Talk:2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash/Archive 1

No indication of Israeli involvement
There is no indication of Israeli intelligence involvement at this time. The source cited doesn't mention anything about it either. Edit: The part mentioning that seems to have been removed from this page. 82.2.41.189 (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The Wayback archive URL is currently invalid. Leaving aside that WP:DAILYMIRROR is a tabloid and a no consensus source, in the source I don't see anything about Israeli intelligence being involved in the crash either. that introduced the claim. Boud (talk) 19:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 19 May 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. WP:SNOW. (closed by non-admin page mover) Queen of Hearts  ( talk ) 20:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash → 2024 Iranian leadership helicopter crash – Similar to 2023 Wagner Group plane crash. The current title really undersells the significance of this event.  Bremps  ...  15:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment — I amended your move as this is a helicopter crash. I made the same mistake myself. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think I'd be supportive, but I would prefer if we could please wait until things settle down a little. We don't even fully know what happened yet, let alone have a WP:COMMONNAME. Current events articles immediately getting a bazillion move requests opened is definitely a pet peeve of mine, we may as well close as no consensus now. Toadspike   [Talk]  15:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * In general, I agree with you, but 2024 Iranian Presidential Helicopter Crash seems safe. No one is denying that the President was aboard. 2600:4040:297C:8F00:A9E5:4E04:EFC7:7F73 (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That name would work but it would undersell the fact that the FM was also onboard.  Bremps  ...  16:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Support but we gotta wait a bit Waleed  (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * As of now, I probably wouldn't support it just to be consistent with other article titles. From what I've seen, they describe the location of the crash rather than who was aboard. Triclops Queen (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * comment maybe changing the title into "2024 iranien president's helicopter crash" would be the most the most relevent. all the media are emphasizing on Raisi's presence in the choper here CNN https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/raisi-iran-president-helicopter-crash/index.html Anticonstitutionnelist (talk) 16:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. Too clunky title. Borgenland (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose — Per Borgenland. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose for now. It is appropriately titled per WP:NCE. We should not rename until a commonname is more established. --- C &amp; C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 17:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now. Wait a little while I think. Sadustu Tau (talk) 17:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now until a WP:COMMONNAME is established. Spiderpig662 (talk) 17:48, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Support. I agree it needs to sound more notable. Wjfox2005 (talk) 18:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose other articles about crashes with similarly notable persons on board (e.g Kobe Bryant) - are consistently named by year and location 2020 Calabasas helicopter crash Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above, such a title would deviate from the standard titles for the similar pages. Egeymi (talk) 18:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose The proposed name is not (yet) a common name. The Smolensk air disaster did not become commonly known as the 2010 Polish leadership plane crash even though it killed the Polish president, his wife, the national bank head, several senior military leaders, 18 members of parliament, and senior govt officials. Boud (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: WikiProject Disaster management, WikiProject Iran, and WikiProject Aviation have been notified of this discussion. RodRabelo7 (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Succession
Isn't discussing a succession too WP:CRYSTALBALL??? Borgenland (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * not necesserly because there if facts about it, it's enshrined in the iranian constution article 131
 * look on president of iran on "inability of the president" Anticonstitutionnelist (talk) 23:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Khamenei quote
Khamenei's quote is mistranslated. He said to the people that "[They] don't need to be worried or anxious as administration of country will not be disrupted at all" Source Jondoeburner (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * (Source is english.khamenei.ir/). Thanks. That makes much more sense. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

how long till he's no longer President?
How long can he be missing until power is given to the next in the line of succession? 2602:306:BC74:6240:948:979E:186E:2296 (talk) 00:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As with who's next, when he "takes power" is decided by the Supreme Leader, whenever he wants. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Location found by the Akinci drone
Possible location at Tavil/Tawil per AJE live blog - "The official said the location is in an area called Tavil. Iran's Press TV also reported that rescue forces are heading towards the spot." The slopes are clearly steep - a gradient of something like 1 in 2, i.e. 27 degrees. Not yet usable, but there should be proper sources soon. Boud (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Varzaqan helicopter crash?
As we can see, the year isn't needed here and I doubt any sources there use it. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * No, the crashes constantly indicate the year as well as location Waleed  (talk) 04:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Reuters list of reactions
https://www.reuters.com/world/reactions-death-irans-president-helicopter-crash-2024-05-20/

Includes EU, Japan, Sri Lanka, Egypt, etc. 2Links (talk) 08:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The current listing on wikipedia seems to suggest that only Muslim countries and India cared about the search and death, which is a very odd and skewed view of the real situation. I suggest it needs to be written in the order of deliverance, alphabetically or geographically. Amoresmore (talk) 08:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Although those were the first reported, section definitely needs expanding now that there are reactions from others. Prefer organizing geographically as in other articles. 2Links (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Text mentioning continuity with vice president has been deleted
There was a line but it has been deleted that Mokhber is now president for 6 month Baratiiman (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * https://www.shora-gc.ir/en/news/87/constitution-of-the-islamic-republic-of-iran-full-text
 * Article 131 stated he first deputy of the President, is obliged to arrange for a new President to be elected within a maximum period of fifty days not 6 month 78.39.140.179 (talk) 09:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2024
(Under "Crash" section) change awkwardly phrased "Giz Galasi event" to "inauguration of the complex", which would also connect better with the preceding "Background" section. Td 078 (talk) 03:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

should we move the article since crash site location updated?
should we move the page to something like "2024 Jolfa helicopter crash" since reported a updated location? Haers6120 (talk) 02:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I'd be ok with that, but it probably requires a move request, seeing as the previous move was contested. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 02:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * in the video shown here the coordinates are N 38 46 21 E 46 43 24 Schrauber5 (talk) 03:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * According to Cedarnews the site is N 38 47 10 E 46 42 56 which is 2km away Schrauber5 (talk) 04:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * According to this image from a Turkish drone finding a hotspot, the coords are 38° 46′ 04″ N, 46° 41′ 33″ E near the village of Tavil, East Azerbaijan. I have made it so the article displays the coordinates from Wikidata so there won't have to be edit conflicts. If anyone wants to adjust the coords, please do so on Wikidata. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The videos from the Turkish drone do NOT match the videos of the actual crash site (terrain, actual crash location is NOT on a top of a ridge). Seems Bayraktar was searching in the wrong location - they likely mistook the camp fire of a freezing rescue team. Maybe they did not release the video with the correct hotspot - or maybe Bayraktar wasn't even involved in finding the crash site (despite Turkish claims). At least the current location from the Bayraktar hotspot (38° 46′ 04″ N, 46° 41′ 33″ E) is not correct. MrHRFloyd (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have adjusted the coords to 38°44′34″N 46°39′37″E, 2 km SW of Uzi. Make any change as you see fit on Wikidata here. Abductive  (reasoning) 11:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Precise location (coords)
Our article states "The helicopter's exact location and condition have not been disclosed" and provides a citation. We also have coords in use for the crash site – either the coords fail WP:V, or the earlier quote is outdated. Which is it? MIDI (talk) 10:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * That earlier quote was there more than 24 hours ago. In light of this, I think it should go. Borgenland (talk) 10:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The source is the image in this Turkish article. Abductive  (reasoning) 10:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The morning crew at the BBC finally rubbed the sleep out of their eyes and found it. I have adjusted accordingly. Abductive  (reasoning) 11:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Main picture is wrong
On the picture is not a helicopter but a plane and it is a different accident - پیدا شدن لاشه هواپیمای سقوط کرده در مازندران (tinn.ir) 85.163.239.53 (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Assuming you're referring to File:Ebrahim Raisi helicopter crash site 19 May 2024.jpg, it shows the tail and horizontal stabilisers of a Bell 212. MIDI (talk) 13:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's the correct photo, just taken from above the crash zone. The tail is the only part that survived the fire. Here is the whole crash from above showing the same tail piece:
 * https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/first-visuals-from-iran-presidents-chopper-crash-site-no-survivors-5702595 Pat2dv (talk) 14:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Foreign reactions
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/reactions-crash-iranian-presidents-helicopter-2024-05-19/

