Talk:People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran/Archive 61

June and July edits
Can you specify which revert you think has not been given adequate explanation? ParadaJulio (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * No. Sorry. I called out specific instances in this page and other pages before. I have done this for various cases by Fad Ariff and Iraniangal777, and also Alex-h and you since you came in to fill their shoes. MarioGom (talk) 18:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah ... not sure what this open question is meant to mean or refer to. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Workshop for trimming second paragraph in Cult of Personality
According to a RAND Corporation policy report, while in Paris, Massoud Rajavi began to implement an "ideological revolution", which required members an increased study and devotion that later expanded into "near religious devotion to the Rajavis". After its settlement in Iraq, however, it experienced a shortfall of volunteers. This led to the recruitment of members including Iranian dissidents, as well as Iranian economic migrants in countries such as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, through "false promises of employment, land, aid in applying for asylum in Western countries, and even marriage, to attract them to Iraq". MEK also gave free visit trips to its camps to the relatives of the members. According to the RAND report, the recruited members were mostly brought by MEK into Iraq illegally and then were asked to submit their identity documents for "safekeeping", an act which would "effectively trap" them. With the assistance of Saddam's government, MEK also recruited some of its members from the Iranian prisoners of the Iran-Iraq war.

What additional information could be included in this paragraph (apart from what's already covered in the first paragraph)? Are there any elements that could be omitted? ParadaJulio (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


 * What additional information? Well, like anything. Because this is single-sourced, which makes it rubbish. Hence why it has been replaced with material sourced to a wide range of different sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Review of recent modifications in Early years (1965–1971)
More reliably sourced information was removed here.

Removals

 * Their views aligned with what was a common tendency in Iran at the time – a kind of radical, political Islam influenced by Marxism
 * During the 1970s, while MEK publications were banned in Iran, they propagated radical Islam through some of Ali Shariati's works. The MEK and Shariati claimed that Islam should oppose feudalism and capitalism; should eradicate inhumane practices; should treat all as equal citizens, and should socialize the means of production.
 * Up until the death of the then leader of the MEK in June 1973, Reza Rezai, there was no doubt about the group's Islamic identity. -- This is reliably sourced information about the MEK's relation with Islam, which makes the "contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy" more accessible.


 * Its members mainly belonged to the Iranian intelligentsia, particularly the salaried middle class, college students, teachers, civil servants, and other professionals. According to Ervand Abrahamian, the MEK's "modernist interpretation of Islam appealed to the educated youth, who, while still culturally attached to Islam, rejected its old-fashioned clerical interpretations". Unlike the clergy, it accepted Western concepts (especially in the social sciences). -- This is more reliably sourced information about the MEK's Islam and the clergy's Islam, which was changed to "it attracted primarily young, well-educated Iranians".


 * Leftist Iranian students affiliated with the Freedom Movement of Iran to oppose the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. -- If the affiliation with the Freedom Movement of Iran is in the lead, then it needs to be also in the article.


 * The organization engaged in armed conflict with the Pahlavi dynasty in the 1970s and contributed to the overthrow of the Shah during the 1979 Iranian Revolution. It subsequently pursued the establishment of a democracy in Iran, particularly gaining support from Iran's middle class intelligentsia.  -- explains what the group set out to do.

Additions

 * They aimed to establish a socialist state in Iran based on a modern and revolutionary interpretation of Islam -- which source supports this?
 * During the 1970s, the MEK carried out a series of attacks against the Iranian and Western targets, including the assassination of US military officers and US civilian contacts in Tehran. -- covered in Schism (1971–1978)
 * a puppet of the United States -- this excludes that in those days many Iranians (including these students) considered Pahlavi responsible for Western influence in Iran. Why cherry-pick certain parts of that information? Please list pages for the cited "Iran Between Two Revolutions. Princeton University". Alex-h (talk) 17:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Some of these "removals" were simply summarization based on the same source material. But to be honest, I don't have the energy to endlessly argue over this. Feel free to keep the long-standing, ridiculously redundant, chronologically chaotic and disorganized text. MarioGom (talk) 22:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll dig in the history to see which of these were done by me, and then follow up. MarioGom (talk) 11:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

1988 execution of MEK prisoners
A substantial amount of vital information was removed from "1988 execution of MEK prisoners".

[1] Information about the accused:
 * The executions were carried out by several high-ranking members of Iran's current government. According to the US State Department, the "death commissions" responsible for the 1988 executions of Iranian political prisoners started on 19 July (1988) and included the current head of the Iranian judiciary and current Minister of Justice.

