Talk:Kish Island/Archive 1

Cleanup
i agree with the cleanup tag, which presently states The current version of the article or section reads like an advertisement. i'm sure there's a lot more about Kish than just as a tourist paradise. And certainly the IOB is something which is surely of interest - after all, there are claims that a nuclear attack on Iran is going to happen because of this... Go to the main article for references etc. Boud 19:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Advertisement tag
The tag has been there for a long while. I will try to delete the most obviously POV content. Pascal.Tesson 03:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[IMG]http://rapidshare.com/files/125342459/Kish_Iran.jpg[/IMG] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paars (talk • contribs) 09:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

"Kish, Iran" to "Kish Island"
I think "Kish Island" would be a more appropriate name for the article, any objections? --Azerbaijani 09:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, unless we should start calling all Islands followed by their parent country... e.g. "Isles of White, United Kingdom", or "Ibiza, Spain". There should be no double standards in wikipedia and all articles treated equally. --Sina 16:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Lotus hotel
The 6 star Lotus hotel will never be built due to coral reefs in the area. For more information check this out. Wikilo12 00:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Dariush Hotel/Rezidor Management
Rezidor Hotel Group no longer manages the Dariush Grand Hotel - This has been verified by Rezidor. I'm not however sure if Mr. Sabet is still the owner of the hotel. Does anyone know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.2.198.2 (talk) 14:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC).


 * Please provide source. Thanks --Sina 16:34, 19 September 2007 (UTC) Insert non-formatted text here

Location on a Map
There is a need to show the geographic location of this island on a map.Patchouli 19:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

There is a map but the location of the island is not marked on it. If anyone knows how to do it, please do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Axamir (talk • contribs) 07:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Can someone mention that Kish is a rare island made out of dead animals/fossils.
Kish is unique in the way that it's an island made out of dead animals gathering, this process has taken many years, it is unclear why it happened but it happened. There are only few islands in the world like Kish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.99.30.61 (talk) 03:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC) I've never heard of such a thing. If you have any references in hand, please provide. --Axamir (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Protected
I'm protecting this page because of the prolonged edit war that started last month. Aside from the unanswered comment above, I see no effort at discussion at all. Instead, I see the section being added, then deleted, then added, and then deleted again. This is not a game where things are meant to go back and forth. If the user (Pumpjack) wants to include this section, they need to make an argument here on the talk page. Likewise for the users that have been deleting the section. Normally we see pages being protected because of "fast edit wars", in which the reverts occur in a much smaller time frame. However, it's been getting annoying seeing the lack of discussion on this, so I'd like to encourage everyone to try to resolve this once and for all. Khoikhoi 08:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I was asked to comment on the edit war, as an impartial observer. I had not heard of the case until today.  I can see good reasons on both sides of the argument, and as a non-expert, I'll just mention what I see as the two sides, and leave it at that.


 * In favor of mentioning the disappearance: It happened and was briefly in the news.  People should be discouraged from trying to present a particular country or region in an entirely favorable light, which this article certainly does.  There is no harm in a one sentence reference under "Current events".


 * In favor of omitting mention of the disappearance: More than a million Americans disappear every year.  About ninety percent of them turn up within a few days, but that still leaves more than 100,000 unaccounted for.  Unless the missing person was notable before the disappearance, there is no reason to mention an individual disappearance in Wikipedia.
 * Rick Norwood (talk) 13:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

♠ Hello, I was asked by Pumpjack to provide another opinion as one who has not been involved in this debate. BTW, Pumpjack and I do not know each other from previous contact, I don't even know why I was chosen. Anyway, I have read through the thread of discussion and done a little bit of searching on Google regarding Kish Island. Apparently Iran considers it a crown jewel of tourism and cultural development. I also looked for cites on Levinson, and read some of them including a press briefing by Sean McCormack, State Spokesman, Washington, DC on April 24, 2007. Since the article section is unavailable for review let's first make clear that Levinson is a retired FBI agent. He was on a private business trip. I can see both sides of the debate here, and controversies are a regular part of many articles, especially political ones in which I participate heavily in. I believe a compromise should be found, because it is a fact that he is missing and it is reasonably certain he was on Kish Island. However, Axamir does have his point about the quality/quantity of information. If both sides could agree on adding a section, maybe Axamir and Pumpjack could work on a draft offline in a sandbox and try to be more accommodating of each others view. That is, each of you write from the others point of view (your own draft), then compare and combine drafts in the sandbox. Sometimes taking the opposing view can help alleviate personal stumblingblocks that we all have. I believe both sides have spoken reasonable tone for the most part, but a certain level of stubborness does peak out. ;) Thus, I suggest the approach above to attempt a resolution.  -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  TALK 13:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I also was asked by Pumpjack to comment and think the idea expressed above by T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  is a good one. --BoogaLouie (talk) 16:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm yet another person who was asked to offer input on the Kish Island article. Based on both arguments, and seeing the original copy that was offered for the inclusion of Levinson I would like to offer the following thoughts:

