Talk:Qasem Soleimani/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

edits

deleted spymaster from his name and took down his alleged date of death. Presstv disputes this. see here http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/07/22/252151/irgc-rejects-reports-of-soleimani-death/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Caricature

According to biographies of living persons, "images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light." Hence I'm going to remove the caricature. Mhhossein (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

a suggestion: adding news on him

I suggest we add a section by the name of news. there is no room in the page for that.--m,sharaf (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Wounded

Maybe Soleimani being wounded in early November should be mentioned, and his disappearance from the public eye, since that day. Glatisant (talk) 23:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Agree. It's pretty suspicious. I mean, it's very likely that he died. --Monochrome_Monitor 18:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Qasem Soleimani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120725085931/http://www.aei.org/files/2011/07/13/MEO-2011-07-No-4-g.pdf to http://www.aei.org/files/2011/07/13/MEO-2011-07-No-4-g.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120725085931/http://www.aei.org/files/2011/07/13/MEO-2011-07-No-4-g.pdf to http://www.aei.org/files/2011/07/13/MEO-2011-07-No-4-g.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

very poor quality article

this article needs to be entirely rewritten and then locked — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.136.14.143 (talk) 04:23, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Major general

@Pahlevun: Regarding your recent edit to the article please see: [1], [2] and [3]. Mhhossein (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: Do you find "Major general Qasem Soleimani is an Iranian major general" right? Pahlevun (talk) 13:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Now I can agree with you, if you mean that the first appearance of Maj Gen is just excess, as we have another mention of it in the sentence. Mhhossein (talk) 13:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

It was already explained in the edit summary. I consent removing either of the "major general"s to make sense of it. Pahlevun (talk) 13:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

You could've explained that instead of asking question. Anyway, how bout this suggestion:

"Major general Qasem Soleimani is an Iranian general?" Mhhossein (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

In the English-language media, he is usually referred to as "General [Qassem] Soleimani", and in Persian he is not usually referred with the title "Major General". In fact, "Haj" and "Sardar" are more common. I suggest to simply remove the titles before his names, and mention his titles either in a separate section or somewhere in the lead. --Z 18:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Seems fair enough! I think we can act based on Z's suggestion. Mhhossein (talk) 14:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

• @Pahlevun: Salaam, could you please address the recent IPs' back and forth regarding Soleimani's titles? --Mhhossein ^talk 19:08, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: Seems a simple vandalism to me. As it was in the previous versions, "Sardar Sarlashkar Pasdar" is the full version of what is used to address Soleimani officially. Only the first word (Sardar) is honorific, the second is his rank (Sarlashkar) and the third (Pasdar) means that he serves in the IRGC. I suugest mentioning Sardar only for "honorific_prefix" in the infobox. Pahlevun (talk) 19:11, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Qasem Soleimani in Imam Khomeini Hossainiah01.jpg
• Qasem Soleimani with Zolfaghar Order.jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Qasem Soleimani with Zolfaghar Order.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Rewrite intro

The introductory paragraph needs to be rewritten-- this is an article about Soleimani, not the United States' list of terrorists. It also refers to "Assad" with no context. The introduction should be very broad, should focus entirely on Soleimani, and should give proper context for anything it refers to.

Deletion of images must cease

There seem to be some vandalisms aimed at the uploaded images with one idiot even calling them "violent" images whatever that means. If you want to remove anything then it must first be discussed in the talk page and you should provide cogent reasons.

Dead?

We need confirmation that he is dead Hitjack64 (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Second this. We do not yet have confirmation from anyone reliable. Iraqi state tv is not reliable and all reliable sources are saying reportedly. Pentagon and IRGC have not confirmed. Nole (chat·edits) 02:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

As of the timestamp of this comment, none of the sources in the article have anything more than the iraqi state tv source. Obviously it's more likely than not that he's dead, but that's why we use the presumed dead template instead of the confirmed dead template. That should not be changed until we have a confirmation from a source better than "@Global_Mil_Info" on twitter. Nole (chat·edits) 02:19, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@El C: and @Ultimograph5:^^ Nole (chat·edits) 02:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, these confirmations via Twitter are of limited reliability. El_C 02:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

• I'm now seeing this, which is closer to the pentagon confirming. Nole (chat·edits) 02:32, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Pentagon confirms. I've changed the template to reflect that. Nole (chat·edits) 02:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Nominated for the main page at ITN

{{ITN nom}} -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:02, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Great job!