dropping this here since I can't edit Readingpro256 talk to me contribs 02:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yeah we've already used this source Waleed  (talk) 15:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Add Australia to list of reactions during search
https://www.aap.com.au/news/pm-waits-for-news-on-crash-search-for-iranian-president/

Australia prime minister also commented on the search. Amoresmore (talk) 07:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Done Waleed  (talk) 16:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Initial survivor
Ayatollah al-Hashem survived long enough to speak on the phone at least twice and update the authorities on his condition, before dying at some point before the responders arrived. Should this be reflected on the list of survivors as "0 (initially 1)" and the fatalities as 8 (initially 7)"? Varavour (talk) 15:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I mean I don't think so that this needs to be pointed in infobox, like any other incident, only the final number of fatalities is given even if some die of wounds later on. Waleed  (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * A better source would still be needed though, per WP:TASS. Borgenland (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think this was a rumour that was later proved wrong. The scene of the accident leaves no doubt that pretty much everyone died on impact and then the helicopter burned out. If he would have survived long enough to make that call he would have probably given more correct information on the seriousness of the crash, and likely would had left the wreck before it burned out. It's also impossible that he would had heard ambulances coming because they weren't anywhere nearby by then. It took the rescuers more than 12 hours after the crash to reach the place.
 * Honestly, I think someone made that up to try to calm down the rumours about the accident. A lot of early info proved to be wrong when they found the wreck: this wasn't a "hard landing", it literally crashed against the side of the mountain and burst into flames. They were likely all dead within max 10-15 minutes after the crash. Anyone who didn't die during impact was burned to death only minutes later. Pat2dv (talk) 17:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

government reaction paragraph should be turned into a bulletpoint list
it lists about two dozen people and honestly we should either cut it down or bulletpoint it NotQualified (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Yeah I agree it's getting too lengthy now. Sadustu Tau (talk) 18:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Flag salad "Reactions" section
As many of you know, most editors despise list-formatted "Reactions" sections, especially the flag icons. These sections should be converted into prose—not a bulleted (flagged) list. Sourcing should not be primary, such as tweets, and should have encyclopedic value. A politician giving his/her condolences does not have much, if any, encyclopedic value, and each certainly does not need its own sentence or paragraph. Abductive (reasoning) 09:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Even if we don't make a list, shouldn’t we write who from which state or just wich countries sent condolences? Zeeshan Y Tariq (talk) 09:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Agreed, little to add to what you've said. The flags add little more than prettiness (not a good enough rationale), and the quotes add nothing but a show of support, kind words, or sympathy (not a good enough rationale). I have no real objection to mentioning which countries/organisations/etc. that have made statements (provided it's prose AND isn't so many that it gets out of hand), but WP:QUOTEFARM and WP:LISTDD should guide us in this instance. MIDI (talk) 09:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Most of the first paragraph needs to be removed as it is virtually all primary source too. Amoresmore (talk) 09:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Xxx2023 please respond here before making unilateral moves. Your actions are no longer opposed by a solo editor. Borgenland (talk) 09:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Flags are being used to inmprove visibilty, in which reader can easily find how each country reacted to the incident. A list is the best method to present several inputs so I do not see any issue in sorting the info in such manner. Xxx2023 (talk) 09:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * But does every country's reaction follow WP:UNDUE guidelines though? Wikipedia is not a dumping ground for each country's reaction. Borgenland (talk) 09:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'd give leeway for official mourning abroad. As for the flag soup, it is clear that some editors have failed to read WP:UNDUE, not to mention the tons of copyvio, commentary and WP:QUOTEFARMs that I have had to clean up. Borgenland (talk) 09:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There are lots of articles which have a separate page regarding reaction to that certain event. Does this incident Chris Rock–Will Smith slapping incident deserve a so-called "encyclopedic" article! Let's see how most users would argue to figure out the final outcome. Xxx2023 (talk) 09:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The current paragraph without the flags gives undue weight to Muslim countries and India.
 * Why is India included considering its geopolitical relations are very minor? It's not even part of the Iranian axis.
 * Where is China? Why has the EU not been mentioned despite being involved according to other text? Amoresmore (talk) 09:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My only concern was that you would remove all content related to the sections. To be honest the latest version looks decent! Xxx2023 (talk) 09:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The problems with these 'reaction' sections is that in every case where world leader is killed, or dies, at some point all 195 countries, and innumerable 'international organisations' will have something to say about it; I think it's better to wait for an independent source to make a 'reaction to the accident' article, rather than relying on primary sources. Jeff UK  10:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the section should be removed and replaced with an aftermath section. Reactions are only required if they have a meaningful impact on humanity. Amoresmore (talk) 11:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Please add to "REACTIONS" section - Polish President Andrzej Duda (https://x.com/AndrzejDuda/status/1792468887923028454). Thanks Paawlus (talk) 13:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I've just closed the "" discussion below as a duplicate of this topic to ensure we centralise discussion. The gist there is that the section should be turned into a bulleted list because it's (too) big – I would suggest that this is a sign the section is too large rather than needing change of format. Listing every country or head of state who has said something is not of benefit to the reader (and goes against my comment above of "I have no real objection [provided that it] isn't so many that it gets out of hand"). WP:REACTIONS sums up what's going on here. MIDI (talk) 19:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2024 (4)
Skyfrostt (talk) 20:55, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * – No specific request provided. MIDI (talk) 21:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

