Talk:Fereydoun Farrokhzad

He was; is and will always be a true Iranian Patriot

He proved that being Iranian is not a matter of being of any persuation. The man was; is and will always be a model for what we should all strive to be. Next time you call someone a k* remember that the best of us one of them. Show respect and honor our best. The man gave up everything for Iran. How much more may we demand of a person?

Please help clean up Fabricated Content in this article and similar articles

I have removed a couple of politically motivated statements and other propaganda from this article by certain special interest groups/individuals. There is no evidence of "Iranian Government" involvement in this murder; I have examined the sources that were presented by other editors, which propose multiple suspects including a foreign lebanese-based hit squad. Either way, his murder is unsolved. Please help keep this article (and Wikipedia) free of political slants, advertisements, and other promotional material. --Mehrshad123 (talk) 06:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I remember reading the news of Farokhzad's murder in a local Persian newspaper in Toronto, the writer referring to a German news source explained Farokhzad used to pick up the new refugee youth from the town's train station and helped them to settle in their new environment and this is where he met a young man who later became Farokhzad's partner and roommate. Farokhzad was making frequent trips to the US at the time and eventually decided to migrate to the United States permanently. In the last trip back to his home in Germany, Farokhzad surprised his partner with the decision of leaving him and migrating to the United States and this is when an argument breaks out and Farokhzad was murdered. At least this was the allegation shortly after Farokhzad's murder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.254.223

Don't change sourced information. The cited source clearly talks about Farrokhzad's opposition to the Iranian government and you try to hide it. Alefbe (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Um...Could you please show me where I was trying to "hide" Farokhzad's opposition to the Iranian government? I see your problem might be with logic as well as literacy level. Also, how does "opposition to the Iranian Government" amount to the Iranian government being responsible for his murder.? Please keep your political slants out of wikipedia and since are obviously using Wikipedia to rally people behind your "islamic democracy green movement" on your page, please do NOT touch this article again. Mehrshad123 (talk) 04:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Farrokhzad was clearly against the Islamic government of Iran and he didn't care about random non-Iranian Islamist groups. This page says that "The murder has been treated as a work of the Iranian government" and for this claim, Peyvand's article is enough [1]. Don't delete sourced material and don't try to hide Farokhzad's opposition to the Iranian government by using the vague term "Islamists". Farrokhzad didn't care about random non-Iranian Islamists and random non-Iranian Islamist didn't care about him. Alefbe (talk) 01:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean by "Peyvand's article is enough"? Once again you are making false accusations about deleting sourced material. Do not touch this article again. Also you have been warned before about using Wikipedia as a base for your "Islamic Democracy" Propaganda Campaign.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 01:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed the discussion on this talk page, and was trying to find more sources for this article. I hope that the changes that I have made are accurate and helpful. The sources that I have found present the view that agents of the Iranian government were most likely responsible for Farroukhzad's assasination, because Farroukhzad was known for his outspoken opposition to the regime. If you have other sources that present different information, could you please cite them? Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 02:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort, but the contents you have added are all unfounded assumptions from a certain political group. If you search on youtube for any of Farokhzad's numerous public speeches (albeit in Persian), you will see that he was vehemently anti-Islamic and anti-moslim, and a patriotic Iranian at the same time. In one excerpt, a member of the audience protests Farokhzad's continuous mocking of the moslim book "Quran", and Farokhzad immediately responds saying "Madam, please enjoy the show and drink your wine." --Mehrshad123 (talk) 22:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree that this article could use more/better sources, but it doesn't seem to me that the two sources that I added before come from a single political group. I just looked for additional sources, and I still am not seeing other perspectives besides that Faroukhzad was most likely murdered by agents of the government due to his opposition to the regime. For example, I found a PBS article that puts the murder in context with murders of other Iranian intellectuals around that time, and a book that lists Farroukhzad's murder with other assassinations that were allegedly carried out by the Iranian government. I would think that there would be reporting on the murder in German newspapers, but I can't find very much. Perhaps I am not spelling his name the same way that it was spelled in German news articles, I have come across quite a number of different spellings in various articles. Maybe you can find additional sources.

