Template talk:Iranian Majlis

Numbering
Hi Pahlevun. . I made an example from German parliament. Federal election of 2017 named as «19th Bundestag», Thus federal election of 1949 was the «1st Bundestag». we clearly can see discrete numbering for legislatures. I'm going to revert your last edit on the template. Benyamin-ln (talk) 15:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Inter-Parliamentary Union considers Iranian parliaments to be the same institution (look for "Affiliation date(s)"). Pahlevun (talk) 18:31, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I see that page. The dates resetted after 1979. Benyamin-ln (talk) 12:36, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, they don't. Iranian parliament was not a member of the IPU between 1979 and 1981 (like 1908–1930 and 1939–1949). This also means that they are considered the same institution. Even the name asserted in the 1979 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the term convened in 1980 was 'Majles-e-Shoray-e-Melli' until it was renamed later. Pahlevun (talk) 14:00, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Resetting the numbers is due the fact that the state historiography tends to presume that the revolution has brought the genuine institutions, so similarly the current administration is called "12th government", yet it is not. Pahlevun (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * consistent numbering is not Common. However you can call for a Third opinion. Benyamin-ln (talk) 15:19, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:COMMONNAME is about article titles, which we previously did agree on, not about numbering here. Pahlevun (talk) 16:35, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

In order to thoroughly discuss my reasons, I'm going to explain why it's wrong to put National Consultative Assembly (NCA) above Qajar and Pahlavi, while putting Islamic Consultative Assembly (ICA) above Islamic Republic: —Pahlevun (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) NCA and ICA are the same institution (Iranian Parliament or Majlis). This is acknowledged by the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
 * 2) After Iranian Revolution in 1979, the Iranian Parliament was called NCA by the constitution from 1979 to 1989 amendment and was officially in use. The reason for renaming it was Islamization.
 * 3) In Iran, historiography is under the shadow casted by the state and its ideology, as it always has been. Thus Iranian sources date back everything to Iranian Revolution in 1979, neglecting what was before and implying that they were not genuine. So,the current parliament term is "10th Majlis", resetting the numbering since 1979, while it is the 34th term since the foundation in 1906. Similarly, the current administration is the "12th government", while it is the 117th government since the constitutional revolution. Note that my problem is not with the article titles, but it is with the number resetting everywhere, including in this template. Wikipedia should be neutral.


 * The discussion that Pahlevun created, is not in list of Active disagreements now. can you help us to solve the dispute on this template? Benyamin-ln (talk) 11:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Benyamin-ln: Hi and Sorry for the delayed response. I read the above comments and would like to assert that the only way to resolve this issue is to adhere to the RSs. I'm not going to ignore Pahlevun's attempt aimed at justifying his viewpoint though. Original research is allowed on TPs, but it should be avoided when it comes to editing the articles. Anyway, please see the following sources and see their numbering style:
 * PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS, by The Iran Social Science Data Portal, a project funded by the Social Science Research Council, Princeton University and Syracuse University.
 * "Table 1 depicts the national seat distribution of the 10th Iranian parliament in the first round...," by Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School.
 * "Iran's 10th Parliament: Less of a Men’s Club," by the Atlantic Council.
 * "Following are some facts about Iran’s 10th parliamentary election...," by the Reuters.
 * ...and probably some others with same numbering style.
 * In my opinion, continuous numbering would not be in accordance to the the reliable sources. That's what I think should be considered in this regard. -- M h hossein   talk 18:40, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, views expressed by users invited by one side of the discussion are not considered third opinions, though they are welcome and part of the discussion. I am requesting for more comments. Pahlevun (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

RfC
&#x20; –Pahlevun (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Should the Iranian Parliaments before and after 1979 be considered separate institutions?
 * 2) Should the numbering of Iranian parliamentary terms reset in 1979?


 * Comment Clarification requested: – In what way would the content of the article look different if #1 is upheld, vs. if it is rejected? Mathglot (talk) 10:19, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * This version with two headers National Consultative Assembly and Islamic Consultative Assembly over Qajar monarchy, Pahlavi monarchy Islamic Republic suggested that they were two different institutions. I removed the headers and apparently there were no objections. Pahlevun (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * No I see no reason to do so. L3X1 ◊distænt write◊  00:24, 7 March 2018 (UTC)