The helicopter
Some sources say the involved helicopter was a Bell 212, not 412 which is usually used in official Iranian President travels. Aminabzz (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * which sources? Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 19:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/5/19/iran-helicopter-accident-live-president-fm-on-missing-aircraft?update=2910784. Borgenland (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, I was going to say that from the photos in the article it looks like a 212 (just 2 blades on the rotor), but was hesitant to change just on the basis of my visual impression.
 * Now that we have a source saying that, I think we should change it. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should. Rynoip (talk) 21:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I already did :) Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 21:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Nice. Rynoip (talk) 23:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * nevermind its still 212 for some reason ill try to change it Rynoip (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * But it is actually a 212... Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 23:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is? i thought the topic was about it being a 412 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/5/19/iran-helicopter-accident-live-president-fm-on-missing-aircraft?update=2910784 Rynoip (talk) 23:44, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, sorry for the confusion, the article originally said it was a 412, but it is actually a 212. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 02:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * the picture is probably not from the crashed one 172.59.212.22 (talk) 03:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Iran is not listed under oparaters in the Wikipedia page of the Bell 412 but it is listed on the Bell 212 page so I think it's very clear that it was a 212 172.59.212.22 (talk) 04:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks for the clarifictaion Rynoip (talk) 21:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Were there any signs of the helicopter having been sabotaged?195.244.210.117 (talk) 06:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I am bringing up the issue of the photo of the helicopter in the infobox. I was surprised that Wikipedia had such a closeup, free-to-use photo, and I exposed here why this photo may not be depicting the President's crashed helicopter: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk%3AIranian_presidential_helicopter_crashed_2024.jpg#Issues_with_this_photo --Inotodo (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

== What was the call sign of the aircraft and the designation of the flight? Air transports of heads of state and government has "IRAN02". kencf0618 (talk) 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Türkiye sent Akıncı drone to support search and rescue efforts
I think this is an important topic that should be included in the article. Source Tahriqedicii (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It's included Waleed  (talk) 00:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Russia sent 47 people two planes and a chopper
https://www.khabaronline.ir/amp/1908840/ Baratiiman (talk) 04:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Done Waleed  (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2024 (3)
Would suggest the inclusion of alleged suspicion and accusation of Israel and America in to the crash.(sources: 1. https://www.business-standard.com/external-affairs-defence-security/news/why-president-ebrahim-raisi-s-death-comes-at-a-sensitive-time-for-iran-124052001331_1.html 2. https://www.livemint.com/news/world/ebrahim-raisi-assassinated-many-suspect-israels-role-behind-iran-presidents-death-officials-clarify-11716202227544.html 3. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/could-israel-be-behind-the-crash-of-iranian-president-ebrahim-raisis-helicopter/articleshow/110261625.cms 4. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/iran-president-raisi-helicopter-crash-like-a-netflix-thriller-raisis-death-revives-talk-of-mossads-free-run-in-iran-did-israel-kill-iran-president/articleshow/110268901.cms?from=mdr 5. https://vinnews.com/2024/05/20/israel-denies-involvement-in-raisis-death-iran-blames-us-for-preventing-spare-aviation-parts/)

IndianSainik (talk) 15:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Israeli alleged involvement is mentioned in the reaction section and alleged American involvement in aftermath section Waleed  (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No need to push speculative matters further than what is already mentioned. Borgenland (talk) 16:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I was just mentioning it, all good and that's it. Thanks for the mention, though. IndianSainik (talk) 19:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah but what I had to do with that Waleed  (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry I didn't noticed that. Thank you for pointing out. IndianSainik (talk) 19:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template.   Mel ma nn   19:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 May 2024
Since we have confirmation of the deaths of the passengers and crew on board, this can be classified as an accident. Change the Infobox to say “Accident” from “Occurrence.” 2603:8000:CD01:B7F0:D80C:7B8B:A5D7:91B4 (talk) 00:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thank you Kiwiz1338 (talk) 03:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Move
The following "Raisi was the second president of Iran to have died in office, following Mohammad-Ali Rajai, who was killed in a bombing in 1981." Is in aftermath, it should be in background. Not relevant here.
 * Also the last 2 paragraphs should be in reactions.37.252.94.207 (talk) 05:52, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Confirmed deaths discrepancy
The crash section cites Yahoo News saying 9 were killed in the crash, but the infobox cites AP News listing the number of deaths as 8. Whichever one is wrong should be altered, if that is known. I don't have permission. JorikThePooh (talk) 21:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I think the correct number is 9 as it includes a body guard but it is already being discussed in another section Waleed  (talk) 00:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I suspect they overcounted the bodyguard. Probably need to compare it with what Iranian media actually said. Borgenland (talk) 08:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Uzi, Varzaqan
Could someone please add a link to Uzi, Varzaqan in the intro--MarcelloIV (talk) 09:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Imam of Friday Prayer
The term imam for Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem is a reference to his position as Imam of Friday Prayer in Tabriz. So it should be linked to Imam of Friday Prayer as imam is a very different position and has a whole other meaning. Jondoeburner (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Any objections to removing the Arab-Israeli contentious topic warning?
We currently have on this talk page, but there is so far only speculation about Arab-Israeli involvement. We don't have any warning about the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict, even though the event happened near the Azerbaijan border, and we don't have any warning about post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, even though Iran is under US sanctions and US-Iran relations come up often in post-1992 US political discussions.