[2] Information about the victims, and the treatment they received. The information about women and children was also removed:
 * Most of the prisoners executed were serving prison terms on account of peaceful activities (distributing opposition newspapers and leaflets, taking part in demonstrations, or collecting donations for political oppositions) or holding outlawed political views. In order to eliminate potential political oppositions, the Islamic Republic started "coordinated extrajudicial killings" in Iran. Under International law, the killings were considered a "crime against humanity". The commissions including judicial, prosecution, intelligence and prison officials proceeded executions that were not approved by their own existing legislation, and sentenced prisoners to death despite any proven "internationally recognized criminal offence". The Prisoners were questioned if they were willing to give written repentance for their political activities and beliefs.

[3] An attestation from a main government official challenging the fatwa: [4] Information about the executions: [5] Fatwa: [6] Information from government officials: [7] Information about cover-up: [8] An attestation from MEK leadership:
 * Ayatollah Montazeri wrote to Ayatollah Khomeini saying "at least order to spare women who have children ... the execution of several thousand prisoners in a few days will not reflect positively and will not be mistake-free ... A large number of prisoners have been killed under torture by interrogators ... in some prisons of the Islamic Republic young girls are being raped ... As a result of unruly torture, many prisoners have become deaf or paralysed or afflicted with chronic decease.
 * identify phoney repenters, or go to the war front and walk through enemy mindfields. According to Abrahamian, the questions were designed to "tax to the utmost the victim's sense of decency, honor, and self-respect". The Mojahedin who gave unsatisfactory answers were promptly taken to a special room and later hanged in batches of six.
 * through a fatwa
 * In 2016, an audio recording was posted online of a high-level official meeting that took place in August 1988 between Hossein Ali Montazeri and the officials responsible for the mass killings in Tehran. In the recording, Hossein Ali Montazeri is heard saying that the ministry of intelligence used the MEK's armed incursion as a pretext to carry out the mass killings, which "had been under consideration for several years". Iranian authorities have dismissed the incident as "nothing but propaganda", presenting the executions as a lawful response to a small group of incarcerated individuals who had colluded with the MEK to support its 25 July 1988 incursion.
 * Those executed were put in collective graves containing multiple corpses at the Khavaran cemetery, which the Iranian government tried to cover up by changing the cemetery into a park."
 * In 2019, Maryam Rajavi, released a book named "Crime Against Humanity". The book is about the 1988 massacres of political prisoners in Iran, listing the location of 36 Iranian mass graves and explaining that about 30,000 people were executed, with the majority being MEK members.

I am recovering this information because "trimming" is an insufficient rationale to exclude it from the article. If there is still an interest in trimming this section (rather than removing substantial amounts of vital information), then we can workshop it (a draft proposal below).

Workshop for trimming 1988 executions information
A draft proposal:

On 19 July 1988, Iranian authorities suddenly isolated major prisons, having its courts of law go on an unscheduled holiday to avoid relatives finding out about those imprisoned. Many of the prisoners killed during this time were "subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in the process." The commissions proceeded executions that were not approved by their own existing legislation, and sentenced prisoners to death despite any proven "internationally recognized criminal offence". Those executed included women and children.

Most of the prisoners executed were serving prison terms on account of peaceful activities (distributing opposition newspapers and leaflets, taking part in demonstrations, or collecting donations for political oppositions) or holding outlawed political views. Under International law, the killings were considered a "crime against humanity". The executions were carried out by several high-ranking members of Iran's current government. According to the US State Department, the "death commissions" responsible for the mass executions and included the current head of the Iranian judiciary and current Minister of Justice.

Ayatollah Montazeri wrote to Ayatollah Khomeini saying "at least order to spare women who have children ... A large number of prisoners have been killed under torture by interrogators ... in some prisons of the Islamic Republic young girls are being raped." The Iranian government accused those investigating the executions of "disclosing state secrets" and threatening national security". According to Amnesty International, "there has also been an ongoing campaign by the Islamic Republic to demonize victims, distort facts, and repress family survivors and human rights defenders. In 2016, an audio recording was posted online where Hossein Ali Montazeri is heard saying that the ministry of intelligence used Operation Mersad as a pretext to carry out the mass killings, which "had been under consideration for several years". Iranian authorities have dismissed the incident as "nothing but propaganda", presenting the executions as a lawful response to a small group of incarcerated individuals who had colluded with the MEK to support its 25 July 1988 incursion.

Those executed were put in collective graves containing multiple corpses at the Khavaran cemetery, which the Iranian government tried to cover up by changing the cemetery into a park. In 2019, Maryam Rajavi, released a book named "Crime Against Humanity". The book is about the 1988 massacres of political prisoners in Iran, listing the location of 36 Iranian mass graves and explaining that about 30,000 people were executed, with the majority being MEK members.