-The original text about Levinson does seem to be worded poorly and trends toward too much speculation. However, Pumpjack already mentioned that he knew that the phrasing was a bit 'off' from what it needed to be, so it seems as if there was no intent to either villify or include a political agenda, or in any way be disengenious. -There appears to be ample material available reference, yet it is being ignored and the reasons for exclusion seem fairly weak. Accusations of bias are not the same as actually pointing to specific places in the ariticles used for reference and making the case that the word choices were meant to imply a specific position. Even then, you get into a thorny area of semanitics where a person might misread something in a way that the writer never intended. That being said, these aren't opinion articles that are being referenced, nor are they hearsay.

-My own conclusion: It would seem that based on the evidence that has been given by others that this article should include a line, how ever brief and how ever worded, about the disappearance of Levinson. Originally, the line sounded too speculative, but I think with work it should find a place in the article. Rocdahut (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks to everyone who took the time to comment on this discussion at my request. Based on the third party recommendations, I have created a sandbox at User:Pumpjack/Sandbox. Axamir, with your agreement, I would like for us to try this approach in an effort to reach an agreement. Would you, and/or other interested parties be open to this? --Pumpjack (talk) 00:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You plan on creating that section anytime soon? -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  TALK 15:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Small housekeeping edit request
editprotected Please update the  link near the end of the article to Iranian islands in the Persian Gulf. Thanks. Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ PeterSymonds (talk)  15:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yet another Robert Levinson discussion
Some person - anonymous - has decided he doesn't like the link to the Robert Levinson article in the "see also" section. He keeps deleting it, with the only comment being "see discussion page" or similar. As anyone can see, the consensus seems to be that there should be a few words regarding the disappearance of Robert Levinson on this page. Even though that text is not yet there (and should be, as the majority of people seem to think), apparently even the "see also" section is not acceptable.

So come here and explain yourself if you can, but it's all been said already as far as I can see - and that is all but one person wanted some text here. Please add to the discussion if you like, but if it's more of "I don't want it and won't allow it" type of argument, we've seen it all before. --Commking (talk) 04:38, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus. However, a link to the Robert Levinson article in the "see also" section is fine, but nothing more. This is not WikiNews. --InputPoem (talk) 05:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks - consensus was the wrong word. But as you can see, most of us believe that there should be some words, however brief, of the event. Just because it's news, does not mean it isn't notable. We had that discussion already - Shall we delete the article on the Iranian Revolution also, because it was in the news? You have a lot of editing ahead of you if you really want to delete anything in Wikipedia that was also reported in the news my friend! Is there any other reason to exclude it, or is that it? We need to be NPOV here. cheers --Commking (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * To give more space to the incident is a violation of undue weight. The incident is US-centric because coverage of the story is not widespread in other parts of world--despite what Commking would say about coverage in Australia. Commking made the analogy of Aruba and Natalee Holloway. She is quite right, the situations have similarities. Yet the Aruba article does not even mention Holloway--not even in a "See Also" link. The article needs much more information about its tourism and its economy and its history, and "you have a lot of editing ahead of you if you really want to" improve the article.--Agha Nader (talk) 20:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with most of that - I don't think it warrants any more space, a few words is enough - a very short sentence on the "see also" section, and it won't even appear on the table of contents that way. As it stands now the comment is no more than a footnote anyway. Yes, you could argue that the subject is US-centric, but I don't think that in itself is cause to delete it, Wikipedia is all about notability and being complete rather than being "universally relevant". I would not think deleting anything on that basis is the way to go (wikipedia would start to look rather bare wouldn't it?) - it's still notable. I agree the article could use "fleshing out" a lot more, and am happy to contribute. I get the impression that some feel that adding the text somehow reflects negatively on Iran or Kish Island (this is an encyclopedia, not a tourist brochure - NPOV guys!) - I would argue suppressing such information would do that. If we can add to the article and "dilute" the Levison comment further, rather than censor it, that would be a much more sensible and positive way to go. I'll make an effort to do so. Anyone care to join me? --Commking (talk) 02:03, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * My two cents in this regard: I agree with Agha Nader about the issue being US-centric. Moreover, it was also brought up when the war mongers in the US were trying to find an excuse to extend the Iraq war into Iran, so they were trying to tie things like this guys missing to Iran. Well, it didn't work... --Axamir (talk) 06:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