For the folks that have been updating the article following reporting of Soleimani's death, great job in updating and improving the article generally... beyond just adding the information about his death.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:11, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Article Assumes Motive for US killing of Soleimani is "Factual"

The opening paragraphs of this article suggest that the motive for killing Soleimani is factual. The US motive for killing Soleimani appears to be based on an allegation by Trump - Trump has been documented in telling up to 1250 falsehoods per month.

At this point we cannot take the allegations, listed in the opening paragraph, at face value. Specifically, we do not know whether "Iran-backed militants" stormed the US embassy in Iraq, nor do we know whether a "US Contractor" was really killed in Iraq by Iran-backed elements, and if the incident has occurred there is still no credible proof, yet, that the named Iraqi PMU was behind it. This incident may have been based on false flag attacks similar to the so called "Chemical Attacks" in Syria which were debunked again last week in documents released by Wikileaks, but were later were used as an excuse to attack Syria. This article needs additional attention to prevent propaganda-based sourcesXoltron (talk) 04:25, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

What is a "propaganda-based source"? kevinp2 (talk) 04:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

A source which potentially facilitates spreading propaganda rather than dissemination of factual information.Xoltron (talk) 04:37, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Can you identify any particular sources used on this page that you think are spreading propaganda? Axedel (talk) 04:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Just because the article is based on reliable sources and those don't agree with your opinion / agenda doesn't mean the article is out of line. Plenty of people have and had concerns about numerous military actions that Obama did as well, especially Libya which did not have Congressional approval either, but those opinions don't belong if they can't be backed up with reliable sources and same with this article. 2600:1700:1EC1:30C0:794F:E994:93CC:12CB (talk)

There is a new spelling mistake

"seemes" instead of "seems"

A-bj-q (talk) 10:06, 3 January 2020 (UTC)  Done @A-bj-q: thanks for pointing it out! Wakari07 (talk) 12:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

Edit the template at the bottom of the page named "Military Offices" to specify Esmail Ghaani as the succeeding commander of the Qud Forces, replacing "Vacant", as sourced on his wiki page. Amanda.Yaya99 (talk) 11:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done by teamwork. Thank you for the notification. Wakari07 (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

Currently the article's header mentions his death and features a link saying (see Assassination), but it is linking to the wikipedia page [Assassination]. It should link to this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Baghdad_International_Airport_attack 68.230.45.65 (talk) 05:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

 Already done This appears to have already been resolved EvergreenFir (talk) 20:29, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

"Soleimani was killed on 3 January 2020, after a missile targeted his convoy near Baghdad International Airport, with 4 other Popular Mobilization Forces members" Rewrite this to "Soleimani was a victim of targeted killing perpetrated by United States" source https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/defense-secretary-says-iran-and-its-proxies-may-be-planning-fresh-attacks-on-us-personnel-in-iraq/2020/01/02/53b63f00-2d89-11ea-bcb3-ac6482c4a92f_story.html Here's this specific word used https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/01/03/world/irans-gen-soleimani-killed-baghdad-strike Here's the Associated Press source that the boston globe article used as source https://apnews.com/5597ff0f046a67805cc233d5933a53ed/ Another source https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/qassem-soleimani-iran-airstrike-trump-nuclear-deal-what-happens-now-latest-a9268496.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.30.242.184 (talk) 04:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Please gain consensus for any proposed language changes. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Martial Arts and Dan

Apparently he had Dan in Karate. The source in Persian, so not really sure what it means. My understanding (unless he follows a different dojo system) is that that is like saying "he had grades in school". Dan is a ranking system, 1 Dan, 2 Dan, etc. My guess, not reading Persian or looking into this farther, he was a 1 Dan and that didn't carry over translating into Persian from Japanese and English from Persian. 142.118.61.25 (talk) 16:25, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Can you please link the source here? EvergreenFir (talk) 20:33, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Date of Death?