ParadaJulio (talk) 15:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Material was removed because very little of it needs to be here. It is also present at the child article. All that should be here is a brief executive summary after the link. It needs cutting further from what it was, not re-expanding. Any quotes and statements not specifically related to the MEK should also go, as they have no place here. The executions did not only involve the MEK; MEK members and those accused of MEK membership just made up a large part of those executed. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You can't just remove substantial amounts of vital information from the article only because you want that section shorter. You're stripping it from very important points. Start with this workshop where we can discuss any defined issues you may have about the content, including a proposal draft for making it shorter. ParadaJulio (talk) 11:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I means, yes you can, and that is in fact exactly what you should do if the material is already WP:SPLIT to a child article. The whole point of Wikipedia is that pages link to each other, so that material doesn't need to be copied over and over again in different places. All we need here is a brief summary and the main article link. Your edit also didn't just restore material that has been gone for months, but also deleted the first paragraph, which was totally unexplained in the edit summary. I'm not sure why you are doing this, but it is exactly the same thing that Fad Ariff was doing nearly a year ago before they were blocked for sockpuppetry - they were refusing to allow this section to be condensed, while, mysteriously, trying to get away with deleting the first sentence on the sly. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh no, my mistake, you've actually buried the first sentence in the second paragraph, which was similarly actually what Fad Ariff kept doing. But same question, why are you blindly reverting to a version that has been edit warred into existence by a sockpuppet, and which clearly ruins the flow? Iskandar323 (talk) 12:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I placed back the longstanding content and then gave you a list of the information you took out. I explained to you why I think the information should not be removed from the article and suggested we discuss it. "Trimming" is an insufficient rationale to exclude it from the article. Without resorting to further unnecessary hostility, what rationale for example do you have for wanting to remove "Most of the prisoners executed were serving prison terms on account of peaceful activities (distributing opposition newspapers and leaflets, taking part in demonstrations, or collecting donations for political oppositions) or holding outlawed political views. Under International law, the killings were considered a "crime against humanity". The executions were carried out by several high-ranking members of Iran's current government. According to the US State Department, the "death commissions" responsible for the mass executions and included the current head of the Iranian judiciary and current Minister of Justice." ? ParadaJulio (talk) 13:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This material is principally hosted elsewhere now. No other reason is required. All that is needed here is a bare minimum summary. The version, before you re-expanded it, was still too long. Per WP:SPLIT, step 6: If material is split from an article, consider whether a summary section should be created - this material is on its own article. And this article is overlength, so you are re-adding duplicated material to an overlength article? That is making the encyclopedia, the project here, worse. Why would you want to do that? Trimming is exactly the rationale here, because WP:TOOLONG applies here. This section is also clearly bloated. Aside from the fact that you literally cannot include all the detail on anything on every page, this information is already elsewhere, so nothing is actually being deleted: it is simply hosted at the main-linked page. That is how an interlinked wiki article is supposed to work. You are asking why removed the material, but that is not the question here; the question is: why keep it? Iskandar323 (talk) 14:58, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So in response to this proposal: no, it's too long, and this article is WP:TOOLONG. This material has all been split, so does not need to be duplicated here. All we need is a brief summary of the key highlights particularly pertinent to the MEK. We do not need granular details, excessive tangential quotes or other bloating dross. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So let's trim it. I just trimmed some of it. We can trim more about the accused, victims and the treatment they received, attestation from main government officials and cover-up, but do not just remove it all. Since the article is WP:TOOLONG, why have you re-expanded some sections? What rationale for example do you have for re-expanding about Saddam or "Cult of personality"? That section needs work, but what you replaced it with is loaded with POV and has a terrible imbalance of suppressed information. I also placed back previous section titles ("Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists" in this article is egregiously WP:UNDUE) and merged the "Iraqi government's crackdown (2009–2010)" with "Relocation from Iraq". IMO, there should be substantive reasons for contentious re-expansions that are exempt from WP:TOOLONG. ParadaJulio (talk) 17:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Why are you inviting me to trim it? It was already trimmed: you actively untrimmed it. And I never removed it all - it was still about five, very long paragraphs - though, even if there was only a single paragraph, it wouldn't matter, because it has its own page. WP:TOOLONG does not mean the only way is down, but that it should be the general direction of travel. I'm not going to discuss the cult section here; again, the only reason why the cult section was shrunken in the first place was due to the activity of the tendentious socks that have some weird love affair with the MEK. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You were stripping it completely from very important points, not trimming it. If WP:TOOLONG should be the general direction, why add all of this text to the article? I kept your order about Operation Mersad, and kept the section down to 3 paragraphs. ParadaJulio (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Crafting a decent lead for this shitshow of a page is obviously a work in progress. To make an omelette you have to break some eggs. Just because the page is too long that doesn't mean that every edit is going to make it smaller. However, sections that have their own child articles can obviously be reduced fairly freely without risk of eliminating content, because it is all duplicated elsewhere. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Mohammad-Reza Kolahi
Revert/contest and  because some looks like vandalism and some is already in the page. Mohammad-Reza Kolahi could be added if others think WP:TOOLONG is not applicable. ParadaJulio (talk) 17:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have moved this thread to the top level, since it is a change by a different user than the changes discussed in the previous thread. Please, avoid indiscriminately expanding the scope of previous threads. Best, MarioGom (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Cult of personality
The current version of this section is just a shambles; it needs completely rewriting based on the quality academic sources such as Abrahamian and Katzman or restoring from an earlier version that already deferred to these sources. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:00, 9 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Also the section title is misleading. Many reliable sources describe the MEK as a cult or a religious-political sect, not merely an organization practicing "cult of personality". I planned to rewrite various parts as a section for "cultic practices", but feel free to take the lead. MarioGom (talk) 13:42, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This proposal by Vice regent might be of some help.Ghazaalch (talk) 03:48, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yep. That looks pretty good. Certainly better than the mess that was already there. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Why is the current version of this section in "shambles"? The proposal by Vice regent was made in a previous RFC and it did not achieve consensus because it does not present opposing views accurately or in due weight. It also used sources like ex MEK member Masoud Banisadr, or wikivoicing that "They must suppress all sexual thoughts" or "The MEK is believed to have become a cult to survive", which contradicts WP:NPOV.