As it was discussed before, it has not % 100 cleared that the missing FBI agent was actually disappeared from Iran. Let me emphasize IRAN. Do we have to go ahead and place a link in Iran page also?!! off course not. We can take the issue into Wikinews and stop forcing it into other pages like Kish island, Iran, Middle East, Persian Gulf. It wouldn't do any good.--Axamir (talk) 06:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nobody knows where he is. Nobody knows what happened. What is known, is that he was last seen on Kish Island. That's it. And that's all we are saying. No conclusions are being drawn. None. If you want practice censorship as they do in Iran, go ahead, by all means act as a mouthpiece of the Mullahs if you so wish. But you must recognise that Iranian government policy is not the law here, and NPOV is. We need to state the known facts, and nothing more. Why are you so keen to supress factual information? Why so much enthusiasm for censorship? This is hardly NPOV. --Commking (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Your logic does not make any sense! Quote "He was last SEEN"!!! seen by whom?! where is he? The story is not yet clear. How many times should we make this argument with you? Look at it, it's almost a page and you keep saying what you have been saying, each time with new BS(es). Mollas?! what is that got to do with mollas! Censorship Holy s*** We have gone over this over and over with you so stop forcing it to articles like Kish island, Iran, Persian Gulf ... Like other fellows have said to you. Take it to wikinews where it is more appropriate to be. --Axamir (talk) 05:47, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

BTW, if you have problems with Iranian government, you may go and resolve it with them. Wikipedia is not the place for personal hatred and revenge.--Axamir (talk) 19:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Internetional Incidents (Robert Levinson)
Someone keeps deleting this section of the article. It's important to note that this page is not here just to talk about the positive aspects of the subject - we have to be NPOV. The facts are that this incident made news all around the world, it's notable, and should be here. I am not sure I like the heading "International Incidents" so much.. maybe we can change that - any suggestions? --Commking (talk) 06:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I do not think it is necessary to add this to the page because of the followings: 1- It has not been proven that the FBI agent has been kidnapped from this island yet. No one knows what's going on. 2- If we are going to add this rare incident to the page. We should add any arm robberies, rapes, drug related violences that happen every day in NYC to the New York city page. If you look up the New York city page, you can not see any of them reflected. You may say they are not in the news! but if you read New York Times, they catch news everyday; however, nothing negative about New York is found at its page!! WHY?!!! It would be double standard if we add this unproven propaganda to the Kish Island page where nothing sincere can be resulted from. I would like to thank Khoikhoi for giving this opportunity for us to discuss the mater --Axamir (talk) 00:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Salaam - Thanks for coming and talking about it. First off, I did not write this section - I have simply re-instated it a couple of times when it strangley disappeared with no explanation. That's not how we do things on Wikipedia, and why I started this discussion. I can answer directly the three points you raise:


 * Firstly, you say it is not proven he was kidnapped, and nobody knows what is going on. The edits did not say he was kidnapped, just that he disappeared and was last seen on Kish. References were provided later. We can say it is alleged he was kidnapped, with appropriate references of course. The fact that nobody seems to know what is going on as you put it, does not mean the episode should not be discussed or mentioned.


 * Secondly, this incident was indeed notable - this is not something that usually happens at Kish, or in Iran (I am sure you will agree - you did say yourself this was a rare event). Such a disappearance is unusual. If you think disappearing foreigners in Iran is usual and not newsworthy or notable in any way, please explain to us why, but it's made newspapers around the world and I feel is definitely notable. Feel free to add any notable events of the type you describe to the NYC page, if they are notable they also definitely should be there. Personally I have no interest in the NYC page.


 * Thirdly, lots of unproven events are in talked about in Wikipedia - UFO's, loch ness monster, and many articles about people disappearing exist. There is even an entire category for disappeared people. We can talk about the Jimmy Hoffa disappearence for example, because it's notable, and we should be able to mention the Robert Levinson incident also. Nobody has proven what happened, and so long as that is clear in the article I can't see a problem?