First accounts said that he was killed at late Thursday. And now some write that he was killed at early Friday. Which is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArcticGravyTrain (talk • contribs) 10:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

See my reply to the same question above. Assuming UTC or local time, it should be unambiguous. Wakari07 (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Assuming Kim Ghattas and The Atlantic are reliable enough on their own—source provided in the two other threads asking this question—I updated the article under the section "Death". Wakari07 (talk) 22:02, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

Change date of death from 1/3/2020 to 1/2/2020 47.215.136.185 (talk) 04:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

<unanswered: my edit was reverted> An early report states: "Strikes have been carried out against two targets linked to Iran in Baghdad on Thursday, U.S. officials told Reuters." A tweet by the Iraqi Interior Ministry's Security Media Cell visible in this article is dated 11:46 PM on 2 January. "Mohammed Redha al-Jabri, head of protocol of Iraq's state-sponsored Popular Mobilization Forces, was killed Thursday 'along with three guests accompanying him,' Al-Hashed Al-Shaabi, also known as the Popular Mobilization Forces, told Newsweek." Also, the source for infobox - died, Jerusalem Post, reads "Iraq's Security Media Cell announced late Thursday night that three katyusha rockets had targeted Baghdad Airport. The militia members were hosting "important guests" at Baghdad airport who were being driven in two militia vehicles that were struck by two rockets, said the militia sources. Two militia sources said the two guests were also killed in the attack but declined to identify them. It is assumed that Soleimani was one of them" — although AP says "early on Friday". Turkish state media has also Friday. Wakari07 (talk) 06:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

It appears that the strike occurred around 1 AM local time: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/01/qassem-soleimani-death-missed/604396/ EvergreenFir (talk) 20:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Wakari07 (talk) 22:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2020

Suleimani was killed on January 2nd, 2020. This page has his death listed as January 3rd, 2020. Change date of death from January 3rd to January 2nd. 76.173.79.214 (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

The strike occurred around 1 AM local time ([4]). EvergreenFir (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the source. Wakari07 (talk) 22:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

tags

we should put the tag in the beginning to the death section because the other sections are not getting heavily edited.

ForTheLorax (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Aftermath

@Alex-h: there is no problem to insert a new section, but adding only positive reactions is a strong violation of NPOV. I have to note that you reverted the edit for the third time. Can you give reason for your reverts?Saff V. (talk) 16:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand. The reactions are what they are. If there are only positive ones, then there are only positive ones. If there are also negative ones, add those, too. El_C 19:59, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

The problem is giving it UNDUE weight in a new section called aftermath. Most people in Iraq have condemned the attack.see. While the celebration video was only 6-8 people(probably ISIS members).--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 20:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm more concerned about duplication of 2020_Baghdad_International_Airport_airstrike#Aftermath, but fair enough. El_C 20:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Yamamoto reference

Useless reference to Yamamoto. It is not like USA did not attempt any targeted attacks after 1943. I do recall other recent USA successes in such activities. Don't remember their victims atm. Obama, Castro and Gaddafi might have some words about it, if they were still alive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.56.84.144 (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The article states, "This is the first time U.S. forces took out a senior military officer of a foreign country since American pilots shot down the plane carrying Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto during the Second World War.[110]"

I can't fathom this is accurate. The term "senior military official" is overly vague. Was Suddam Hussein not a "sr. military official"? How about Abdul Karim Kassem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:182:CD00:1640:9C2E:2C05:D057:4F94 (talk) 17:50, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Saddam Hussein was a head of state. And he was executed on the order of the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal. Anyway, the Yamamoto claim is attributed to the New York Times. Unless you have a reliable source that says otherwise, then I see no problem with the aforementioned passage. El_C 17:58, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@El C:This article documents the killing (via sniper) of an unnamed NVA General during the Vietnam War. While I can't immediately find any other sources, I would agree that it seems unlikely the US has not killed any senior military figures since 1943, so I would agree with the OP that we remove the reference. Darren-M talk 18:50, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Copy that. El_C 18:51, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

It does seem an interesting point, as the targetted killing of a serving officer in an opposing army (rather than leaders of non-state entities like bin Laden or Baghdadi) is pretty unusual. It might be worth stating that the NY TImes have made the comparison. But anyway it would seem more appropriate to include it in the article on the airstrike itself, not Suleimani's bio. FrankP (talk) 19:07, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The article didn't actually say targeted, though. My opposition was based on it being unlikely that the US hadn't killed any senior military figures in 70 years. It's more plausible if it actually means an operation specifically to kill a senior military figure. Darren-M talk 19:11, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