I was interested to learn about the excerpt from Farroukhzad's show, but it doesn't seem to me that such content makes him "vehemently anti-Islamic." It sounds to me like the comments you describe may have been intended to be humorous. Performers often make jokes or comments on controversial topics like religion. I don't think that the fact that Farroukhzad made jokes about the Quran or about the drinking of wine automatically makes him anti-Muslim, just as I wouldn't think that a performer who made jokes about the New Testament is necessarily anti-Christian, or a performer who made jokes about the Torah is necessarily anti-Jewish. I also haven't found sources that support your claim that Farroukhzad was "anti-Islamic," although it does appear that he frequently criticized specific clerics. Making the claim that Farroukhzad was anti-Islamic based on your own analysis of his performances seems to me to be original research (see WP:OR). Different people can have different good-faith interpretations of such things, which is why Wikipedia relies on reliable secondary sources (aiming at verifiability, not truth, per WP:V). So, I am reverting your changes and adding some additional sources.

Also, some of the sources I have found are written in Dutch, but if you are interested in reading them and don't speak Dutch, Google Translate makes them quite intelligible. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 03:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I already know the rules on original content; I have been doing this for a while now. Again you have not introduced anything that tips the scale. I read through the sources (all of which have been provided by OTHER editors) and the only concesus is that the killers must have been Islamic. Regarding the excerpt I gave you from Farokhzad...that is just a single line out of a 3 hour long mockery of Islam and Moslims carried out by Farokhzad in the early 1990's. I don't think you understand the magnitude of publicly mocking the Islamic book Quran for its views on (how to have) sex with animals, incest, etc., all of which were continuously mocked by Farokhzad in his stand-up comedy sketch. In muslim countries this easily constitutes a death sentence, in addition, the sources provided by other editors suggest foreign hit squads of arab origin. I have to question your motivation on this now; the people that introduced the bogus content which you have reinstated TWICE now, are using Wikipedia as a political campaign platform. Their discussion pages clearly and openly reveal their political agendas which are reflected in this article. Also, as you claimed in your own research, the german courts and media did not make any accusations against the Iranian Government regarding this murder, so again, why do you insist on reintroducing bogus propaganda?--Mehrshad123 (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Among the sources that I introduced, I think that at least Trouw and PBS are OK sources to cite.

• Trouw, which seems like a WP:RS to me, says: "Opponents of the Iranian dictatorship died: the dissident Iranian singer Fereydoen Farokhzad was in Cologne by an Iranian death squad into pieces and put in a bag, the former prime minister was in Paris Bakthiar with stab wounds killed, the poet and theater director and Said Sultanpoer writer and translator Hossein Sadri were executed in Tehran, an opponent of Muslim fundamentalism and Turkish theologian was killed Turan Dursun, Turkish journalist Ugur Mumcu in his car blown up." This is an automatic translation from Google Translate, so the syntax isn't perfect.(http://www.trouw.nl/krantenarchief/1993/02/13/2662538/_Altijd_de_taal_van_de_Inquisitie_.html).
• Trouw again: "Ferejdun Farokhzad, the famous Iranian protest singer who lives in exile in Germany, this week in his home by stabbing to death. This Saturday, the police reported. His body was found Friday after the police had turned its neighbors, has long since Farokhzads dogs barking. Farokhzad Iranian opposition circles was a welcome guest for his fight against the regime of fanatical Muslim clerics in Tehran. In the West, conducted the singers action against the Iranian government. The Iranian opposition says therefore ensure that the Iranian secret services were behind him."

Garbage. This is not news or factual information. It is propaganda that does not belong in Wikipedia. If people want this type of information, they can read Fox News, VOA and numerous other propaganda outlets which are getting their information from the lies you are putting on Iran-related wikipedia articles. What is your REAL motivation here? For someone is not well versed on Iran politics, you make a lot of edits to these types of articles.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

(http://www.trouw.nl/krantenarchief/1992/08/10/2714601/MISLUKTE_CRUISE..html) Again, the translation is not perfect, but the speculation clearly seems to be that the Iranian government was behind the murder.