 * The MEK has barred children in Camp Ashraf in an attempt to have its members devote themselves to their cause of resistance against the Iranian regime, a rule that has given the MEK reputation of being "cultish"." Various sources have also described the MEK as a "cult", "cult-like", or having a "cult of personality", while other sources say the Iranian regime is running a disinformation campaign to label the MEK a "cult". -- The first paragraph is due and not too long.


 * According to a RAND Corporation policy report, while in Paris, Massoud Rajavi began to implement an "ideological revolution", which required members an increased study and devotion that later expanded into "near religious devotion to the Rajavis". After its settlement in Iraq, however, it experienced a shortfall of volunteers. This led to the recruitment of members including Iranian dissidents, as well as Iranian economic migrants in countries such as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, through "false promises of employment, land, aid in applying for asylum in Western countries, and even marriage, to attract them to Iraq". MEK also gave free visit trips to its camps to the relatives of the members. According to the RAND report, the recruited members were mostly brought by MEK into Iraq illegally and then were asked to submit their identity documents for "safekeeping", an act which would "effectively trap" them. With the assistance of Saddam's government, MEK also recruited some of its members from the Iranian prisoners of the Iran-Iraq war. -- The second paragraph can be summarized according to its weight, maybe to -- While in Paris, Massoud Rajavi implemented an "ideological revolution" which required devotion from its members.. Or what other summaries could we consider?  Alex-h (talk) 11:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * On what planet could the second paragraph of that version be good encyclopedically? It is just single sourced the RAND report, which is good to have in there as one voice, but it clearly only one of many voices on the subject. Otherwise, ok, let's have a discussion about source quality and wikivoicing - that's reasonable. Sure, that BBC quote shouldn't be Wikivoiced. Very true. I've attributed the former members. Iskandar323 (talk) 11:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * let's have the discussion before please, not after you make wide changes again. Alex-h (talk) 12:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not making wide changes. I just did some basic merging, attribution and copyediting. This is Wikipedia. We edit things here. If you don't understand that, you're on the wrong platform. And I was attributing the statements that you yourself pointed out as unattributed, i.e. in line with your comments. If it's a problem that you yourself pointed out, then you should want it to be fixed, surely? Discussion is not needed for basic editing and copyediting; discussion is needed on precise phrasing, source quality, etc. And here you haven't even continued the discussion: you're just complaining about me copyediting. I asked a question above: what do you think is so great about a gigantic single-source paragraph when there are diverse sources available, and you haven't even responded. Since I've removed one unattributed quotation that you didn't like, and properly contextualized another, an alternative approach would be to thank me for a good piece of collaborative editing well done based on a fruitful talk page discussion. Instead it's just more griping. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Iskandar323 You're claiming that you're not making wide changes and that this article is WP:TOOLONG and then add +12,866‎ bytes of text to the article? If a controversial edit is being called into question in a talk page discussion, you need to respond appropriately. Alex is saying that Vice regent's proposal did not previously achieve consensus in a RFC because it does not represent all views appropriately. I wholeheartedly agree, there is a lot of imbalance in that version. Alex is also saying that the first paragraph of the longstanding version is "due and not too long". Kindly address this. Since there is consistent interest in changing the second paragraph, then we can workshop it (a draft proposal below). ParadaJulio (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It's not my content; I'm just undoing these bullshit mass reverts by yourself and Alex going back to god knows when and undoing dozens of good little uncontroversial edits in addition to reverting the content you have issues with because ... ? Just copypasting old versions of the article isn't editing; it's just disruptive piss-taking. Iskandar323 (talk) 18:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Just noting that given Alex-h and ParadaJulio's blocks, all the above objections do not hold water for CRP. MarioGom (talk) 01:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Review of recent modifications in the lead
A lot of reliably sourced information was removed from the lead and substituted with cherry-picking or fringe-ness. I am reinstating some of the previous (established) lead in light of the following NPOV concerns --