Any objections to removing this particular template (topic=a-i) from this talk page? Boud (talk) 19:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Agree, we should really wait before at all relating the crash to Israel or anything to do with the conflict, as right now it is entirely speculation. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 19:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Apologies I forgot to remove it when I was trying to find a related article. Borgenland (talk) 20:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe link Kobe Bryant helicopter crash to Iran? 2600:1017:B8C2:648A:551:3330:2A7D:334C (talk) 00:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * what? Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 02:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No objection, I was thinking the same thing myself. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ Boud (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I would argue that it should specifically be mentioned. There have been rumors globally about Israeli involvement. The rumors are natural (i.e., the incentives would align in a way that this outcome is advantageous to Israel) given that Iran has backed Israel's opposition (Palestine, et al.) in the 2023-2024 Israel-Palestine war. Furthermore, Iran has undertaken large-scale covert sabotage against Iran in recent memory, such as the complex virus that sabotaged Iran’s nuclear program. Thus, the global rumors are a natural consequence of this crash occurring. Together, this creates one piece of evidence that, to me, is enough to justify a very brief mention (of Israel’s apparent lack of involvement) in the article here.
 * Moreover, these rumors have been so prevalent that the Israeli government came out and specifically addressed them, saying that they were not involved in this crash in any way. Example news story/source: https://www.yahoo.com/news/israel-iran-president-helicopter-crash-154340897.html. To me, this is a second piece of support for the inclusion of the topic within the overall article.
 * To be clear, I am not asserting that Israel is in any way responsible for this. I am stating that I think the rumors – and Israel’s public response to them – are important enough to be included. In fact, many may wonder specifically if Israel is involved, if Israel has denied involvement, etc. and may thus come to Wikipedia to find out. Hence, I would argue that that information should be included.
 * I would include something like:
 * "In the immediate aftermath of the crash, questions of foul play arose.[manycitations] Due to Iran’s support of Palestine[citations] during the ongoing intense conflict between Israel and Palestine,[citations] as well as to Israel’s covert involvement in sabotaging high-profile Iranian programs in the recent past (such as Israel’s sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program),[manycitations] some in the global community publicly suspected foul play by Israel.[manycitations] In response to this, the Israeli government officially denied any and all involvement with the incident.[manycitations] To date{tag:asof}, there has been zero evidence found by any party – Iranian or otherwise – to implicate any foul play at all – Israeli or otherwise – in the incident."
 * In my mind, this statement 1) addresses the issue that is certainly large enough to be addressed, as I outlined the arguments for above; 2) clearly addresses why some in the global community might have publicly speculated Israel’s involvement, and it does so using solely indisputable facts, not opinions; and 3) very clearly states that not a single person or other entity has found any evidence at all of any foul play, specifically including a complete lack of evidence of any Israeli involvement. Phatmatt12188 (talk) 22:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's really clear to me what you want - there is already a fairly long paragraph in the article (in the 2024_Varzaqan_helicopter_crash section) about the rumors that Israel was involved, the lack of evidence, and the Israeli denial. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "In the immediate aftermath of the crash, questions of foul play arose.[manycitations] Due to Iran’s support of Palestine[citations] during the ongoing intense conflict between Israel and Palestine,[citations] as well as to Israel’s covert involvement in sabotaging high-profile Iranian programs in the recent past (such as Israel’s sabotage of Iran’s nuclear program),[manycitations] some in the global community publicly suspected foul play by Israel.[manycitations] In response to this, the Israeli government officially denied any and all involvement with the incident.[manycitations] To date{tag:asof}, there has been zero evidence found by any party – Iranian or otherwise – to implicate any foul play at all – Israeli or otherwise – in the incident."
 * In my mind, this statement 1) addresses the issue that is certainly large enough to be addressed, as I outlined the arguments for above; 2) clearly addresses why some in the global community might have publicly speculated Israel’s involvement, and it does so using solely indisputable facts, not opinions; and 3) very clearly states that not a single person or other entity has found any evidence at all of any foul play, specifically including a complete lack of evidence of any Israeli involvement. Phatmatt12188 (talk) 22:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's really clear to me what you want - there is already a fairly long paragraph in the article (in the 2024_Varzaqan_helicopter_crash section) about the rumors that Israel was involved, the lack of evidence, and the Israeli denial. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * In my mind, this statement 1) addresses the issue that is certainly large enough to be addressed, as I outlined the arguments for above; 2) clearly addresses why some in the global community might have publicly speculated Israel’s involvement, and it does so using solely indisputable facts, not opinions; and 3) very clearly states that not a single person or other entity has found any evidence at all of any foul play, specifically including a complete lack of evidence of any Israeli involvement. Phatmatt12188 (talk) 22:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's really clear to me what you want - there is already a fairly long paragraph in the article (in the 2024_Varzaqan_helicopter_crash section) about the rumors that Israel was involved, the lack of evidence, and the Israeli denial. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Türkiye claims
Turkish daily Türkiye reports the following in its article : According to what an Iranian security source we reached told our newspaper, the helicopter carrying the Iranian President shared crew and passenger classification information shortly before take-off. Foreign Minister Abdollahian and Tabriz Governor Malek Rahmati were planned to travel together in helicopter number 2. At the last moment, the General of the Revolutionary Guards Corps together with the Tabriz Representative of the religious leader Ali Khamenei, Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem, were put on the helicopter.

The helicopters carrying Raisi were [usually] selected from Russian aircraft affiliated with Revolutionary Guard Corps. A 30-year-old US-made helicopter was chosen for the Tabriz trip. Another important detail is that while the previous pilots were selected from the Revolutionary Guard Corps, the flight crew for this trip was appointed from the Army staff. Three different tracking devices were fixed on the helicopter before the accident. In addition to the standard GPRS and transponder, a special system that provides 72-hour uninterrupted signal continuity was installed in the vehicle carrying Raisi. However, the location of the helicopter could not be determined. Not sure how reliable Türkiye is, so not putting this in the article for the time being. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 16:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's a reliable source, so I've parenthetically included it. kencf0618 (talk) 01:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

correct typo
Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said he did not feel comfortable sending condolences to Iran for its provision of militarily aid to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 200.12.168.26 (talk) 21:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅, thanks. - ZLEA  T \ C 02:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Ale-Hashem
BBC cites Iranian sources saying he survived for an hour. This may end up being information that turns out to be untrue later on, and it's only sourced to Iranian statements. Harizotoh9 (talk) 08:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

link to an existing wikipedia page for Ilham Aliyev
In the section 2024_Varzaqan_helicopter_crash-> Reactions-> Foreign. The Azerbaijan President page is not linked to the president Wikipedia page. Please do the link to this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilham_Aliyev Siddhu2411 (talk) 09:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * - This is already linked to previous in the article.  G M G  talk  11:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Some videos of the wreckage
I've found these videos  in the Mehr News Agency website but I'd like to confirm if they are available under a free license before uploading them. Any thoughts? Basque mapping (talk) 21:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Commons:Template:Mehr suggests that the licence Mehr uses is compatible. Commons:Category:Mehrnews review needed might be helpful too. MIDI (talk) 08:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * This would depend on whether it is the original source of the content. You can find similar info at the bottom of every Wikipedia article, but we also include some fair use, non-free content which is not covered under the license because it doesn't originate from Wikipedia.  G M G  talk  11:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Raisi's helicopter leaving Khudafarin (cropped).jpg
Is this the president's helicopter or a rescue helicopter? The caption on Wikipedia differs from the one on Commons. The image has no source URL to verify. Schierbecker (talk) 20:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I found the photograph here. It is of the president's helicopter. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 21:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * According to who? Schierbecker (talk) 22:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The source is MEHR, relying on Tabriz. Kentucky Rain24 (talk) 22:28, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * From MEHR: "Tabriz- The helicopter carrying the president on its way back from Khodafarin to Tabriz fell in poor conditions in the region; the interior minister confirmed the crash announced the dispatch of relief groups to the region." This doesn't verify the caption. Is this the helicopter carrying the president, or another helicopter in the same convoy? Schierbecker (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * New York Times photo caption: "In a photo provided by Islamic Republic News Agency, the helicopter carrying Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi took off at the Iranian border with Azerbaijan". -- Green  C  22:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That photo comes from the Islamic Republic News Agency and from a different photographer. Schierbecker (talk) 23:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It is the same helicopter. The photographs have different angles. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * There were three helicopters involved in the convoy. How do you know? Schierbecker (talk) 06:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I've just seen this discussion, having just made this edit. The image source does not verify that the helicopter in the photo is the one that crashed and not one of the other two – the image caption is simply "The official opening ceremony of the joint project of Qiz Qalasi Dam". The NY Times source is a different photo so we must not WP:SYNTH that it's a photo of the same aircraft, but given the source of that image is the same batch (MEHR) as the other, the initial source does not provide verification. MIDI (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the image to the article, with a new caption. The image was removed with a claim that it was nominated for deletion at Commons. A claim that does not check out. The original image it was cropped from is from Mehr, and they do licence their images as CC4.0, so all is good. Mjroots (talk) 13:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Setting the record straight, the image removed was not the one in the infobox, but another image elsewhere in the article. Mjroots (talk) 13:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification, but also for reinstating the image with an appropriate caption. MIDI (talk) 13:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Age of the helicopter
The article says:

This makes no sense. The last year of the late 1960s was 1969, meaning that the helicopter was at least 2024 − 1969 = 55 years old. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 19:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Reading the sources, I am fairly confident that the Reuters article means that the Bell 212 model helicopter was first developed in the late 1960s, but this specific helicopter it may be 40 to 50 years old.
 * I do think this section is misleading in its phrasing, as the Reuters article says "Experts said the few details available suggested it may be 40 to 50 years old.", which seems to be less certain than the phrase "The aircraft was said to be around 40 to 50 years old." I would support a complete rewriting of this section. Lunsel (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I concur with your interpretation of the source (https://aviation-safety.net/ appearing not to mention any dates). The previous wording implied two different ages of this specific unit, rather than an introductory date of the model and then the age of the specific airframe involved. MIDI (talk) 19:56, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'll propose the following wording to see if there's a consensus:
 * The helicopter involved was a Bell 212 model, which was initially designed by Bell Helicopter in the late 1960s, and introduced in 1971. This specific helicopter, with MSN 35071 and registered as 6-9221, is currently believed to be 40-50 years old, given the current available information. Lunsel (talk) 20:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. But someone has already changed it. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 20:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe you can add the bit about when the model was designed and introduced. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think the "someone" who already changed it may have been me before I commented above :). Comments on Lunsel's proposed wording: "initially", "currently", and "given the current available information" needn't be included. Bell 212 should be linked. Reworded proposal:
 * The helicopter involved was a Bell 212, which was designed by Bell Helicopter in the late 1960s and introduced in 1971. The airframe had the serial 35071 and was registered as 6-9221, and is believed to be 40-50 years old.
 * MIDI (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Great. I like this. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I am okay with this, thank you! Lunsel (talk) 22:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Is this now. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I am tending to prefer 6-9207 for the Bell's tail number, which might set the cat among the pigeons. Both ASN and Airliners.net confirm this identity for Bell c/n 35071, although the IRIAF does have some history of renumbering their aircraft when it suits them. The last good photo of 6-9207 (dated 2012) shows it in basic camouflage scheme, but clearly states it is a VIP machine that transports the President. I am open to persuasion that during the last 12 years along with a spanking new paintjob, it was re-registered, but I would need to be certain of the source, and currently none of the sources allegedly supporting '6-9221' mention this serial, so where exactly has it come from?
 * What is not open to negotiation is the age of the machine; the design may be 40-50 years old, but this particular airframe is from 1994, making it closer to 30 years old, as per the article in Türkiye (see below). This is just basic commonsense (for an aviation buff - maybe less obvious to newspaper hacks or the general public);
 * Here is my synopsis of the Bell production line from that period -
 * c/n 35070; 6-9206 IRIAF
 * c/n 35071; 6-9207 IRIAF
 * c/n 35072; PNC-187 Policia Nacional de Colombia, w/o 22 March 1998
 * c/n 35073; PNC-0488 ex PNC-188
 * c/n 35074; PNC-189 damaged Dec 1994, later to G-BWOS Heliwork, Thruxton (UK), re-exported to Colombia April 2000
 * However obscure their subsequent history, these are all 1994 build machines. It is not new research - it is just how aircraft production lines work.
 * WendlingCrusader (talk) 21:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for the above c/n listings? - ZLEA  T \ C 14:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I may have found something. The Aviationist seems to show some conflicting X posts.  To be specific, the Intelli Times post includes an image of 6-9221 (with the serial clearly visible), showing that it had a four-bladed rotor and was therefore a Bell 412.  On the other hand, the same article includes a post by AmirGM showing what Amir believes to be the accident aircraft, a Bell 212 (the same one in this article's infobox) with the same livery as the Bell 412, with a two-bladed rotor clearly visible.  Meanwhile, The Aviationist itself states that the aircraft was a Bell 212 was "a former Iranian Air Force helicopter that was converted three years ago to be used by the Iranian government."  Based on the Intelli Times image, it's clear that 6-9221 was not Bell 212 c/n 35071 as has been reported, though it's possible that 35071 rather than 6-9221 was the accident aircraft.  Unless and until clearer pictures of the wreckage are released, we might have to include a note that sources disagree on the model of the helicopter involved. -  ZLEA  T \ C 14:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Didn't really "crash in severe weather"
The infobox's Summary field says that the helicopter "crashed in severe weather". However, the testimony of Gholam-Hossein Esmaeili, the head of the President's Office who was traveling in one of the other helicopters, contradicts that: Gholamhossein Esmaili said on Monday in an interview with the state TV that weather conditions in Iran’s Varzaqan region, where president Raisi’s copter crashed, was perfect at the start and during most of the flight that took place a day earlier.

…

He said the helicopters had taken off at around 1:00 p.m. local time on May 19 while weather condition in the area was normal.

After 45 minutes into the flight, the pilot of president Raisi’s helicopter who was in charge of the convoy, ordered other helicopters to increase altitude to avoid a nearby cloud. Another one: Esmaeili said that weather conditions were favorable during the flight, with only one area being cloudy.

“Half an hour after the flight, there was cloudiness near the Sungun copper mine, but it was not fog. Perhaps there was fog deep in the gorge, but there was no fog along our flight path. The clouds were slightly higher than the helicopter. The pilot of the helicopter with the President on board, as commander, gave us instructions to gain altitude and continue moving above the clouds.

The helicopters increased altitude, and after about 30 seconds our pilot realized that the President's helicopter was missing. Eventually the clouds cleared and we saw the Sungun copper mine. The severe weather with rain started after the crash, impeding the rescue efforts. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 15:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

