This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1978 Iranian politics, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
"Iranians’ social media posts created a new hashtag, #Kotlet, referring to Soleimani’s death essentially as a well-known Persian fried meat patty. Iranians intentionally started cooking kotlet and shared these pictures on social media to show how much they liked kotlet, a double entendre for how happy they were that Qasem Soleimani had become like a kotlet, his body unrecognizable like a fried ground beef patty. Today, when people post videos of themselves serving kotlet as an anti-regime message, they risk being arrested." CurlyMoeLarry (talk) 22:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2023[edit]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered=or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
“A narrative mentions about the American drones which took-off from Kuwait land, and entered Iraq and did the mentioned operation, on the other hand, the headquarters of the Kuwaiti Armed Forces denied the news after a few hours. The second news says that an American UAV rises from the Al-Adeed base in Qatar and do the mentioned assassination-operation.” 2601:603:4E01:1420:868:E969:EE3B:A053 (talk) 15:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The 'Iranian propoganda section' is very weak. It is full of bague statements with very little specifics and unattributed opinions such as the passive 'Is believed to be'. It also has one of the signs are WP:OR, that is, a long list of weak sources for each statement. If the statement is supported, it only needs one good source, rather than the weak sources such as Vice and CNN. Ashmoo (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's also very strange to put a section on propaganda's alleged influence on his popularity ABOVE a section on his actual popularity under the "Public Image" section. I feel like such a section should come AFTER the "Popularity in Iran" section rather than prefacing it. It feels, as I say elsewhere on this page, like deliberate editorializing.
Furthermore, Soleimani was a genuine hero to the Iranian people. While his death may have been advantageous to the Iranian government as it provided them with an immortal martyr to uphold, I don't expect that any other nation would act differently in the same situation. JFK's death was followed by the three networks broadcasting about it for a collective 186 hours over the weekend, plus an all-day coverage of the funeral which went well into the night with reused footage of the crying crowds. The Americans then proceeded to name basically everything they could after the man and erect countless monuments, many of which are documented helpfully on a list on this website, and his grave is now home to an "eternal flame." It could be reasonable to call all of that "propaganda" but it would also be editorializing and not fit for Wikipedia. I don't think this is either, and the fact that this is seen as acceptable when the former would rightly not be demonstrates a profound western bias on this website. Jackwc123 (talk) 17:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The lede claims that "Iranian propaganda outlets subsequently [after his death] represented Soleimani as a national hero." This is a misleading claim -- Soleimani was already popularly celebrated as a national hero, much as generals such as Douglas MacArthur and Moshe Dayan were in their own lifetimes (for good or for ill).
In 2018, Iran renamed a street after Soleimani, and one source referring to that very event quotes a commissioner saying thus:
Sardar Soleimani is loved by a large part of the people of Iran and I hope that this naming is a tribute to his efforts and efforts to serve Iran, the people, Islam and all Muslims in the region.
These articles describe Soleimani as having "celebrity status," "well-placed to become a legendary figure," "subject of documentaries,"and comment on his ubiquity on Iranian television. When he was killed, analysts commented on the assassination as a gross tactical error specifically because he was so popular.
The portion of the article I am taking issue with is obviously inappropriate editorializing. Regardless of your opinions on Iran, it is undeniable that Soleimani was popularly perceived to be a national hero, and this was not a posthumous invention of the Iranian government. Discussions of the Iranian government's posthumous hagiography of the man should be presented alongside the context of his genuine popularity among the people in the "Death and legacy" issue, not out-of-context in the lede without that necessary information. Jackwc123 (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: per WP:DECISION NotAGenious (talk) 18:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