Removals

 * Its revolutionary interpretation of Islam contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy as well as the populist version developed by Ayatollah Khomeini in the 1970s. It is also Iran's largest and most active political opposition group.


 * In 1983, the MEK started ties with Iraq following a meeting between Massoud Rajavi and Tariq Aziz.


 * In 1986, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) requested France to expel the MEK from its Paris headquarters, so in response it re-established its base Camp Ashraf in Iraq.


 * In 2002, the MEK was a source for claims about the nuclear program of Iran. In 2003, the MEK signed a ceasefire agreement with the U.S. and put down their arms in Camp Ashraf.

This is WP:DUE and WP:MOSLEAD information and removing it would need a proper explanation first.


 * The lead used to say that the MEK is a "political-militant" group, but this was changed to only "militant". I don’t know if the MEK are still a militant group today, but they surely are a political group. The short description in the article uses "Iranian opposition group", and I suggest changing it to that. Alex-h (talk) 16:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Additions
"The Islamic-leftist People’s Mojahedin of Iran". ; "left-wing Muslim group". ; "the Mujahedin-i Khalq, a leftist Islamic group." ; "the leftist-Islamic opposition group People’s Mujahedin" ; "Though a Muslim organization, the MEK seeks a secular republic in Iran based on democracy and political pluralism." ; "The leftist Islamic group, Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MKO), declared an armed struggle in 1981" ; "the leftists Islamic group, the Mujahedn" ; "the MEK, a leftist group of Iranian exiles pushing for the overthrow of the regime." ; "The most important leftist orgniazation supporting Bani Sadar was the Mujahedin e Khalq" ; "The MEK began as a leftist organization opposed to the rule of the shah, and it initially supported the Iranian revolution." ; "A number of prisoners affiliated with banned opposition groups, like the leftist Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization" ; "The news comes amid mounting pressure on the left-leaning Islamist group that has long opposed Iranian governments, from the monarchy of Shah Reza Pahlavi to the current theocratic state that gained power in 1979." ; "Following an attack during the Iran-Iraq War by Iraq-based members of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), also known as the People's Mujahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI), Iran's then-Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini issued an order to execute all prisoners who were loyal to or sympathised with the leftist opposition group." ; "It began as a leftist-Islamist opposition to the late shah of Iran" ; "The MEK, a leftist group founded in the 1960s," ; "Sazman Mojahedin-e Khalq-e Iran (People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran), a religious orgnaization with leftist programs." Being Muslim is what distinguishes it from its Marxist counterpart (or Organization of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class). Even Ervand Abrahamian makes that distinction saying that "The Marxist and the Muslim Mojahedin have produced their explanations for the 1975 Schism. According to the Marxist Mojahedin, their 'political consciousness' had been raised once they began to study systematically 'dialectical materialism' especially the works of Marx, Lenin, and Mao Tse-tung. Hence, they claimed, Marxism had revealed to the fallacies of Islam." "Meanwhile, the Muslim Mojahedin survived partly in the provinces, partly in sections of the Tehran bazaar, but mainly in the gaols. The "killing of US personnel in Iran during the 1970s" was designated to a member of the Marxist Mojahedin, important information that also formed part of the article but was also inexplicably taken out. Also their Muslim identity is clearly described by Abrahamian:"Its revolutionary interpretation of Islam contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy as well as the populist version developed by Ayatollah Khomeini in the 1970s."
 * They accepted a combination of Marxism and Islamism as the base of their belief -- The infobox says the group is Shia Muslim and the the MEK is primarily characterized as either "Muslim", "Islamic", or "left-wing":


 * Following the occupation of Iraq by U.S.-led coalition forces in 2003, the U.S. did not hand over MEK fighters to Iran. -- Why would the U.S. not handing over MEK members to the IRI in 2003 need to replace the current information in the lead?