I get that, yes the article should have made its claim more precise. I think the fact they have made the comparison is of interest, so something like "The New York Times compared the killing to the WW2 operation in which Admiral Yamamoto's plane was shot down". I might introduce something like that at 2020 Baghdad International Airport airstrike. Oh. No need, it's already there! But phrased in the way you objected to. FrankP (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2020

He was a man of Lurish etnicity born in kerman is what i want to add. And this is the source https://fa.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/طایفه_سلیمانی_کرمانی 154.127.1.194 (talk) 07:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.. WP:CIRCULAR. Majavah ^(t/c) 13:45, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I looked and can find no reliable sources (at least, in English) saying Soleimani is Lurish. -sche (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Posthumous promotion

I have removed the claim that Soleimani was posthumously promoted to Lt. General as I can find no reliable source to back the claim. The article provided two sources. The First of these referenced Wikipedia as its source, and so is clearly unreliable. The second of these is from Euronews but it does not have text referring to any promotion following his assassination but rather uses the rank of Lt. Gen. in captions of photos from 2019 when he was still alive. It thus does not support posthumous promotion and I suspect is simply a captioning error. After all, no regular serving Iranian officer has been promoted beyond Major General since the revolution, as I understand it, so his being a Lt. Gen. in 2019 seems unlikely and would need a better source – such a promotion would likely have generated news stories on its own. It is possible that a posthumous promotion has or will occur but I can't find (after an admittedly quick search) any news story reporting it. I have no objection to the information being restored in the event that suitable sourcing becomes available, of course. EdChem (talk) 02:49, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Haaretz has a story of Soleimani and it says that he is Lt. Gen. The story is from October 2019. I think Haaretz should know. It seems that he was promoted at least months before the death. [5] Grel (talk) 17:50, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

I've reverted an edit making the same claim of posthumous promotion which cited the same source mentioned by EdChem, potentially circular as the Medium.com article cites Wikipedia. We should get better evidence of a promotion before allowing this change. As to the possibility that he was actually promoted earlier (while alive) I don't think we can base this on a caption or mention. While Ha'aretz for example may usually be accurate, they might simply make a mistake. If he had been promoted I would expect an official (Iranian) source to announce this. Bear in mind that his own commanding officer the head of the IRGC is also a Major General not Lieutenant General, so it does seem unlikely. FrankP (talk) 18:13, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

There are reliable sources for this posthumous promotion, such as "Ayatollah Khamenei has promoted his loyal officer to lieutenant general" (BBC) or "Martyr Lieutenant General Qassem Suleimani joined his martyred brothers..." (Reuters). In case you need an Iranian source, I think this Islamic Republic News Agency link would suffice. Pahlevun (talk) 21:47, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

If the above sources are deemed sufficient, then text about this should be added (restored) to the article, rather than the information being present only as a category. -sche (talk) 23:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me, that seems to clear it up. I'll add to the article. FrankP (talk) 23:34, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm glad better sourcing for this has been found. The presence of an IRNA source on top of the other sources makes me optimistic that they are not circularly taking their info from Wikipedia, too, as I'd like to hope that a government-controlled Iranian outlet either reliably knows their guy's rank, or will receive and publish a correction from the government if they are wrong about it. Btw, in the process of citing his birthdate, pursuant to a recent {{cn}}, I noticed that a few outlets seem to be copy-pasting our erstwhile presentation of his birthplace as disputed. I made the one-off State Department memo which lists Qoms into a footnote, rather than body text, to discourage citogenesis. If we were so inclined, it would be possible to add another footnote—to the text about his promotion—mentioning that some sources like Euronews and Haaretz had him as a Lt Gen already in 2019 (it does seem too dubious to provide as "body text"). (Of course, it would be ideal to find a source not just saying that his birthplace was X or that he was promoted after Y, but saying outright that the sources giving another place/date are mistaken.) -sche (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Totally, it's unambiguously better sourcing, thanks to Pahlevun for digging these out. Still the only one which explicitly reports the action of him being promoted (posthumously) is the comment by the BBC's Lyce Doucet, the others simply use the rank in mentioning him. I'm just not convinced the captions in the pre-death articles were other than mistakes, so I think we should let that rest. FrankP (talk) 01:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

name pronunciation

Would be nice to have it at the start of the article.i have no idea how to add IPA stuff

Just for completeness, noting that this has now been done by somebody. Darren-M talk 18:55, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