• PBS, which I would also consider to be a reliable source, puts the murder of Faroukhzad in the context of the Chain murders of Iran (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/tehranbureau/2009/12/the-chain-murders-1988-1998.html)

Garbage. Again, this is not news or factual information. It is propaganda that does not belong in Wikipedia. If people want this type of information, they can read Fox News, VOA and numerous other propaganda outlets which are getting their information from the lies you are putting on Iran-related wikipedia articles. --Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

So, all of the media speculation that I see suggests that agents of the Iranian government were responsible, since this murder took place around the same time as the Chain murders of Iran, and since Farroukhzad was known for his opposition to the Iranian regime. The fact that he also performed dicey stand-up comedy routines doesn't seem to me to make it any less likely that he was murdered by government agents. Since it's an unsolved murder, I wouldn't be surprised if there were other theories about who killed this singer, but this is the only theory I have come across.

Garbage (See above comment).

About the German courts and media, I cannot find anything that they said about this. If you can find these sources, would you please add them? In my opinion, this would certainly be another relevant perspective. Also, if there are reliable sources suggesting foreign hit squads of Arab origin, they should be cited in the article. It looks like the only reference right now is to the Payvand article, which also seems to present the view that the murder was due to the "Islamic republic's agents."

Exactly! The murder was in Germany. And there was NO conviction, and not even a single suspect has been named so far. It could have been MOSSAD agents who have carried out numerous assasinations in Europe for all anyone knows.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Even though mocking the Qu'ran is viewed as a very serious offense in Muslim countries, I still don't think that performing such a comedy routine proves that Faroukhzad was anti-Muslim. Since, as you say, such a comedy routine would be illegal in Muslim countries, including Iran, such a comedy routine could also be a political statement. Or, since it was a comedy routine, it might just have been intended to be humorous.

Definitely not humerous to the muslims. Farokhzad knew this and he was deliberately trying to insult Islam in the worst way possible by quoting and commenting on citations about sex with animals, incest and the general primitivity of arab/semitic culture. You can certainly ask someone to translate the youtube videos of Farokhzad's multi-hour speech, and as an editor you should research this before making baseless edits to this article.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, I don't think that it is fair to assume that the people who introduced this information to begin with are using Wikipedia as a political campaign platform. Just because someone expresses a particular political belief on their talk page doesn't mean that their contributions to an article can automatically be assumed to be biased. People with all kinds of different political views edit this encyclopedia, and many of them are really great editors who try to make articles NPOV.

This is not an assumption. There have been compaints about these individual's political edits in other articles.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I haven't been cherry-picking sources here, but brought the most reliable & relevant sources that I could find. Please add sources, rather than removing them, if you feel that there are points of view that are not represented in the article. Or, if you do want to remove sources, could you please explain specifically why the sources that you want to remove are unreliable? Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 06:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

It is not necessary to clutter this article (as well as numerous others) with Western/Israeli propaganda. We are talking about an entertainer here.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 03:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I remember Farokhzad was murdered by his young Iranian live-in boy-friend after Farokhzad telling the boy that he was leaving him to move to United States, according to police reports at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.7.14.75 (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Reliable Sources on Faroukhzad's Murder

Mehrshad123, I don't find your description above of the Trouw and PBS articles as "propaganda" and "garbage" to be helpful towards understanding why or why not these sources should be used. "Propaganda" is quite a loaded word, and I doubt that either of these articles is purposely misrepresenting the truth with an ulterior motive. PBS is a respected American public broadcasting television service, and according to the Wikipedia article on PBS, the federal government is prohibited by law "from interfering or controlling what is broadcast." I'm not sure exactly how reputable PBS's print journalism is, but I would suspect that it's all right.

Please re-read my notes above. The U.S. congress DOES allocate funds specifically to state run media like VOA and PBS for the purpose of "bringing about regime change" in Iran and likely other countries as well. Tens of millions are allocated annually. I am not your tutor here, if you cannot do this research on your own then you have no business editing so stop wasting other people's time. Besides, you have already admitted that your own research has shown you can not find anything that implicates the Iranian government, as the propaganda planted in this article was claiming--Mehrshad123 (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not at all familiar with Trouw, but based on its wiki entry, it looks like a reasonable independent newspaper to me as well. In any case, it seems to me that incomplete (or even somewhat biased) sources are better than NO sources--that way the reader can see where the information is coming from and judge for herself whether or not it is true. Certainly your suggestion that Farroukzad might have been killed by "Islamists" because he was "anti-Islamic" would require a citation to a reliable source to be included in the article. I appreciate your summary of the content of Faroukhzad's show, because I found it interesting and because it is not something that I would be likely to learn about otherwise, since I unfortunately do not speak Persian. But I don't think that your conclusion that Faroukzad was "anti-Islamic" belongs in the article, unless sourced to a reliable secondary source.