 * Then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney argued that the MEK should be used against Iran. -- Which part of the RAND source supports this? And why would these claims need to replace the current information in the lead?


 * Since 2009, when the Iraqi government became openly hostile to MEK, the U.S. led efforts to get the group's members out of Iraq. -- This excludes "amid growing Iranian influence in Baghdad." Better sources also say "Led by politicians sympathetic to Iran, the Iraqi authorities tacitly allowed Iran-allied militias to attack the group." Why cherry-pick certain parts of that information in the lead? Alex-h (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * "Its revolutionary interpretation of Islam contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy as well as the populist version developed by Ayatollah Khomeini in the 1970s." - is not accessible at all. It sounds extremely dated, and, to most readers, Khomeini's Islam is also conservative Islam of the traditional clergy; it is therefore not intuitive what 'populist' is meant to mean in the context. Most sources simply state some variation on the theme of "the MEK combined Marxism and Islamism" at the outset. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:42, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It is undeniable that the MEK's interpretation of Islam contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy and Khomeini. This is affirmed by the authoritative historian as Ervand Abrahamian is. Alex-h (talk) 17:23, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, but what does that mean? Contrasts how? What is a reader meant to understand from that? This is meant to be an encyclopedia. It should accessible. How is Khomeini populist? This is not the sort of simple explanation required of a lead. What's the actual Abrahamian quote? Does he use the term "revolutionary interpretation" for example? I don't see that quoted directly anywhere in the body. The better and clearer explanation that I do see from Abrahamian in the body is that the group used a "combination of Muslim themes; Shii notions of martyrdom; classical Marxist theories of class struggle and historical determinism; and neo-Marxist concepts of armed struggle, guerilla warfare and revolutionary heroism" - sounds a lot like Marxism and Islamism ... Iskandar323 (talk) 19:37, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * what you have to say in Iskandar323's response?Ghazaalch (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2023 (UTC)


 * If you're asking how I interpret Abrahamian's quote, I interpret it as written -- the MEK’s interpretation of Islam is "revolutionary", and is different from the clergy’s more "conservative" interpretation of Islam or Khomeini's "populist" Islam. The article previously provided further details about this information, but I see that a lot has been changed or removed from the article recently. I will review the recent modifications in the body and provide an update about this. Alex-h (talk) 16:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, are you saying that you are extracting the word "revolutionary" from the phrase "revolutionary heroism" and converting that into "revolutionary interpretation of Islam", or at least saying that this material as presented in the past is justified? Because it isn't. This is a massive piece of WP:OR. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I reviewed the first part of the history section and reliably sourced information about the MEK's relation with Islam was removed. Alex-h (talk) 17:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

More additions to the lead

 * In 1985, Rajavi launched an "ideological revolution" banning marriage and enforced divorce on all members who were required to separate from their spouses. He married one of the new divorcees, Maryam Azdanlou, who became his senior lieutenant. -- There were many aspects about the "ideological revolution", and something with more notability would be that "Throughout the revolution, the MEK played a major role in developing the "revolutionary Muslim woman", which was portrayed as "the living example of the new ideal of womanhood". According to Ervand Abrahamian, the MEK "declared that God had created men and women to be equal in all things: in political and intellectual matters, as well as in legal, economic, and social issues"." (see "Ideological revolution and women's rights")


 * In April 1992, MEK carried out attacks against Iranian embassies in 13 countries. -- WP:CHERRY-PICK that cuts out information like the incident was a way to protest the bombing of a MEK military base where several people had been killed and wounded.


 * At the same time the MEK paid Western political influencers to lobby for its removal from the list of designated terrorist organizations. -- WP:CHERRY-PICK, there were many aspects about the "Removal of designation" like "In 2008, the Luxembourg European Court of First Instance upheld that there was no justification for including the MEK in the EU terrorist list and freezing its funds. The Court then allowed an appeal to delist the MEK from the EU's terror list. An attempt by EU governments to maintain the MEK in the terror list was rejected by the European Court of Justice, with ambassadors of the 27 member states agreeing that the MEK should be removed from the EU terrorism list. The MEK was removed from the EU terror list on 26 January 2009, becoming the first organization to have been removed from the EU terror list." "The Council of the European Union removed the group's terrorist designation following the Court of Justice of the European Union's 2008 censure of France for failing to disclose new alleged evidence of the MEK's terrorism threat." "Secretary of State Clinton said in a statement that the decision was made because the MEK had renounced violence and had cooperated in closing their Iraqi paramilitary base." "An official denied that lobbying by well-known figures influenced the decision." "