 * I can understand you may be sensitive about something that some people would see as negative to Iran, but demanding silence and imposing censorship is not a way to prevent that (sorry if I sound blunt, it is not my intention). By all means lets make it clear nothing is proven, the position of the Iranian police of government must be made very clear to be NPOV. We must be NPOV, and I feel these edits were.


 * I still think we need to change the title of the section - any thoughts? --Commking (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

RESPONSE FROM PUMPJACK --

I wrote the International Incidents section of this article. I am perfectly open to changing the heading in the event a reasonable alternative is offered.

This Levinson case is notable, and closely associated with Kish, where Levinson was last seen. This is neither positive, nor negative. Rather, it is simply a fact. That is, Levinson went to Kish, and has not been seen since. Had Levinson disappeared in Luxemburg, then this paragraph would be appropriate on the Luxemburg page. The same stands for Key West, Fiji, Pune, or any other location for that matter. However, Levinson did not disappear in any of these places. He disappeared in Kish. Therefore, it should be mentioned on the Kish page.

You raised two objections:

1 – No one knows what happened to Levinson.

As CommKing mentioned, I didn’t say that Levinson was kidnapped. I only said that he disappeared. Any other speculation I included was cited as such.

2 – The Levinson paragraph is a double standard since other cities, such as New York, do not mention crime or other notable events.

I couldn’t disagree with you more.

There are an endless number of Wikipedia articles that describe disappearances, or other crimes and incidents that have drawn the subject (location) into the spotlight.

Here are some examples of Wikipedia articles:

Munich Germany – Talks about the 1972 Summer Olympics, during which Israeli athletes were held hostage and killed by terrorists.

Mountain Brook, AL – Claims to be the home town of Natalie Holloway, who disappeared while on vacation in Aruba.

Waco, TX – Discusses the US Government’s attack on the Branch Davidian compound, where 74 people died at the hands of US ATF agents.

Golden Gate Bridge – Extensively discusses the phenomenon of suicides from the bridge.

University of Texas at Austin – The 1966 Mass Murders are mentioned, and also mentions that several suicide attempts prompted the university to close the UT Tower over the years.

Deltona, FL – The Deltona Mass Murders are mentioned in addition to rising crime rates.

Incidentally, I live in Deltona, FL. I would rather not have the murders discussed on my own town’s Wikipedia page. But, I can’t disassociate my city with the murders. They are a fact, a part of the local consciousness, and are inextricably tied in association to the city of Deltona. We are a better and stronger community because we admit their relevance as historical fact. Indeed, it is through our acknowledgement of the murders that we become empowered to prevent them from happening again.

The Levinson disappearance must be a part of this article. I am open to revisions. However, arbitrary deletions are not in the spirit of what Wikipedia is all about.

Please unlock this article, repost the Levinson Incident, and make changes to it.

Thanks for your inputs. The referred individual had been last seen in Kish island. It has not been proven that he has been kidnapped or disappeared from the island. So, I still think what has happened to this individual has nothing to do with the island, and also including the hypothetical incident to the page would hurt the island image.

As for your brought up examples, Munich, Texas and ..., they are all documented facts and no one can not ignore them. They are not quite similar analogy when you are trying to relate someones disappearance from the region (middle east) to one particular island based on some unproven claims.--Axamir (talk) 06:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you accept that he was last seen and heard from on Kish, so it definitely does relate to the island. And yes, there are loads of references available, here are a few:
 * http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268520,00.html
 * http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/03/09/missing.american.iran/index.html
 * http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/09/24/news/tehran.php
 * http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88131543


 * You are correct in that it is not proven he disappeared from the island, or was kidnapped, and nobody has asked that the article should say so. Instead, the article should read that he was last seen on Kish, a fact that you do agree with. So, now that it has been shown to meet notability requirements, it has appeared all over the press, and is definitely documented as being related to Kish, I take it you have no further objections? There is well and truly enough material to satisfy all the Wikipedia requirements, so if you still don't like it you're going to have to show under what Wikipedia rules it should be left out. Over to you.  --Commking (talk) 08:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what's behind this and what motivates you to relate this to Kish island. Like I mentioned before it is based on YET an unproven claims. It has not yet turned into fact. We can't accept anything mentioned in the press because they carry agendas. Example: what you see in American press may be different and even opposite in French, Iranian, Arabic media. So, press is not a source to rely on. If you are so eager to include this in the Kish island page, you have to wait till it is proven that the FBI agent ACTUALLY kidnapped or disappeared from the island. I believe we still have to wait till the REAL truth comes out.