However, although I believe that including speculation sourced to these references in this article is better than including speculation sourced to nothing, I also was not totally happy with the quality of these sources. In my view the main problem with these articles is that they contain very little information on this topic. The Troew article contains a news brief on Faroukhzad's murder, while the PBS article includes Faroukhzad's death in a list of murders of Iranian intellectuals that happened at about this time. It's not clear from these sources who exactly alleged that Farroukhzad was likely murdered by the government, which certainly seems like a relevant point. One thing that was making it challenging for me to find sources on this topic is that there are many, many English spellings of Farrokhzad's name used in various sources. I was just looking again for sources, and I finally found good references on this topic: UNHCR and UNHCHR.

• http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,IRBC,COUNTRYREP,IRN,,3ae6a8170,0.html and
• http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/E.CN.4.1993.41.En?Opendocument

Another point--I find it kind of odd that you have mentioned Israel TWICE in your reply above, speculating that "It could have been MOSSAD agents...for all anybody knows" and referring to the sources that I introduced as "Western/Israeli" propaganda." Western, all right, but what on earth do you think that Israel has to do with these sources? They are from Dutch and American newspapers. I wouldn't expect that the murder of an Iranian singer in Germany would be especially well covered in the Israeli news. FYI, by the way, there are very independent Israeli newspapers, such as Haaretz, which present a broad spectrum of opinions on lots of controversial issues. I am curious to know--what news sources do you consider most reliable? Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 05:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Cordelia, you are too patient with Mehrshad123. Enough is already said. Don't reward him with a lengthy discussion. If he has any reasonable objection, he can invite opinion of other users (those who have been active in pages about politics and contemporary history, not just users who had previously edit-warred with me, like User:Parthava). Alefbe (talk) 06:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

As a propagandist who is trying to turn Wikipedia into an "Green Revolution Islamic Political Foundation" you sure have a lot to say my friend. There are plenty of propaganda websites better suited to what you people are trying to do. You can certainly try and start an edit war, but these types of articles always tend to revert back to their factual versions over time. How old are you?--Mehrshad123 (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Mehrshad123, looking at the article history, this at least the seventh time that you have reverted to your preferred version of the article. Please stop. You are now replacing information sourced to reliable sources with unsourced information. If there are further improvements that you want to make to the article, or you find something in this article to be inaccurate, please discuss it on the talk page. Thanks, CordeliaNaismith (talk) 00:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Cordelia, you are the one that is trying to push an agenda here, and your prior edits to similar articles reveals this. You have tried your very best to come up with phony and fraudulent sources in order to "validate" propaganda and you have failed in each iteration as your so-called sources are based on this wikipedia article! Interesting that you are accusing me of presenting "unsourced" new information when: (a) I have not added any information, but simply removed propaganda brought here by MKO/Toodei "Editors" who are using wikipedia to rally people for a political movement in their talk pages, which I have repeatedly stated is inapropriate and should be against rules if it is not already, and, (b) You have repeatedly tried to add phony sources (which are based on this Wikipedia article) in order to validate false information in support of your propaganda campaign on Wikipedia. As I said, there are websites more appropriately suited for propaganda. THIS IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA ARTICLE! --Mehrshad123 (talk) 22:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

So what is exactly wrong with UNHCR[2] as a source? You'll need a more viable argument other than propaganda and "trying to turn Wikipedia into an "Green Revolution Islamic Political Foundation" --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Nothing is wrong with the source. Look back at this editor's (CordeliaNaismith's) history. She was initially trying to post falsified content. Once I pointed this out, she admited that she can't find any sources to justify the content, so she started using neo-con and MKO terrorist sources that were based on this article. When that didn't work she added a bogus UNHCR article. I read the article. It has absolutely nothing to do with the (false) content she has reinstated in this article. These people are not interested in facts. This is simply an opportunity to spread political propaganda. Also look at the discussion page for the user Alefbe, (who has not introduced any source at all) should not be making bogus edits to articles which concerns topics that he is personallly and politically involved in.--Mehrshad123 (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not interested in your personal animosity toward Alefbe or Cordelia. You stated that there is nothing wrong with the source, then you state, "When that didn't work she added a bogus UNHCR article". Which is what we are discussing. Instead of ranting, why not explain why you've been removing[3][4][5][6][7] this source[8], when you stated, "Nothing is wrong with the source.". You appear to be reverting simply on the basis of personal animosity, unless you can clarify your position. --Kansas Bear (talk) 04:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