None of the three presidents went to his funeral
. Baratiiman (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Helicopter registration
As the ASN Wikibase is being challenged as not being reliable (IMvHO, it is, because sourcing is insisted upon), I've been looking at the sources given there, and found this tweet by a news agency. Can we use this for the registration instead of ASN? Mjroots (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Courtesy ping for, who challenged the ASN Wikibase. Mjroots (talk) 17:47, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, the Intellitimes blog doesn't show up on the reliable sources list, nor was it ever brought up for discussion by anyone on the noticeboard, nor does it show up as ever being used as a source on Wikipedia. Celjski Grad (talk) 18:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Tag
Can the current tag be removed from the article now? Kiwiz1338 (talk) 03:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Time on May 19th?
Currently and since creation, the article has not specified a time on May 19th or even a rough time of day like Morning, Noon, Afternoon or Evening. From what I can tell from the creation time it was in the morning. Any articles or sources or references that say the time? Alexysun (talk) 02:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Template:Infobox aircraft occurrence doesn't have a field for the time (odd?), but the "Crash" section does indicate around 13:30 local time. Moscow Mule (talk) 03:22, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Tehran's main boulevard
In the funeral section: hundreds of thousands were estimated to have followed the procession down Tehran's main boulevard. That's what the says but even so, it must have a name... Moscow Mule (talk) 03:25, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Probably someone who's been there could best answer. I have my guesses but I'm afraid of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The clue is it is said to run from either the University or Enghelab Square to Azadi Square. Borgenland (talk) 05:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Casualties
Per [], I can only count eight people (5 passengers and 3 crew). Who was victim no. 9??? Borgenland (talk) Borgenland (talk) 10:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This article adds 'A bodyguard' not listed on the Al Jazeera link. - Raisa, Amir-Abdollahian, Ale-Hashem, Malek Rahmati, Raisi’s head of security, a bodyguard, 3 Flight crew.  Makes 9,  but I've changed it up a bit,  so the lead sentence makes it clearer everyone died,  then we list who was onboard. Jeff UK  10:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * AP now reported it as 8. Borgenland (talk) 10:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 8 seems to be the number everyone is settling on, I think 'Head of Security and bodyguard" was originally misconstrued to be two different people.  Long live the Oxford Comma! Jeff UK  11:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if anyone's in the middle of doing this, but the article is (still) contradictory – lead lists eight people, body says "It was eventually reported that nine people were in the helicopter when it crashed", and the infobox (worst of all) says 6 pax + 3 crew = 8 occupants. I think the quote ("it was eventually reported...") is probably superfluous, unless we're discussing how number of occupants was misreported or something like that; I think it can probably come out altogether. If that goes, it's only the infobox that needs fixing. MIDI (talk) 12:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I tried to change this, but Jalapeño reverted my edit. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 12:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Here's the thing, when I monitored the proceedings in the morning of 20 May it was 9, since the evening news sources are calling it 8. In this case, it would be best for all to consult Iranian media and recheck the time stamps for all sources uses in this issue. Borgenland (talk) 12:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * AP, quoting IRNA, writes:
 * I'll try to change to eight again. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 13:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The info box is inconsistent in its numbers. It lists six passengers and three crew (9 total) and 8 fatalities. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Corrected it to 5 passengers based on confirmed identities. Would have wanted to identify all if it weren't for WP:MEMORIAL. Borgenland (talk) 15:12, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Other Wikipedias(French, Chinese, German, maybe more) list 6 passengers and 3 crew as well; please confirm that 5 passengers making 8 fatalities is correct? Zarathusa (talk) 15:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 8 people per this BBC article on the funeral []. It is most likely that the other Wikipedias are not updated maybe due to lesser oversight and coordination with other language projects. Borgenland (talk) 16:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * A picture of the funeral on AP: [] also shows 8 coffins. Borgenland (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I was just looking at the same photo and counted only 8 coffins. I wonder if the president's coffin is seperate as I can't imagine his would have been in the two stacks of three. I would imagine he would be given more deference. Any other photos showing the coffins? Jurisdicta (talk) 23:27, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I counted the one in Tabriz. It would be awkward to stuff a 9th body given the positioning of the coffins inside the truck. Borgenland (talk) 05:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I counted the one in Tabriz. It would be awkward to stuff a 9th body given the positioning of the coffins inside the truck. Borgenland (talk) 05:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 May 2024 (2)
The coordinates mentioned here reflect a position more that 5km to the north of the actual location. The correct coordinates is as following 38°43'09.0"N 46°39'18.0"E this coordinate can be cross referenced with the physical and vegetaion pattern existed in the photographic evidences from the crash site, which can also be found at the following website: https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/iran-president-ebrahim-raisis-death-how-the-deadly-chopper-crash-unfolded-2541700-2024-05-20 Deja7Vu (talk) 22:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * CNN reported:
 * CNN has confirmed the geolocation of the crash site of the helicopter carrying Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in the mountainous region of Varzeghan, near the village of Uzi…
 * …the exact location at 38.7189°, 46.6548°
 * It was first geolocated by Nathan Ruser, an analyst on the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Cyber, Tech & Security team (ASPI CTS), which CNN later confirmed.
 * Ruser's 38.718959°N, 46.654892°E is 38°43′08″N 46°39′18″E (2 km to the south-west of Uzi), which is different from 38°46′04″N 46°41′33″E (1 km to the east of Tavil), the coordinates displayed in the Turkish drone video feed (lower right corner, marked by "NEWPOI TGT"). Ruser talks about why the Turkish coordinates can't be correct:
 * …since it was a helicopter crash into the side of a mountain, it was likely quite high (vs the Turkish drone coordinates that were 100m off the valley bottom).
 * — UnladenSwallow (talk) 10:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The distance between these two locations is 6.33 km, Bell 212's cruise speed is 186 km/h, working out to 2 minutes of flight. Could it be that something "fell off" the helicopter, and it was able to continue its flight for another 2 minutes? I don't know. Or maybe the object located by the Turkish drone was a simple campfire. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 10:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * thoughts? — UnladenSwallow (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Looking at satellite maps, the location identified by the Turkish drone does not match the area shown in the video of the crash site, while Ruser's location does. Clearly, the Turkish drone coordinates are wrong. I'll remove them from Wikidata and change the article. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 May 2024
Section = BACKGROUND Change "serial number" to "construction number" Change "aircraft registration number" from 6-9221 to 6-9207 Change "estimated to be 40-50 years old" to "built in 1994" with optional "and was 30 years old at the time of the crash" Remove "Much of Iran's military air fleet was acquired prior to the 1979 Revolution"

These are FACTS as explained by myself in the TALK pages. Whilst Reuters and others are perfectly acceptable 'reliable' sources for politics etc, when it comes to aviation matters, you can sometimes find that their 'aviation correspondent' is also a part-time racing commentator and property expert. Much of the Background section is attributed to AP correspondent Jon Gambrell, a foreign correspondent, photographer and news leader based in Dubai. My own field of expertise is just aviation.


 * Within the aviation community, "construction number" (usually abbreviated to "c/n") is standard terminology. The problem with 'serial number' is that it is ambiguous and often refers to military registrations where they are in number format. i.e. civilian aircraft have registrations, military aircraft have serials, but they are the same thing. Registrations and serials can change with change of ownership, but construction numbers are provided by the original manufacturer, and stay with the aircraft for life. This is basic aviation knowledge. Unfortunately the UK CAA themselves are guilty of using 'serial number' when they should know better, but note how both sources for Bell 212 production (see below) use "c/n".