As for your provided links: I discuss the most conservative ones (Fox News) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268520,00.html If you look at the heading of the news, even in the heading, you see the question mark (?). It shows the issue requires further investigations.

So we have to wait till they find out where exactly in the middle east the agent has been kidnapped before adding this remark to the page. I strongly oppose adding this hypothetical accusation to the page because of its negative impact to this lovely island of Persian Gulf. I believe this discussion is over and we have to wait till the truth of the matter comes out. Thank you.--Axamir (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

RESPONSE FROM PUMPJACK –

I appreciate your passion on the topic. However, rest assured that from my perspective, this discussion is far from over.

You raise the following points in your most recent response:

1 - Motives

The only motivation that any of us should have is to convey a comprehensive description of the subject in a way that is truthful and neutral. We cannot risk depriving the reader of the truth at the expense of protecting the subject’s image. With that said, let me pose the question back to you. What motive underlies the insistence to censor this topic? I am motivated to mention Levinson because it a notable, relevant, and a well documented fact about the island.

2 – Documentation

I disagree with your assessment of this subject as being unproven. It is a known fact that Levinson entered Kish, and has not been seen since. This is documented by both the U.S State Department and the Government of Iran. In fact, the Iranian authorities promised Levinson’s wife that they will continue to search for Levinson.

The Levinson disappearance is widely accepted as completely true, factual, and pervasively documented by a legion of sources, liberal and conservative, from all over the world.

I feel the argument to include the Levinson case is overwhelming and compelling. Since the case is well documented, the only remaining reason for not including the incident is protection of the island’s image. It is not the intent of Wikipedia to either improve or detract from the image of any subject being discussed. Rather, isn’t our objective to present a fair and accurate representation of the subject in a way that is NPOV?

I am not claiming that my original post is perfect. In fact, I would be open to any and all changes to my original entry that would lead to resolution of this dispute. I would agree to virtually any iteration of the disappearance and encourage the reader’s to improve upon it. In fact, I am open to anything, with one exception: censorship.

Will you meet halfway and allow the topic, at a very minimum, to be mentioned as a part of the Kish Wikipedia article? I have posted a message to KHOIKHOI, and responded to all questions and arguments. I will provide a reasonable time frame in which this editor can reply with a decision. If the decision is made to censor the topic, or no response is given, I will progress through Wikipedia’s escalation process. I don’t feel like I’m asking for much, just the inclusion of this verifiable fact. I’m willing to agree to anything except censorship.

Thanks --Pumpjack (talk) 18:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)Pumpjack

Pumpjack: Why are you being so defensive about it? All I'm saying is that we have to wait till the truth about this story surface. I agree with you, we are not going to go any where in this discussion. Because we do not have enough facts to make our assumption based upon. You keep telling that he had been seen in that island. So what? I've had a trip to that island too. If I get kidnapped tomorrow, would you be willing to related my disappearance to Kish island!!? I agree his disappearance is true, factual and documented as you said. However, what is it got to do with the island. We can not make any conclusion out of it till the REAL truth comes out and we all know where this FBI agent has been all along and who behind kidnapping was and where exactly in the greater Middle East he was kidnapped from? I am afraid, I still don't see any relation with him being kidnapped and Kish island to make a remark in the island page (with all the information that is out to public now). It is too early to judge.

By the way, you got me wrong when I said about it hurting the island image. Off course it hurts the island image when it has nothing to do with it and you are trying to linking this event to some where that he happened to be there some time. If it is proven that he has been kidnapped from the island, I will not have any problem mentioning the truth and adding the fact to the page. I leave it to others to weigh in on the subject as well.--Axamir (talk) 02:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

PUMPJACK WRITES –

I believe that the Levinson case is a notable fact related to Kish.

Regardless of where Levinson was actually abducted, the verifiable documentation tells us that he was last seen in Kish. Subsequently, the island has been moved into the international spotlight as a direct result of Levinson’s disappearance. Virtually every major news organization in the world has carried coverage of the incident. It has prompted unprecedented responses from the U.S. State Department in the form of numerous press releases about the case.