The IPA was added in diff by a lexicographer I know from his good work over on Wiktionary, but who does not speak Persian. I'm intrigued that it gives the first name three syllables, while the various transliterations Wikipedia and Wiktionary list and moreover the IPA at wikt:قاسم#Persian suggest two syllables. (This Persian BBC report uses the name circa 18 seconds in.) @ZxxZxxZ: is a native speaker of Persian (and another fellow Wiktionary admin)—can you shed some light on whether the IPA here or at wikt:قاسم#Persian should be changed? -sche (talk) 00:48, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@-sche: I based this on the Forvo recordings. The -e is called ezāfe, and the article says it occurs between given name and surname. However, User:Keivan.f, who speaks Persian, has removed it, so maybe the article is wrong, and the Forvo recordings if I'm not hearing them wrong. — Eru·tuon 05:53, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

​ Hi. To clarify, as far as I know the concept of ezāfe does not exist in English or many other languages; at least not in the way that it's used in Persian. It's simply a way of connecting the first and last name, but it's usually omitted when the names are written with Latin alphabet. That's why we have it as "Qasem Soleimani", not "Qasem-e Soleimani". I also realized that this -e is not included in the pronunciation section of some other articles about Iranian figures, including Ali Khamenei, so that's why I thought maybe it was better to have it removed. Keivan.f^Talk 06:01, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I reverted it back to how it was after looking at the articles about Iranian political figures, including presidents. Since it's the standard way of pronunciation in Persian, it seems that it's better to include it. Sorry for the confusion that I might have created. :) Keivan.f^Talk 06:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Honorific prefix

I removed a string of honorifics from the top line of the infobox. I think this field is intended for the person's main official title or role, not for every title or rhetorical honorific they may be associated with. The other titles may be best in nickname or somewhere in the body of the article. I just thought it would be best to discuss it here.

The titles in question are:

• Sepahbod - Farsi equivalent of Lt Gen in the IRGC
• Pasdar - nickname for members of the IRGC
• Shahid - martyr, so POV
• Haj - already noted in the infobox

Sardar, which remains, apparently covers all general officers. I await correction on the proper usage of the original language titles. But I wonder if we shoudn't be using English equivalents instead, which seems to be the norm in other bios. FrankP (talk) 09:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

"Haj" is indeed not an official title. However, "Sardar", "Pasdar", and even "Shahid" are official titles, although the literal translation of the last one does seem POV, they are actually used in official records of statistics and elsewhere in official context - media, etc. (and in that exact order that I had added). Replacing "Sepahbod" with "Lieutenant General" is appropriate as is common with all other articles, but other titles shouldn't be in the original language for the sake of consistency. I want to note that, however, mentioning all of these titles has not been a common practice in other similar articles in Wikipedia. --Z 17:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

If it is going to be translated, "Sardar" and "Sepahbod" may be merged and simply translated to "Lieutenant General". --Z 17:14, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarifications. I'm not against including any of the titles, but I thought it best not to inflate the Honorific field in the infobox. It's my understanding from some sources (e.g ABNA) that his supporters often referred to him familiarly as Haj Qassem. And Shahid of course comes from a particular viewpoint, but I support it being reflected properly in the article (in fact I inserted a mention of Ali Larijani and others making this point). But for the top line of the infobox I expect Lieutenant General would be best. In an English-language and NPOV context, I think he would usually be referred to by (Western-equivalent) military rank. As to where to include the others, I am open to suggestions. FrankP (talk) 18:29, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Reported dead 3 times already - 2006, 2012, 2015

Can someone add this into the article. Can't work out where to put it, but it should be in there, as this current "death" is no different. Reliable source also BTW: https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/soleimani-a-general-who-became-iran-icon-by-targeting-us/ar-BBYAIbC Apeholder (talk) 02:57, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Soleimani is now dead, so obviously this is different. And while the source is reliable, it doesn't support your claims. -- Jibal (talk) 05:39, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps it is unsurprising, given the secretive nature of his career, that a number of sources seem to have gotten a number of details about him wrong from time to time: for example, further up this page you will find a few sources which had him as a Lt General last year, prior to what other RS say was an only posthumous promotion. At one point, this article mentioned that he had in the past been erroneously reported to have been gravely wounded; that text and its sources seem to have been excised (as being unnecessary/insignificant detail, IIRC), but if there are good sources I would not see a problem with a sentence or two mentioning that he had been reported killed or gravely injured a number of times prior to this year. -sche (talk) 06:09, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

What was an Iranian General Doing in Iraq?