 * During its life in exile, MEK was financed by Saddam Hussein or fake charities based in European countries. -- Terrornomics and Newsweek make an attribution (to an U.S. official or the U.S. State department) for a claim of "support" from Iraq ("support" could mean different things like allowing them to base in Iraq). The sources at the end of the sentence say "Recognizing that most Western countries would not allow it to solicit funding publicly under its name, the MEK had its members engage in street solicitation as representative of front organizations (author's conversations at the Nejat Society)", "Although a large portion of the NCRI's funding was provided by Saddam Hussein and some came from Saudi Arabia, the NCRI also raised money through fraud.", and the third source is in Dutch and talks about an alleged fake charity where money goes to the MEK). Please provide the quotes from "The United States and Iran: Policy Challenges and Opportunities" and "Debating the Iran-Iraq War in Contemporary Iran".


 * the US was able to convince Albania to accept the remaining 2,700 members who were brought to Tirana between 2014 and 2016. -- The part "the US was able to convince Albania to accept the remaining 2,700 members" is only given in the first Guardian source. The second source is by the American Herald Tribune? The second Guardian source says "From March 2013 to September 2016, about 3,000 MeK members are believed to have been sheltered in Albania, after being transferred from Iraq". "The US was able to convince Albania" is WP:UNDUE.


 * On June 20, 2023, the Albania police raided an operation at the MEK camp in Tirana, on the orders of the Albanian judiciary due to the investigation of the SPAK ( Special Anti-Corruption Structure). The police claimed that the MEK violated the 2014 agreement which let them stay in Tirana. -- The MEK has had several raids in their camps. Why was this one in particular picked for the lead? Alex-h (talk) 16:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Alex-h: You changed a lot more than just this. In future, if you are making mass reversions to a prior version of the page, please make sure to provide a page version number so that editors can refer to it. Iskandar323 (talk) 06:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @: "Notably included Donald Trump's inner circle" is WP:UNDUE -- it included much more than this. "Between 1997 and 2013, the MEK was also on the lists of terrorist organizations of the US, Canada, EU, UK and Japan" -- ruins the flow of the previous version and the MEK was designated and delisted in different years depending on the country. "The European Union, Canada, the United States, and Japan have previously listed the MEK as a terrorist organization. The MEK is designated as a terrorist organization by Iran and Iraq." is more generic but also more faithful paraphrasing. Alex-h (talk) 18:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * , I restored the longstanding material that you deleted. You should have built consensus before implementing the changes into article. Note that the longstanding materials were added to the article one month before the date you reverted them; and you should have considered them as longstanding.Ghazaalch (talk) 15:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Ghazaalch: With all of that restored material it's getting too long. I hope you've got some ideas on how to reduce it as well, because there are limits to how much it should contain. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:30, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I will propose a summarized version soon. And some materials need to be moved to the body of the article.Ghazaalch (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Ghazaalch the changes you restored are being called into question (and they are not the "longstanding version" because they were made just over a month ago). You need to respond to the questions if you want those changes implemented. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Calling into question is not enough. We should reach consensus. And they are longstanding. I made the changes on June 10 and Alex-h reverted them on July 10. So it is a month. Ghazaalch (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If you want to reach consensus, start by acknowledging and then attending to the mentioned challenges. Just because your edits were made a month ago doesn't mean they can't be challenged, that's not how this works. Please attend to the identified problems with your edits. Alex-h (talk) 11:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Sumarization proposal
The People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), also known as Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) or Mojahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), is an Iranian militant organization. that advocates overthrowing the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and installing its own government.

The MEK was founded on 5 September 1965 by leftist Iranian students affiliated with the Freedom Movement of Iran to oppose the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and contributed to overthrowing the Shah during the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The MEK boycotted the 1979 constitutional referendum, which led to Khomeini barring MEK leader Massoud Rajavi from the 1980 presidential election. On June 20, 1981, the MEK organized a demonstration against Khomeini with the aim of overthrowing the regime. On June 28, the headquarters of the Islamic Republic Party was blown up, allegedly by MEK, and more than 70 members of the leadership were killed. Facing the subsequent repression of the MEK by the IRP, Rajavi fled to Paris. During the exile, the underground network that remained in Iran continued to plan and carry out attacks and it allegedly conducted the August 1981 bombing that killed Iran's president and prime minister, Rajai and Bahonar.

In 1985, Rajavi launched an "ideological revolution" banning marriage and enforced divorce on all members who were required to separate from their spouses. He married one of the new divorcees, Maryam Azdanlou, who became his senior lieutenant. In 1986 when France expelled the MEK from the country, it located in Iraq’s Camp Ashraf near the border with Iran. In 1987, MEK sided with Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War; a decision that caused it to lose support within Iran. It took part in several actions against Iran during the Iran–Iraq War, including Operation Mersad, and Operation Forty Stars , as well as the suppression of the 1991 uprisings in Iraq. Following Operation Mersad, Iranian officials ordered the execution of the prisoners said to support the MEK.