Also, the answer to your hypothetical question is “yes”. Had you travelled to Kish, disappeared, had on your behalf countless official pleas and responses from the U.S. State Department or Iranian Government, garnered significant international media attention from every major news outlet in the world, earned third party mediation efforts through the Swiss government, became the focal point of an international manhunt that has lasted over a year, had an official website called www.findaxamir.com started on your behalf, had your spouse travel to Kish under protection of the Iranian government to search for you, then I would absolutely lobby to have your case mentioned in the Kish article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pumpjack (talk • contribs) 13:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

As I’ve mentioned before, I am willing to meet you half way on this topic. I understand your concerns and objections about the incident, and would like to suggest another brief paragraph for consideration.

Suggested Text:

''In December of 2007, the island drew international attention when Christine Levinson visited the island to search for her husband, Robert Levinson, who was last seen on Kish. The Iranian authorities guaranteed security for the family during the visit, but provided few details about the investigation.''

Is this acceptable?

Thanks --Pumpjack (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipdia is not the place for current events and missing person notices. WikiNews is there for a reason. If we were to include every disappearance or missing person case on every city`s page, there would be no end to it. Take it to WikiNews. --InputPoem (talk) 23:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi InputPoem - Levinson vanished over a year ago, hardly a current event. The suggested text is not a missing person notice, but a brief description of the case. Wikinews isn't really appropriate, because it is no longer 'new'. The incident is old, established, and documented. While I agree with you that we can't document every missing person's case on every place's page, I also believe this case is different due to its unprecedented attention.

