Talk:Youcef Nadarkhani

A few notes so far:

 * There appears to be several different spellings of his name. I've seen Yousef and Yusef in particular as common spellings; I used the one that appeared most often, and in the more official correspondences.  Likewise, his wife's name had a few alternate spellings floating around on the internet.
 * There are pictures of Youcef online; however, I can't find any available for use on wikipedia. Most of the pictures appear to be completely unsourced.  I am still hunting for a good picture.
 * The main body of the article is choppier than I'd like. I might tackle it myself, but I wouldn't mind it if someone else were to attack it themselves.

This whole sentence is unclear: Youcef Nadarkhani (born 1977) is an Iranian Christian pastor who is sentenced to die for apostasy from Islam but has been offered leniency if he will recant his faith in Jesus Christ. I'm not muslim but AFAIK, muslim have some faith too in Jesus Christ as one of their prophets. --Pascalbrax (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Was he sentenced to die "from Islam" or from the Iranian government for apostasy against Islam? I'll also work on work on dividing the article into appropriate sections to make it flow better. Mosesman76 (talk) 16:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Where is the court document? Is it me, or does that "translation" look suspect? I think it's a little assumptive to use that as a source of "fact". It's listed on this page as fact. Why?98.165.179.2 (talk) 01:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Jama'at-e Rabbani is not the "Protestant Church of Iran"
Jama'at-e Rabbani, which the anonymous editor(s) 109.60.9.211 and 109.60.1.39 renders as "Protestant Church of Iran" in the "See also" section, is not described as "Protestant" nor as the "Church of Iran" in the Jama'at-e Rabbani Wikipedia article. In fact, the Jama'at-e Rabbani Wikipedia article identifies Jama'at-e Rabbani as being a Pentecostal church. No sources connect Youcef Nadarkhani to Jama'at-e Rabbani. I request that this spurious link be removed from the "See also" section. Wideangle (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Important links deleted by the anonymous editor(s)
The anonymous editor(s) 109.60.9.211 and 109.60.1.39 deleted the important links List of former Muslims and Apostasy in Islam from the "See also" section on more than one occasion. I request that those links be restored to the "See also" section. Wideangle (talk) 20:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit war and page protection
After edit warring with User:Plot Spoiler and User talk:Vrenator (I also made changes to edits by 109.60.1.39), Editor-with-no-name 109.60.1.39 has successfully asked for the page to be locked here, (it was locked 10-11-2011) ... changing the lead from

"Youcef Nadarkhani ... is an Iranian Christian pastor who has been sentenced to die in Tehran.[1][2]  Initial reports, including a 2010 brief from the Iranian Supreme court, stated that the sentence was based on the crime of apostasy, renouncing his Islamic faith. Government officials later insisted that the sentence was instead based on alleged violent crimes, specifically rape and extortion.[3]  The Iranian government has offered leniency if he will recant his Christianity.[3]"

to this "Youcef Nadarkhani ... is person from Iranian city of Rasht who became popular in 2011 thanks to media coverage about controversial trial case. He was described as 'an Iranian Christian  pastor  who has been sentenced to death'[1][2]  in initial media reports from Western World, while by official statement he is convicted rapist and extortionist"

(109.60.1.39 made other changes as well. adding the subject Media claims and changing New Allegations section to Official response)

As far as I can tell there are no sources to indicate that Nadarkhani was ever charged with being a rapist or extortionist his case received the international response it did. The "New Allegations" are in fact new allegations, different then the original "Official Response" and the Media Claims are not just media claims but information from WP:RS. --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This is going to be extremely difficult to resolve this content dispute when this IP is accusing me of being an anti-Iran activist from the "Zionist regime" here. There's no problem with placing the Iranian government's position that Youcef is guilty of rape and extortion on the page, but this cannot be listed as fact as this IP is trying to do and in fact would be a BLP violation. At the same time, this IP is continuously trying to poison the well as BoogaLouie points out, creating section heads such as "Media claims" and implying that all media reports from the "Western world" are false. Plot Spoiler (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Quotes in footnotes corrupted by the anonymous editor
On two occasions (19:28, 11 October 2011 and 19:09, 11 October 2011), the anonymous editor 109.60.9.211 made changes in quoted text of the "|quote=" parts of six of the footnotes in this article. Specifically: In footnote , 109.60.9.211 changed "and he was sentenced" to "and was sentenced" in the quote. In footnote , 109.60.9.211 changed "Youce" to "Youcef" in the quote. In footnote , 109.60.9.211 made 3 changes in the quote: changed "they" to "the Iranian authorities", changed "in order to" to "in what was believed to", and changed "arrested" to "taken into custody". In footnote , 109.60.9.211 changed "administration" to "Administration" in the quote. In footnote , 109.60.9.211 changed "September 22" to "September 22, 2010" in the quote. In footnote , 109.60.9.211 changed "the 'father' of Iran’s revolution in 1979" to "the leader of Iran’s revolution of 1979" in the quote. Such changes are unacceptable. I request that all of the above changes be reverted. Wideangle (talk) 01:04, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Consensus?
I too find the changes made by the SPA IP 109.60.9.211 totally unacceptable. How has this anonymous user managed to get the page locked in the state it is with disregard to the edits of other registered editors and the apparent consensus has been ignored. This IP has edit warred with several users to get his POV into the article. An admin needs to urgently review this. Vrenator (talk) 10:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I have reverted to version 454983419. Please discuss whether further changes are needed. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you  Vrenator (talk) 12:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Martin. This is wonderful.  Now, can the article be opened for further editing by registered editors, with editing by anonymous IPs disallowed?  Wideangle (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that would probably be the best way to go. We need to include the Iranian government's charges but they can't be accepted as simple truth as the IP address was attempting to do. Plot Spoiler (talk) 23:16, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

