Talk:Iran International

WP:OR content

The article names some people as staff which is not valid anymore and it doesn't allow others to add or edit staff, there is some information about it is wrong and also too old and many changes has happened since 2 years ago, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Journalist2022 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

The article says The channel supports minority groups and promotes its diverse workforce, which includes members of the LGBT community, asylum seekers and human rights activists. The sources used to support this sentence are:

• Gay Star News [1] which only mentions of this TV station in quotes by an employee who said "I now appear around the world on the Iran International TV station" and "Naturally, the Iranian regime has fiercely objected to my work for Iran International."
• The second is an op-ed by another worker, published in unreliable New York Post which only mentions that "Fariba Sahraei, a former BBC Persian presenter, is senior editor at Iran International."
• The third does not even mention this TV station. Plus, listening2lesbians.com is not a reliable source.

That being taken into consideration, this is an evident violation of OR. Pahlevun (talk) 06:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Staff at Iran International have faced repeated attempts by the Iranian regime to intimidate and threaten them, with journalists receiving death threats, having their assets frozen and their families in Iran threatened and intimidated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The Times article used to support this sentence does not even mention Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, rather it is talking about Iran's intelligence ministry. It does not also mention "death threat" and this is fabricated by the user who added it. Anyway, this is actually an important matter about this TV station and I will create a section for it. Pahlevun (talk) 07:14, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

For the record, User:User19032020 is continuing to alter what the sources say despite the warning he was given. In this edit, these sentences were added and the source cited is Evening Standard:

Editor of Iran International, Sadeq Saba told the Evening Standard that "We work under Ofcom rules, we have impartial, fair and factual coverage of events in Iran. We are not taking orders from any government, we are not supporting any opposition group, we are not ourselves an opposition channel. We are the professional independent news channel trying to provide alternative news information to our viewers in Iran." I took a look at the source and as I understand, Sadeq Saba is "now a presenter on Iran International", he is not the station's "Editor". Can a presenter (and not an editor) speak for his employer? More importantly, the quote is fabricated. We work under Ofcom rules seems to have been derived from "The three-year-old station broadcasts under OFCOM rules" which is not a quote by Saba, and is written by the Evening Standard. we have impartial, fair and factual coverage of events in Iran is not found in the source like the rest of quote. The only relevant part of the source is the part it says "Mr Saba described Iran International as an "independently funded TV organisation"." and "Mr Saba confirmed the source of their funding is a Saudi citizen, but maintained the channel remains editorially independent.​" As a result, I will remove these parts. Pahlevun (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Please watch the interview with Sadeq Saba, which is where the quotes are taken from. It is untrue that the quote is fabricated, many of the journalists at Iran International are also presenters as is the case with every news channel. Sadeq Saba is an Editor and Presenter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User19032020 (talk • contribs) 17:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The source you provided is only text, there is nothing to watch. Presenter is what the source called him, not editor. Pahlevun (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

User:User19032020: This edit is another violation of yours. If you continue adding some material while citing a source that does not support that, I have no other way than reporting you, because you have been warned enough. Pahlevun (talk) 17:10, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Lead

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, "The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight" while this version is not a summary nor has an appropriate weight. Sections like 'Ownership', 'Content', 'Union busting', 'Plagiarism accusation' are totally absent from the lead while the content of 'Alleged lack of editorial independence' section has been completely made it look the other way around. Note that a claim such as the TV "is not subject to any government intervention that may influence its coverage" cannot be put in the lead backed by a source like The National of United Arab Emirates, while publications like The Guardian and Wall Street Journal say otherwise. Moreover, there are still unaddressed disputes such as whether a quote from an employee can be put in the article as something like "Iran International insists...". For the time being, I am removing the mentioned material in the lead until a consensus is built for a summary with due weight. Pahlevun (talk) 19:05, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Faked footage?

What? No mention of the time Iran International faked footage of Turkish police beating women and pretended it was in Iran? How strange 78.152.229.5 (talk) 13:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

owning by Saudi Arabia

G'day. Please take a look on this edition by user:CaptainObjective, I want to get sure that: "By the policy of wikipedia" is that acceptable to write on the lead part of this article that Iran International's organization is "owning by Saudi Arabia"?