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/388106
 * The original source for incorrect registration 6-9221 is ASN Aviation Safety Network, which is still a valid source because they have updated their information to 6-9207. The archive version of the ASN page is listed as a source for '6-9221' in the INFOBOX, but that is as relevant as an archive version of this Wikipedia page. Forget the archive - use the current ASN page.

https://www.rotorspot.nl/product/b212.php https://www.helis.com/database/model/Bell-212/cn?pag=10
 * The aircraft construction number (c/n) provides a huge clue to the age of the aircraft, as manufacturers tend to start at number "1" (or some other arbitrary number) and move on sequentially. Bell 212 helicopters manufactured in 1971 had construction numbers in the block commencing c/n 30501 (et seq). The crashed aircraft was c/n 35071, which is clearly a different era, being one of the newer machines built in Canada at Mirabel (Quebec) commencing 1988 - this example being a 1994 build machine. Finding a source that encompasses all the necessary information in one place nearly killed my computer, but I got there eventually. Rotorspot.nl provide a production list showing where c/n 35071 sits in relation to other Bell 212s, and helis.com goes further and identifies 1994 as the build year for c/n 35071 / serial 6-9207, and other machines that were adjacent to it on the production line in that year. Also see my explanation on the TALK page.

The actual amount of Iran's military air fleet that pre-dates the 1979 Revolution can be accurately quantified by looking at Flight Global's annual review of World Air Power. But you also need to factor in how successful Iran has been in getting around the sanctions problem, updating these older aircraft, and/or sourcing aircraft from elsewhere (i.e. Russia). Airliners.net is a wonderful resource for high quality photographs of IRIAF aircraft, showing which ones are genuinely active. But above all else, is the statement even relevant now that I have shown that the crashed helicopter is from 1994 ?
 * Returning to the contributions from correspondent Jon Gambrell; I am not 100% happy with most of his contributions to the Background section.

Whether Iranian aircraft 'often fly without safety checks' is a very contentious (and almost certainly wholly unprovable) statement. And I see no evidence that 'Iran purchased the (crashed) helicopter in the early 2000s'. Or that it even matters. I do not feel that any of these statements add value to the article. WendlingCrusader (talk) 12:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The only source that I've been able to find regarding this information was a twitter post from The STRATCOM Bureau, but it doesn't seem to be the official STRATCOM judging from the fact that it has a pakistani emblem on its logo, location "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" and mostly publishes pakistani news.
 * The Aviation Safety Network relies on user contributions as said on the top of the page: This information is added by users of ASN. Neither ASN nor the Flight Safety Foundation are responsible for the completeness or correctness of this information. If you feel this information is incomplete or incorrect, you can submit corrected information.
 * The Bell 212 with registration 6-9207 exists but whether that was the actual aircraft involved is unknown and is quite questionable with a lack of reliable sources.
 * So unless there are valid reliable sources, I would regard this information as unreliable Aviationwikiflight (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Aviationwikiflight Please clarify which exact piece of information or source you claim is unreliable?
 * If you mean AviationSafetyNetwork, be aware that firstly that it is used on numerous Wikipedia aviation pages, and secondly if you are questioning the registration 6-9207, then you are also questioning 6-9221, because both registrations came from ASN. It leaves us removing almost every piece of information except that it was probably a Bell 212, unknown identity, unknown age. Was that your intention? WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The sources used by the Aviation Safety Network are probably unreliable regarding the registrations. I do question both registrations as the sources used do not appear to be reliable enough.
 * The only pieces of information that we know about the aircraft was that it was a Bell 212 and that it was purchased somewhere in the 2000s,  , but other than than, nothing else is known. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ASN appears to be both WP:TERTIARY and WP:UGC, and should therefore be avoided. Its accuracy is irrelevant; we should use the sources it cites (if WP:RS) rather than use a tertiary source. MIDI (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ASN is indeed an unreliable source. As for the identity of the accident aircraft, I am fairly certain that "6-9221" is in error.  The Aviationist features an X post from Intelli Times that confirms that 6-9221 was (is?) a Bell 412, with an image clearly showing both the serial number and four-bladed rotor.  In contrast, most sources seem to agree that the photos of the two-bladed Bell 212 are of the accident aircraft.  I have found three sources that back up the "6-9207" serial number, being AvioNews (which had previously claimed that it was 6-9221 the day prior), Financial Times (which clarifies that this is based on "open source intelligence analysts"), and Viva (in Indonesian). -  ZLEA  T \ C 15:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have clarified in the "Background" section that sources are reporting two different IRIAF serials, and I have removed the serial entirely from the infobox until this is sorted out. - ZLEA  T \ C 16:06, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you - I was beginning to think that no-one was listening to me. Whilst your edit is a good step in the right direction, I still feel we (you) could go further. Firstly it cannot be 6-9221 as that belongs to a different type (Bell 412), but maybe that is too much to ask at this time. I will repeat my point that 'serial number 35071' should read 'construction number (c/n) 35071', and indeed c/ns are usually presented after the registration.
 * The production list you asked for earlier is at https://www.helis.com/database/model/Bell-212/cn?pag=10
 * You will note that this list is at page 10, and covers the airframes from 1988 built at Mirabel, Quebec (hence the Canadian test registrations). You will also note the column headed C/N, and that the list is not necessarily 100% complete. It is more than likely that these aircraft were supplied to Iran via an intermediary to circumvent the embargo and keep Bell Textron in the clear, hence records can be less than complete.
 * Also we should absolutely dispense with 'the helicopter involved is estimated to be 40-50 years old'. The original design is 'over 50 years old', but in all probability the crash aircraft dates from 1992 or 1994, whatever it's actual serial is. This photo https://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran-Air-Force/Bell-212-Twin-Two-Twelve/1558135 carries text describing the VIP flight as consisting of four Bell 212s, and one Bell 412, and indeed on close examination shows three of the four 212s plus the 412 at the back, tail serials 6-9205, 6-9206, 6-????, and 6-92(21) at the back.
 * Here is the current favourite for the crash a/c, 6-9207 shown in 2012 https://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran-Air-Force/Bell-212-Twin-Two-Twelve/2079440 with accompanying text "VIP Aircraft. A test flight before boarding Mr.President." Of course that text is typically generated by the original photographer, so I am not offering it as any form of proof. Plus that was 12 years ago.
 * Having identified three VIP Bell 212 by serial, the fourth is 6-9204 https://www.airliners.net/photo/Iran-Air-Force/Bell-212-Twin-Two-Twelve/2433899, built 1992, with c/n 35057. Helis.com have no listing for c/n 35057, whereas rotorpsot.nl confirm both 35057 and 35059 as EP-???, i.e. unknown Iranian ID. By a process of elimination, this leaves c/n 35059 as most probably 6-9205. There is no source to back that final piece of the jigsaw, but it fits like a glove, and I am a great believer in Occam's Razor
 * To an non-Aviation person a lot of the above is probably hard to follow, but basically the VIP fleet consists of four Canadian built Bell 212s, two built in 1992, and two more in 1994, plus the single Bell 412 about which even less is known. I am in no way advocating we state categorically the crashed aircraft was from 1994, but please, please can we ditch the 40-50 years old nonsense. At best it is lazy journalism, and at worst a clumsy attempt to portray Iranian aviation as existing in the dark ages.
 * WendlingCrusader (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm hesitant to remove 6-9221 as many (most?) reliable sources are still reporting that it was the accident aircraft. To be fair, I have yet to see any images of the crash site that can confirm whether the accident aircraft was a Bell 212 or 412, so unless new crash site images have been released since I last checked, I don't want to discount the possibility that it was 6-9221.  With that said, I will propose the sentence to be changed to something along the lines of:
 * The helicopter involved has been reported by various media to be either a Bell 212 with registration number 6-9207 or a Bell 412 with registration number 6-9221.
 * The infobox would also have to be updated with the aircraft type being listed as "Bell 212 or Bell 412". Given the apparent confusion regarding the identity of the accident aircraft, it might be best to not include the construction number for the time being until more concrete proof of the aircraft's identity is found. -  ZLEA  T \ C 02:46, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I totally approve of your suggestion. Please go ahead.
 * Meanwhile what we really need is an Iranian spotter to report back from Mehrabad as to which helis are left on the flightline there. TBH it wouldn't surprise me if the missing machine was any from the range 6-9204 to 6-9207, or indeed the solitary Bell 412. I'll do some more digging around now that I've got my ducks all lined up (house joke there - two of ours went AWOL early this morning). WendlingCrusader (talk) 09:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Actually, it seems that most sources now agree that it was 6-9207 (including the one that was used to support the accident aircraft being 6-9221), and almost all that previously said it was a Bell 412 have switched to say that it was a 212. I think it's safe to remove the mention of 6-9221. -  ZLEA  T \ C 15:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Synchronicity! — UnladenSwallow (talk) 15:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have removed the mention of 6-9221 from the sentence and added the IRIAF serial back to the infobox. Hopefully there is no further confusion among sources. -  ZLEA  T \ C 15:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The Islamic Republic News Agency has published a photo from the inauguration of the dam showing a Bell 212 flying with the caption "the helicopter that carries the president", so the registration number must be 6-9207. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 15:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Previous helicopter incidents with Iranian presidents
This fact seems relevant, but I don't know where to put it: Iranian presidents Abolhassan Banisadr and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have both survived their own helicopter crashes while in office. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 14:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That's relevant. I tried placing it in "Background", see if it sticks. (Banisadr survived two, according to his article. ) Moscow Mule (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I recall a news report on Al Jazeera saying that it’s also not the first time a senior official in Iran got killed on cranky old aircraft. Will try and find a ref. Borgenland (talk) 07:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Location relative to Uzi
The article says "the helicopter crashed approximately 2 km southwest of the village of Uzi". This is supported by the BBC reference, which says "BBC Verify has confirmed the location of the helicopter crash site to a point in the mountains 2km (1.2 miles) south west of the village of Uzi, in north-west Iran." I appreciate that WP:VNT applies here, but our article on Uzi (with its coordinates) appears to show that the crash site is 4 km north north east of Uzi. We'd be better finding sources that verify that Tavil is the nearest village, and using that as the locale. MIDI (talk) 10:53, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Upon a preliminary search, I've seen both Uzi and Tavil mentioned as the nearest settlements to the crash site. Absent a definitive, agreed upon answer, the most accurate description would probably be to say the event occurred in Bakrabad Rural District, which contains both Uzi and Tavil. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 13:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * On May 20, the President of the Iranian Red Crescent Society Pir-Hossein Kolivand announced that rescue and search teams have arrived at the wreckage of the crashed helicopter, saying that "73 rescue teams are present in the search area of the helicopter in Tawal village with advanced and specialized equipment". I think that the coordinates of the target calculated by a Turkish military drone are a much more reliable source than hearsay, i.e., that the crash site is to the east of Tavil/Tawal. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I was wrong, it was not "hearsay", it was geolocated by an analyst using Google Earth, see below. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 13:54, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It's cool that the village's name is the same with the Israeli gun Uzi. Aminabzz (talk) 18:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I doubt there is a connection between the name of the village and the gun (which was named after its inventor, Uziel Gal). I also doubt that any such connection would be relevant to the topic. -  ZLEA  T \ C 01:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