--Pumpjack (talk) 02:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The case is no different than the case of an Iranian general and deputy defense minster who went missing  in Istanbul last year . That story had more "unprecedented attention" and much more  international news coverage, and the Iranian general was a certainly a person of higher profile than Levinson. Yet no mention of that story can be found on Istanbul page on Wikipedia - and rightly so. Wikipedia is not the place for speculations and unsolved missing person cases. --InputPoem (talk) 04:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The Ali-Reza Asgari defection is a fascinating case. And, you’re right, no mention of Asgari exists in the Istanbul or Turkey Wikipedia articles. That alone, however, isn’t a compelling reason to leave Levinson off the Kish page. Clearly, as we have discussed previously, there are numerous articles on Wikipedia where notable events are mentioned as a part of the place’s history. There is not a precedent either way, which leaves Levinson as fair game for the Kish article. --Pumpjack (talk) 02:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The case is very different to the Ali-Reza Asgari incident - there is not even a suggestion of a crime being committed here, and he certainly is not missing. This is incident is notable as it made headlines around the world, and is the only single issue that has put Kish in the news worldwide. A single sentence is all that is neccesary, even just the the first one suggested by Pumpjack: In December of 2007, the island drew international attention when Christine Levinson visited the island to search for her husband, Robert Levinson, who was last seen on Kish. And that's it. Should not be such a big deal? --Commking (talk) 19:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No difference whatsoever. There is no conclusive evidence on where Asgari is, and his family still consider him missing. So, please, no double standards. Missing person cases don't belong on any Wikipedia pages of major cities. (and yes, Kish is a major commercial/tourist center of Iran, and in news very often). Such cases only belong the Wikipedia page of the subject if he or she is notable enough, and that's it. Instead of POV-forking, and trying to make this page about Robert Levinson, you guys should concentrate your energy on expanding and improving Robert Levinson article, which is a mess. The fact that you two have totally neglected Levinson's own article, and focused on this page instead, is an indicator of your true intentions on this page, which appear to be political and seemingly meant to vilify this city, and puts into question the genuinely of your concerns about Levinson's case. --InputPoem (talk) 12:27, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The Levinson case has placed Kish in the international spotlight, and is a notable fact about the island. A mention of Levinson's disappearance belongs on the page, which summarizes my intentions, InputPoem. I'm perplexed about why you think this incident vilifies the island. Also, how on earth do you think anyone involved in this discussion benefits politically, reagardless of whether or not the Levinson case is included in the article?  Would you please explain these comments? --Pumpjack (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I must say I am taken aback at this latest turn of events - please do not start accusing people of some sort of agenda or vendetta, there is no place for personal attacks here on Wikipedia. We need to stick to the facts. In my experience, this approach is usually only taken when people start to run out of arguments. I am sure you do not want to go down that path - let us speak purely on the subject at hand. I have been very patient here, and I await a decent argument as to why the most newsworthy item of an event on Kish, the biggest since the revolution, should be left out. It happens to be a missing persons case - big deal! If you can find another more notable event, please point it out. I challenge you to. Ignoring this event is not NPOV.
 * I am not sure why you think adding the sentence In December of 2007, the island drew international attention when Christine Levinson visited the island to search for her husband, Robert Levinson, who was last seen on Kish. would somehow reflect badly on, or "vilify" as you put it, Kish Island. You have already indicated there is no proof that any Kish authority was involved - and we are happy to say so. Even if it did reflect badly on Kish, we must remain NPOV rather than automatically reject anything negative.
 * Not sure why the quality of Levinson's article is an issue here, we are talking about Kish. Lets stick to that please. By all means go and clean up Levinson's article if you think it's warranted, no problem - but that's a separate article and not for the Kish talk page.
 * I am also at a loss to see how a single sentence somehow would make the article "about Robert Levinson", as you put it, obviously it would not.
 * I have already pointed out that this has been reported all around the world, more than any other event on Kish, and intentionally ignoring it is POV. I have given references showing it's notability, that is beyond doubt. I have challenged you to come up with a more notable and world newsworthy event - so let's see it. --Commking (talk) 02:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no mention of Ali-Reza Asgari on Istanbul, no mention of Natalee Holloway on Aruba, and this page WILL NOT be an exception to the rule. Soap-boxing and POV-forking should not and will not be tolerated on Wikipedia. --InputPoem (talk) 17:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it doesn't matter if he was disappeared in Kish or elsewhere and the incident was notable or not. A chain murderer may appear in Kish one day, and it would surely be a notable incident. It doesn't mean that we should add it to the article. Here is not a "news bulletin".--Sepid aan (talk) 19:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Notable incidents should not be mentioned at all in the article? Hmmm... Let me see... Yes, it's interesting to note that that the Bandar Abbas article does not have a single sentence about Iran_Air_Flight_655 - nothing. 254 murdered Iranian civilians is not worth mentioning there apparently.. a single sentence would obviously be totally outrageous there as well? I don't think so. If this is how things are done, then yes, you are correct, there is definitely no justification in mentioning Robert Levinson here either. But someone better go tell the guys over the City of Hiroshima and Nagasaki pages to get rid of that nuclear bomb stuff also, because it "doesn't matter if the incident was notable or not". Seriously, where is the line drawn? "this page WILL NOT be an exception to the rule" - what rule? Since you talk as if you are the absolute authority here, please explain? I'd also like to hear why this censorship is NPOV. A link would be great. --Commking (talk) 20:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I used "notable" in a relative context. As you see I compared with "a chain murderer", not with Hiroshima atomic bomb. Here we are talking about a disappearance, not mass killings. Let's assume that Levinson disappearance is notable for Kish, then it is notable as many other noteworthy incidents that happened and might happen in Kish. Here is not a right place for Kish criminal case list. It is the same as many notable events that have been happening in New York but don't appear in "New York" article. You think the case is notable for Kish because it happened that some came to know the island through Levinson. However Kish was extant before it. I think Levinson case is not special for Kish.--Sepid aan (talk) 20:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Commking raises some very good points about Iran_Air_Flight_655. Check out the Strait of Hormuz article, where you will find a complete paragraph devoted to the attack. I think we all would agree that it should be there, and is yet further evidence that places and events are frequently associated. To further illustrate the point, please visit the Tiananmen Square article where you will find an entire section devoted to notable events. There are hundreds of other similar examples on Wikipedia. I'm trying to understand the resistance to a brief mention of the Levinson case, but the arguments don't hold water. --Pumpjack (talk) 01:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Buddy: You are beating a dead horse! By keep pushing and pushing you can not make your argument be accepted. How many more persons does it take to join this discussion and tell you with valid facts to back off for you two(maybe one with two different user names!!) to actually do give up your obviously wrong position? It's really interesting to me. Just tell us why you totally ignore Natalee Halloway and Alireza Askari's cases and keep pushing for this FBI agent's case? Now you say that your words aren't biased and motivated!!


