they don't need to be in.
 * One bold example of this for me is [| Revision as of 03:06, 7 July 2024] . Why does that quote needs to be placed there in Aftermath rather than domestic reactions?
 * We have had this case as you said in the reformist front section before.
 * I think the word Iranian regime is also a case of many similar WP:SOAPBOX instances. Rhraj (talk) 05:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would say:
 * "Supreme Council of Cyberspace has made chatbot's to answer people question about the campaign policies of Pezeshkian and Jalili " AlexBobCharles (talk) 14:25, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Conduct section
Wouldn't it be better to merge it into the "Electoral system" section? The former is very small and has related content to the latter AlexBobCharles (talk) 14:12, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Invalid votes
Dear @Number 57, There are 607,575 invalid votes (about 2%). see khabaronline.ir in Persian and the translation. -- 22:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC) Iri1388 (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Invalid votes are not included when calculating the vote share. The infobox was inconsistent with the results table. Number   5  7  22:22, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The officials in Iran announced 53.7 percent and they counted invalid votes. aa.com.tr -- Iri1388 (talk) 22:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Other sources use the normal figure (excluding invalid votes): Nina News, Daily Sabha, Doha News, Al Mayadeen, Amwaj etc. Number   5  7  23:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Majlis Research Center, the research arm of the Iranian parliament (Majlis) as official source includes invalid votes in numbers and percentage. see rc.majlis.ir/en -- Iri1388 (talk) 23:50, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * These are all non-iranian sources and they aren't official
 * The percentage should count invalid votes AlexBobCharles (talk) 07:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The Reuters
Five people familiar with the matter told reuters the race was rigged https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-irans-khamenei-elevated-little-known-moderate-presidency-2024-07-18/ Baratiiman (talk) 12:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)