• I am asking everyone in here just because I'm a native Persian and I almost watch this TV Channel each day & I have never heard from Iran International to tell their viewers that they are owing to Saudi Arabia or even the other governments.

NameGame (talk) 23:15, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I have reverted the addition, as Iran International themselves deny this, and this all and all remains controversial. CaptainObjective is welcome to take their concerns to the talk page; note, they attempted to do something similar in article about another Iranian news channel which is also opposed by the authoritarian IR [2]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I have provided multiple sources that confirms that Iran International is wholly owned by Saudi nationals. I did not write that they are owned by the Saudi government and in fact put that in there. The sources include government corporate records, and articles from the likes of Guradian, BBC and etc.

The persons who are removing it are trying to make this political. Why would you listen to someone who is basing it off of “what they heard on TV”? I made it based on multiple articles and government sources. I am making a statement of fact that is highly material to readers.

Please note that I have not written anything negative about “another Iranian news channel which is also opposed by the authoritarian IR”. You can read my edit history. I wrote a statement of fact around ownership of Voice of America is owned by the US. That is not negative. It has nothing to do with being for or against Iran. VOA exists in multiple languages and it is all owned by the US. It’s like removing that BBC is owned by the U.K. or CBC is owned by Canada.

Also, the poster appears to think that I am somehow supportive of the IR regime just because I am highlighting a material statement of fact about a channel made by one of their opponents. If that is the case, will you also remove the positive statements of fact I wrote/edited about the Pahlavi (the biggest opponent of the Iranian regime)? You see how ridiculous it is? I think you need to realize I am writing facts, and the other poster is making political.

CaptainObjective (talk) 05:49, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

One more thing: aside from writing positive statements of fact about Pahlavi and other political figures (or correcting any false statements about them), I also made plenty of updates that were negative to the IR regime (including this very page of Iran International). It was me who updated it with the news that their headquarters had to be moved because of the the attacks by the IR regime. Do you see how ridiculous it is for you to accuse me of being pro regime?! I hate that regime but it doesn’t mean that 1 +1 is not 2 because their enemies say it isnt. I am simply making a well sourced statement of fact about Iran International. Here is an example (NOTE: I am ignoring the part about links to government, we can leave that be, but you can’t deny that it’s owned by Saudi nationals): https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-uk-based-iranian-tv-channels-links-to-saudi-arabia CaptainObjective (talk) 06:01, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure this information needs to be in the first sentence: it's a little pointy there and not really adherent to the standards MOS:FIRST requires. The second line, which is about its establishment, etc., would be a more appropriate spot. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, I have removed it from the first sentence, as there was no consensus for it to start with. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

The current dearth of information about the organization's structure really is quite odd. Is it actually an independent company, or just a channel owned by Volante Media? For an organization article, the infobox should have a CEO etc. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:32, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

If you read the first setting/paragraph of CNN, BBC etc they all describe who owns the networks. This information is material, standard to be mentioned amongst the first, and the fact that a troll (HistoryofIran) keeps removing a factual statement because of a political motivation shows how important/material it is. I have provided an abundance of sources to back up the fact. The trolls who remove it cite that they watch the station. This ridiculous, and mods should ban those who try to make Wikipedia political to the detriment of facts. CaptainObjective (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

If you keep calling others for trolls and edit warring then the one that is going to get banned is you. You have achieved no WP:CONSENSUS and despite that I was willing to comprimise, only to get attacked by you and reverted. I have reverted you completely now, feel free to reach consensus. HistoryofIran (talk) 10:51, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Lying?

"Iran International was launched on 18 May 2017, with the aim of lying to the 80 million people that live in Iran and the Iranian diaspora around the world, in addition to informing and educating a global audience on the latest news and developments in Iran and across the Middle East."

Why does it say "lying"? 2001:9E8:C0F6:4600:7091:1EC4:C771:8739 (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

An editor added their personal opinion to the article yesterday and it wasn't completely removed. Thank you for pointing it out. Squeakachu (talk) 18:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Ownership passed to Israel ?

"In 2024, it was revealed that the management of Iran International has been transferred from the Saudis to Israel." The source backing this up seems to be Iranian state media, which is very anti Israel.

Forest576 (talk) 09:06, 22 February 2024 (UTC)