*sigh* I'd appreciate if you would refactor your above comment to remove the personal attacks and misrepresentations of the above discussion. It would be really lovely if you would try to assume good faith here. Did you look at the other article, 2, and do you agree that this is a reliable source as well? The info added to the article in the new iteration comes from these two sources. The citation to the VOA also belongs because it looks like info in that paragraph was taken from this source anyway (this seems much more likely to me than that the VOA article is based on the Wikipedia article). If you want uninvolved opinions on this content dispute, we can start a request for comment. CordeliaNaismith (talk) 23:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd personally love to see an RFC on this topic if this issue doesn't resolve itself quickly. I have yet to see a single RFC side against the inclusion of reliably sourced information. Nefariousski (talk) 00:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Cordelia, that is a very interesting comment about "personal attacks". I saw the deliberate lie you wrote about me about your "complaint" and I went ahead and presented proof to the Admin that you are a blatant liar. - I am sure that you thought I would not see that, but I saw it as clearly as the politically lies you are trying to plant in this article. To Nefariousski: You just jumped into this article/discussion (like Cordelia) and decided that it is "reliably sourced information" without reading the phony sources planted in the last few weeks by Cordelia. Interesting!--Mehrshad123 (talk) 01:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Um, I thought talk pages are supposed to be for discussion of article content'? CordeliaNaismith (talk) 01:08, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

fan mail

The is a bit of factual content that perhaps someone could source in this material, which I removed as clearly inappropriate for the article itself:

"Fraydoun Farokhzad is the best Iranian pop singer. Most irainians, women and men indeed love his warm voice. Through his attractive voice he tried the best to introduce more his sister's (Frough ) poems to the pubic. However, I do not think really too many people are able to understand the original meanings of Frough's transcendental poems, Fraidoon has certainly encouraged people through his songs to remeber Frough and her poems. He has helped to give a great name to Frough without helping people to realize what really Frough is saying about love, women, marriage, life and death, moments and years..! Fraidoon Farokhzad was a smart student enough to study in universities and obtain a master degree in politics, but his blood was amix with arts. He has shown his love for people especially chidren in his works. What I mentioned above as a fan of his music, was a brief biography of a man as a singer and showman. Behind the curtain, in his praivate life, whether Fraydoon was a homosexual or not, was not important to the people who loved listening to his songs and watching his shows.

I can't judge why and by whom he has been assassinated, all I know he was a perfect singer and showman" Elinruby (talk) 02:12, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

RE: all I know he was a perfect singer and showman.. Your comments must be factual; not based on your feelings and preferences.46.64.75.124 (talk) 10:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Of course. That is why I moved the comment here. I did not simply delete it because there is stuff in there about a sister that I do not completely understand but which may be relevant to the biography; also the comments appear sincere and may inspire someone to find an RS for his popularity. I know they made me look a little harder at some of the defamatory statements in the article. Elinruby (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

relevance is unclear

Apparently this discredits him somehow, but if so more explanation is required:

"This radio station reported that Farroukzad had received death threats for his activities in opposition to the regime, allegedly from the "Iranian secret police", although the Iranian secret police, the "SAVAK" was not at odds over the pro-Shah Farokhzad's opinions and had long been dismantled by the Iranian government after the revolution." Elinruby (talk) 02:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Beheaded

The summary says He was stabbed to death and beheaded, but the Death section only says stabbed 40 times. Surly the doctors that examined the body and issued the death certificate must have given a report to the police and his family. Has the family or the police published the report? Where is it and what does it say? ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.75.124 (talk) 09:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fereydoun Farrokhzad. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20121010211832/http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,IRBC,COUNTRYREP,IRN,,3ae6a8170,0.html to http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,IRBC,COUNTRYREP,IRN,,3ae6a8170,0.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 23:41, 30 December 2016 (UTC)