CNN leniency claim
Two editors are going back and forth debating this sentence in the lede: "The Iranian government has offered leniency if he will recant his Christianity". I just read the given source twice, but didn't seem to see this claim--is my brain getting foggy, or is this not in the source? I do believe AMnesty International has made this claim also, though; perhaps we can simply quote them. Khazar (talk) 15:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I sourced this to Amnesty, who make the claim more explicitly, and I made it clear the claim was coming from them specifically. This should meet concerns about NPOV. Khazar (talk) 15:33, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

One report of his execution
http://bluestarchronicles.com/2012/03/03/youcef-nadarkhani-executed-christian-pastor-hanged-in-iran-for-being-christian/

But I want another before I am willing to add this to the entry. FlaviaR (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:27, 10 March 2012 (UTC).

Neutrality issues
Just two examples:
 * First sentence of article states: "Youcef Nadarkhani is an Iranian Christian pastor who had been sentenced to death in Tehran for practicing Christianity in Iran.". Really? Iran denied it, and even US media published denial. Now which story is true? Only thing we know is that he wasn't executed, not even jailed, he's free man.
 * Sentence "he is a Zionist who has security crimes" isn't from Gholamali Rezvani. It's from US-based organization International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran which claims Rezvani stated it for Fars News, while original Fars News' article actually stated this:
 * به گزارش خبرنگار قضایی فارس از چند روز گذشته رسانه‌های غربی بازی نخ‌نمای خود برای اعمال فشار بر ایران را از سر گرفته و بازهم با طرح نبود آزادی بیان و عقیده و نقض حقوق بشر با استفاده از رسانه‌های بعضا صهیونیستی دست به اقدامات تازه‌ای زده‌اند.
 * Last few days Western mass media play games by publishing stories about "lack of freedom of speech or belief" and the "violation of human rights" to put pressure on Iran in purpose of Zionist regime. (translation)
 * Misqouting is obivous and it can be confirmed by any Persian speaker. As an Iranian Christian myself I find whole story ridiculous, pathetic attempt of trying to get Western Christians on anti-Iranian side. --HistorNE (talk) 00:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It is not clear what your opinion is. The case was widely reported in lots of different media in lots of different countries. Lack of freedom of speech, or expression, is a widely accepted flaw in the Iranian system as it is practised today. For example, freedom to choose, or change, your religion is not allowed on pain of death. Democratic peaceful demonstration is answered with guns and bullets. Youcef Nadarkhani did not practice any religion until his teens, whereupon he chose Christianity - and it was for this act that he was originally arrested and charged .... the charges of rape were added later. All in all, the reporting within this Wikipedia article is fair. I'm sure others would agree with me. Francis Hannaway (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It is "widely reported" because journalists just copy-paste story from some major media houses. After Iran gave official explanation, very few media published such response (CNN did) because it wasn't so sensationalistic as former. Encyclopedia shouldn't deal with mainstream media yellow journalism, but facts. Claim that freedom of religion isn't allowed is such laugable joke, it's very common among mixed Armenian-Persian marriages. You don't need to show me some media pamphlet which states different because I can read Persian and there's official Iranian parliament website with all laws. Considering demonstratings, they weren't "democratic" because Iran already is democracy, they were pro-Mousavi who is part of this political system almost 35 years. Claims that charges of rape were "added later" are nonsense, it became typical for propagandist activists always to claim "new charges" after Iran gives official response. There are at least 3-4 identical cases: husband-murderer Ashtiani, two pedophile-rapists Asgari & Marhoni, drug trafficer Bahrami, etc. If Iran wants to do something, it would be done and publically announced. No matter is it installing new nuclear reactors or executing someone for his crimes. Not even official Washington, London, Berlin or Paris can do anything about first one, so you believe mouse-clicker activists are responsible for "changing" Iran's judicial verdicts? Some even believe they're feeding children in Africa on same way. Low-profile propaganda for simple-minded people. --HistorNE (talk) 07:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Confusion
This article seems very confused annd it is difficult for me as someone who knows absolutely nothing about this man to know what has happened. It seems it is disputed as to whether he is alive or dead in prison or at liberty. Would it be possible to include all the possible scenarios citing who claims each is true? Alternatively if there is a concensus could the other theories be mentioned as doubtful or conspiracy theories. There is confusion even in the first sentence and that put me off reading the rest. I do not know anything about the Iranian legal system but to a mere western lawyer like me this first sentence looks very odd. It is said he was condemned to death but then acquitted. Should this be that he was convicted and sentenced to death but the conviction overturned on appeal? Does it mean he was convicted and sentenced and although he remains convicted his sentence was changed to imprisonment on an appeal against sentence? Does it mean that he was prosecuted for an offence which carried the death penalty but acquitted at trial? Does it mean that the Iranian system allows for sentence to be imposed on somebody who has not actually been convicted? I am sure the Iranian Government would deny that. Spinney Hill (talk) 09:13, 24 July 2020 (UTC) Furthermore "judges may still convict a defendant of that crime if they rule based on religious fatwas" is not a sebntence that makes any sense to me. Also The article appears to say that although there is no crime of apostasy people are convicted and sentenced for that crime.Spinney Hill (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)