 * If you care so much about this FBI's missing agent, instead of playing with words and throwing things like Hiroshima Atomic Bomb and Iran Air Flight's analogy, which anyone with right mind knows that they are not quite right analogies here, I suggest you to go and do something for his wikipedia page which is a mess.--Axamir (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Axamir, let's not allow the discussion to degenerate into wild, fictional accusations. I assure you, my argument stands on its own merit. I do not need a sock puppet to help it.  Could it be that our persistence is a function of our belief that the case should be included in the article, and nothing more?  There is no conspiracy here.  There is nothing political.  There is nothing biased.  I was previously chastised (by you I believe) for being defensive.  I would encourage you to heed your own advice and engage those who have opposing views with civility and dignity.  Iran_Air_Flight_655 was brought up because the argument was being made that isolated events should not be mentioned on the article of the geographical location where the isolated event occurred.  These examples, such as The Strait of Hormuz, Flight 655, Hiroshima, Tiananmen Square, all illustrate that this argument is not widely accepted.  In fact, there is an endless list of Wikipedia articles where places do mention notable events.  Kish and Levinson are no different, and leaving Levinson out of the article is POV in absentia. --Pumpjack (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Your intentions are not sincere and obviously politically motivated. I have no doubt about it. Like I said, the fund that you all using to come up and push for nothing, better be used to fix the Agent's own page.
 * As for the Iranian Flight, Atomic bomb I refer you to Mr./Ms. Sepidaan's comment above. Please don't take us back to square one!--Axamir (talk) 19:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I think we are ready to make our conclusions now after all that said. The inclusion of FBI agent information in the Kish island page is not accepted at this time due to lack of information at hand. I encourage the opposition group to make their effort to include and elaborate it in the agent's wikipedia page rather than attaching it to any region, country, or island with no good and acceptable reasons. However, we do not rule out inclusion of the information about agent's disappearance in wikinews.--Axamir (talk) 19:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like to thank everyone who participated and enriched our discussion with their valuable comments. --Axamir (talk) 19:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You guys have to understand, incidents grant their own article. Do you see the New York article detailing the WTC demolitions? It has its own fool titled article, 911 Attacks. Make an article separate discussing the incidents, and briefly mention "Kish Island was also home to the FBI bla bla incident" providing a link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.181.187 (talk) 19:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Major Projects
What is the justification for keeping all of these hotel projects on the Kish article page? Why are they notable? There are thousands of islands around the world, and millions of hotels. Can we possibly discuss all of the hotels on all of the islands? Perhaps a paragraph on the economy of Kish, with some discussion on tourism is appropriate. However, all of this hotel nonsense reads more like an advertisement than an article. I believe they should all be deleted unless someone can put forward a convincing argument for keeping them.--Pumpjack (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Since there has been no objections, I removed the hotel advertisements from the article.--Pumpjack —Preceding undated comment added 19:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC).

Weather and climate As a keen amateur weatherman I would love to rewrite this part of the article in intellible English. I appreciate that English is not the author's first language, but even so I don't have the foggiest idea what he is trying to say-esp. the first sentence. Anthony Kaye~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.36.229 (talk) 08:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I came to this article to learn more about Robert Levinson and guess what? Wikicensorship is at work a.k.a WP:IDL...
Heavy dose of sarcasm.....I just read on the BBC that Robert Levinson might still be alive. The article clearly notes that Kish is the location from where he went missing. So I did a google search and found where THIS ISLAND (note the emphasis). And what a surprise no mention of an American!

Seems the Iranian propaganda machine is even working on Wikipedia too. Well done the editors of conscience who make a worthwhile contribution to Wikipedia [sic]. I mean, according to this article, it's "Come to Kish the wonderful holiday resort", where there have been no reports of Americans ever going missing while enjoying the hospitality of the Jewish-loving Iranian state. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.73.66 (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Alcohol???
Just curious if alcohol is allowed to be sold to foreigners. I mean, in places like Bahrain and the UAE, they are allowed to sell alcohol to foreigners at bars in hotels, etc (no liquor stores, though). Just curious about Kish. Maybe the only alcohol there is like in Saudi Arabia, where you make wine in your own home from grape juice, water, sugar and baking yeast. Anybody know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Betathetapi545 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No alcohol officially but it is reportedly available if you look/ask (as it is everywhere else in Iran, it is far from uncommon.) Blorg (talk) 11:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Kish Island. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120118203843/http://presstv.com/Program/142594.html to http://presstv.com/Program/142594.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Kish Island. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100204230127/http://presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=103847&sectionid=351020108 to http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=103847&sectionid=351020108

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)