In April 1992, MEK carried out attacks against Iranian embassies in 13 countries. Between 1997 and 2013, the MEK was on the lists of terrorist organizations of the US, Canada, EU, UK and Japan for various periods for its use of terror tactics, including the killing of US personnel in Iran during the 1970s. In 2003, the MEK signed a ceasefire agreement with the U.S. and put down their arms in Camp Ashraf. Then MEK paid Western political influencers to lobby for its removal from the list of designated terrorist organizations. After it was no longer designated as a terrorist group, the US was able to convince Albania to accept the remaining 2,700 members who were brought to Tirana between 2014 and 2016. During its life in exile, MEK was financed by Saddam Hussein   or fake charities based in European countries.

The contested material that should be put in its context in the body
Its revolutionary interpretation of Islam contrasts with the conservative Islam of the traditional clergy as well as the populist version developed by Ayatollah Khomeini in the 1970s. The MEK was at one point Iran's "largest and most active armed dissident group", and some sources today still present it as a major political opposition group, though it is known to be unpopular within Iran.

Critics have described the group as "resembling a cult", while its backers have touted it as fighting for a free and democratic Iran.

The parts that are not lede-worthy
In June 2004, the U.S. designated MEK members in Camp Ashraf ‘protected persons’ under the Fourth Geneva Convention, relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War  which expired in 2009 after the attainment of the full sovereignty of Iraq.

In 2002, the MEK was a source for claims about the nuclear program of Iran.

Verification of material
which of your citations says that The campaign to delist the MEK in the European Union counted with Spanish MEP Alejo Vidal-Quadras as one of its main lobbyists? ParadaJulio (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Vidal-Quadras role is well-established, and back in the day it was publicly notorious (e.g. as part of Friends of a Free Iran):
 * El Confidencial : La relación de Vidal-Quadras con el grupo viene de lejos: hace una década, sus esfuerzos consiguieron que la Unión Europea sacase a los MeK de su lista de organizaciones terroristas. Roughly translated as Vidal-Quadras relation with the group [MEK/NCRI] goes back a long way: a decade ago, his efforts achieved that the European Union dropped the MEK from their list of terrorist organizations.
 * Foreign Policy : The organization started an intense lobbying campaign to have itself removed from terrorist lists in the United States and European Union. A vast and impressive range of current and former U.S. politicians and officials ended up being linked to this effort, from Giuliani and Bolton on the right to Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez and former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean on the left. In Europe, the list included Alejo Vidal-Quadras, a now-retired Spanish politician, who previously served as one of the 14 vice presidents in the EU Parliament. The MEK was finally delisted by the U.S. government in 2012 and by the EU in 2009.
 * eldiario.es : Cuando la Unión Europea decidió retirar de la lista europea de organizaciones terroristas a los Muyahidines del Pueblo de Irán (OMPI), principal grupo de oposición al régimen islámico de Teherán, Maryam Rajavi, presidenta del Consejo Nacional de la Resistencia de Irán (considerado el brazo político de los Muyahidines), agradeció el apoyo de un grupo de miembros del Parlamento Europeo, en especial de Vidal-Quadras. Era frecuente que el entonces político del PP participase activamente en todo tipo de actos del lobby en Bruselas de la oposición iraní en el exilio Roughly translated as When the European Union decided to drop the main opposition group to the islamic regime of Tehran, the MEK from the european list of terrorist organizations, Maryam Rajavi, president of the NCRI (considered the political arm of the MEK), thanked their support to a group of members of the European Parliament, in particular to Vidal-Quadras. It was frequent that the then PP politician participated actively in all kinds of events of the Iranian opposition in exile's lobby in Brussels
 * --MarioGom (talk) 20:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * then your first citations did not support what you added to the article? About your second list of citations, they say that Vidal-Quadras is being associated with the MEK's lobbying efforts, but specifically where do they refer to him as "one of its main lobbyists"? ParadaJulio (talk) 17:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * your first citations did not support what you added to the article? Not really. I tried to make a short selection to avoid refbombing, but I did not select properly. My bad.specifically where do they refer to him as "one of its main lobbyists"? e.g. Maryam Rajavi called out Vidal-Quadras specifically when thanking his group for the delisting effort. But if you think this is dubious, I'm fine with changing it to one of its lobbyists. MarioGom (talk) 18:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have added it back, removing the word main which was a reasonable objection, and adding the sources above for completeness. Other than that, ParadaJulio being blocked, his objections do not hold for CRP. MarioGom (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)