9th passenger
A small selection of news outlets reported on a 9th passenger with the name "Kruchev"

While not the most neutral source, there is a video from Warthog Defense that suggests they are a Russian national whose involvement is being covered up. Perhapes it is nothing, but in the interest of factuality it may be worth finding where these names originally were introduced. 185.67.234.25 (talk) 09:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 May 2024
There was a 9th passenger who is suspected to threaten helicopter passengers. Al Hassan jumped down that’s why he didn’t burn. Others killed by bomb in pilot cabin. Hrazavi8881 (talk) 03:37, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 03:42, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Relevance of Biden and Albanese mentions
I must question the relevance of the section reading "The U.S. State Department stated that it was closely monitoring the situation, and president Joe Biden was briefed about the incident. Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese also said that he was monitoring the situation.". To me it doesn't seem like a particularly relevant reaction (particularly when compared to the far-more substantial responses quoted from for-example the Italian prime minister or Lithuanian foreign minister) and if anything seems like a statement of the obvious (given the article describes the disappearance and death of the president of a nation of ninety-million people). HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 09:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I think it is indeed outdated, having been placed when Raisi was still missing. Borgenland (talk) 09:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That may well be the reason and if so I think strengthens the case for removing the sentences. Looking at this as a disinterested party it feels like the only reason those mentions would be kept is to have a reason to mention Biden and Albanese in the article when they are only tangentially relevant at most. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 09:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with the previous comments, this sentence does little to improve the article and adds no relevant information. I support removal of the sentence. Jurisdicta (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Jurisdicta: I've already removed the sentence on 23 May 2024 at 10:13 (UTC).
 * See this revision here:
 * 
 * I've removed the sentence as soon as I saw this discussion originally discussed by HumanBodyPiloter5. I do agree with the others that the sentence was irrelevant and was out of date (was before Raisi's death was confirmed, early on 19 May 2024). PEPSI697 (talk) 08:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 May 2024 (2)
Well-wishes and offers of support came from Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of Pakistan Shehbaz Sharif, President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and the foreign ministries of Afghanistan, China, Kuwait, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.

Adding China to the list of foreign ministeries at the end of the International section. EZJC (talk) 04:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Please add Australia as well.
 * https://www.aap.com.au/news/pm-waits-for-news-on-crash-search-for-iranian-president/ Amoresmore (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Added Aussie reaction Waleed  (talk) 16:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  thetechie@enwiki  :  ~/talk/  $  03:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Rephrasing the possible cause of the accident
Was what happenned in 2024 Varzaqan helicopter crash, Continued VFR into IMC?

''If weather deteriorates during flight or the aircraft flies into clouds, a flight that started out under VFR may turn into a flight under IMC. This is known as VFR into IMC or Inadvertent Entry Into Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IIMC).'' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.112.19.231 (talk) 13:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)