Given the history of war between the two countries, the fact that he was killed in Iraq, particularly Bagdad, seems very unusually to me. The article would be improved if the reasons for his presence in Iraq where provided.2605:6000:6941:7C00:29AB:71E7:5B0A:FE0E (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Soleimani's job for years has been roving the Mid East coordinating and liaising with all of Iran's proxies and allies - Hezbollah, various Iraqi and Syrian militias and so on. There's no surprise finding him Baghdad, it's pretty natural territory for him. His appearances are well-documented (just a quick sample [6] [7] [8]). If you think the article needs it I could maybe add something on this. FrankP (talk) 16:17, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Fighting ISIS. ISIS was a great threat to Iran security so it isn't surprising to find him there. Also by a request from the Iraqi government. I don't think the reason should be included since we don't say what the U.S. Trump was doing in Iraq.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:29, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

He was there for more than just defeating ISIS - the dictatorship in Iran wants to bring Iraq into their circle, if not hegemony. The article shouldn't paint any other picture of this guy than what he was - a person responsible for thousands of people's deaths for a political cause unacceptable to democratic societies. Reliable Sources abound to support these facts. HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:16, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

He was lured there by the U.S. (with the unwitting help of the Iraqi Prime Minister) for the purpose of assassinating him. -- Jibal (talk) 07:00, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Syrian rebels and Al-Nusra Front

@Flaughtin: This information has been reverted, with the following edit summary: "This isn't a reliable source and the details are not even in the article. Take this to the talk page before reincluding them."

InsideOver is a registered news media by ilGiornale online srl. il Giornale is an Italian language daily newspaper published in Milan, Italy.

Text[9]: "La prima e decisiva battaglia che vide impegnati i combattenti del Partito di Dio fu quella per la liberazione dai ribelli e da Al Nusra di Al-Qusayr, guidata dal generale iraniano Qasem Soleimani."

I think it is WP:NOTABLE. Please clarify how this is WP:UNDUE, besides simply not wanting this information in the article? -- Tobby72 (talk) 11:02, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

This is the original English-language The New Yorker source for the entry in the article Al-Qusayr offensive. Wikipedia summarizes it as "The exact details of which individuals and institutions oversaw the planning of the operation are less than clear, however, the commander of the Quds force Qasem Soleimani has been reported to be the mastermind behind the Al-Qusayr offensive. 'The whole operation was orchestrated by Suleimani. ... It was a great victory for him'". The Wikipedia article further states that the 2013 operation was about "a corridor from Damascus to the Mediterranean coast", "securing a withdrawal route in case government forces abandon Damascus" or securing "the supply route for a final counterattack towards Homs" — the city being described as "crucial to supply routes for both sides" in the Syrian Civil War. Google translates your Italian source as "The first and decisive battle which saw the fighters of the Party of God engaged was that for the liberation from the rebels and Al Nusra of Al-Qusayr, led by the Iranian general Qasem Soleimani." So, in my view that's notable and it corresponds to reliably reported fact. Wakari07 (talk) 12:49, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tobby72: It's not a matter of wanting information, it's a problem of your bias. You are slanting the portrayal of his actions at Qusayr in positive light by describing the opposing belligerents using tendentious, unsupported labels which have terrorist associations and connotations. Just because one article from some random source with dubious/unestablished reliability (so what if il Giornale is an Italian language daily newspaper) that isn't even written in English describes the parties which participated in the qusayr offensive in one way doesn't make the material notable and its exclusion undue. On the other hand, descriptions of something that you find from multiple, high quality sources would be notable and leaving out/suppressing that information would be correspondingly undue; this is the case with my description of the opposing forces as "rebels" which the New Yorker article (A turning point came in April, after rebels captured the Syrian town of Qusayr, near the Lebanese border. (italics for emphasis are mine)) and also a France 24 one (The Lebanese armed group has also played a major role in keeping Tehran’s ally, President Bashar al-Assad, in power over the course of the Syrian conflict, participating in decisive victories over rebel groups, such as the 2013 Al-Qusayr offensive and the two 2016 Aleppo offensives. (again, italics for emphasis are mine)) uses. Since there are more reliable sources that describe the forces as rebels and don't use any of these POV labels (al nusra, US backed, whatever) that you use, my version of the text should be preferred. Flaughtin (talk) 01:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tobby72: Per this edit I have cited the passage in the original source verbatim that substantiates my description of the opposing belligerents as "rebels". That should be good enough (it's the original source that was used before any of this meaningless back-and-forth happened) and will advise in the interest of WP:WAR and WP:LAME that you debate any changes you want to make to my version of the text here first before you do it in the article. Flaughtin (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Al-Nusra Front jihadist fundamentalists are on the US FTO list since 15 May 2014 [10]. According to that PoV, in 2013 (Qusayr) they were rebels but in 2016 (Aleppo) they were terrorists. I don't think the above debate is "meaningless". But of course the US has not been neutral in Syria ever since 6 May 2002. Wakari07 (talk) 11:50, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

@Wakari07: None of this is relevant. Perfectly fine if you want to put this on your blogpost but it doesn't belong here. We cite what the reliable sources have said, the reliable sources have described the opposing belligerents as rebels without all these mediocre, POV labels, so that's what we go by. That's it. End of. This is basic stuff you should have already known, but when you make comments like the US has not been neutral in Syria ever since 6 May 2002 I am not surprised that you don't. Flaughtin (talk) 03:45, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Al-Nusra Front is now cited by name and linked alongside the cool-sounding "rebels": the current version is fine with me. Wakari07 (talk) 23:36, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

That's not good enough for the reasons i already gave above. Flaughtin (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Rank...

He was a Lieutenant General at lifetime (OF-8). In the iranien Forces the lowest (Brigadier-General) has no star, the Major General has one star, the Lieutenant General two stars. Above there is the three-star-General (General) and the four-star-General (Field-Marshal). Please correct this, thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.62.251.203 (talk) 08:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Your description of the rank insignia differs from those shown at the relevant wikipedia article and also military.wikia.com. Both show a two-star epaulette for Major General (OF-7). The question was discussed earlier (see above) and no convincing source was found for Soleimani being promoted to Lieutenant General in his lifetime, only a couple of times where news outlets have captioned him as such in a photo (perhaps erroneously). It seems he was promoted posthumously, but better sourcing for this would also be welcome. FrankP (talk) 11:14, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Soleimani NOT on terrorist list, but is on sanction list

I was curious if Soleimani was on the terrorist watch list and have not found evidence that he was. Therefore, I believe the Sanctions section needs updated. Currently sanctions section says: "He was listed by the United States as a known terrorist, which forbade U.S. citizens from doing business with him." I suggest changing it to: Soleimani is not found on USA State Department's terrorist list, (ref [1]), but Soleimani is found on USA Dept of Treasury sanction list (ref [2]).

Lacigol (talk) 15:40, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

• [1] https://www.state.gov/executive-order-13224/#state
• [2] https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/Details.aspx?id=1778

(Sorry to edit your comment Lacigol but the ref tags made these links get separated down to the bottom of the page as new sections get added, so I thought it best to keep them here) FrankP (talk)

I made and edit prior to seeing your posting here. I corrected the designation, using the document's actual title ("Designation of Iranian Entities and Individuals for Proliferation Activities and Support for Terrorism"). I note one of the source links is dead. John2510 (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

It may also be relevant to add that the IRGC was added (in 2019) to the state dept list of foreign terrorist organisations. FrankP (talk) 16:52, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

So he wasn't personally on the list, but IRGC is and he was a commander for IRGC....gotcha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lacigol (talk • contribs) 18:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

I just put a CN flag on this. If it can't be cited, it should be removed Elinruby (talk) 07:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Done. I have put in the Treasury OFAC Sanction Search link from above for the US designation. Also have found the EU listing and will put that in now. FrankP (talk) 11:29, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Problematic reverts

@SharabSalam: Explain this revert of yours. The qusayr material that's currently in the article doesn't meet notability standards and is cited to a dubious source while the quote is cherry picked. I will be reverting your revert if you don't respond to this. Flaughtin (talk) 10:15, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Flaughtin, WP:DONTGETIT, when 2 (and I am the third) editors in the discussion agree that it is reliably sourced and that it should be in the article, you dont go and change it without seeking consensus. Al-Nusra Front is mentioned in the source and you have provided no source to dispute that. Take a look at WP:NOTCENSORED. Also why starting a new discussion when have a discussion just right above, see WP:DONTGETIT.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 11:35, 7 January 2020 (UTC)