Talk:Death of Armita Geravand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

tagesschau.de Article Does Not Seem to Confirm Threats Against Geravand’s Family[edit]

My German isn’t great but I think the article in footnote 3 says that Masha Amini’s family was threatened again near the anniversary of her death, not that Geravand’s family was definitely threatened. Geravand’s family may be behaving consistently with government threats but I don’t think this article confirms that they were threatened.

Both Google’s and Apple’s translation tools seem to support my read.

Can somebody with good German skills confirm what the article at tagesschau.de says? Chris14444 (talk) 16:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference says both families have been under pressure. You can change it to under pressure. Ladsgroupoverleg 07:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Armita Geravand*[edit]

Change the name of the article. 37.3.111.247 (talk) 17:50, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, on videos there's no evidence of killing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.218.67.254 (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. The aggression is usually mentioned as "alleged" in most if not all sources. If it becomes more evident I (or anyone else) should move it back. Rkieferbaum (talk) 02:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information about Mahsa Amini is irrelevant[edit]

This is another girl that died, laws were enforced before and after Mahsa Amini, this event did not happen because of anything related to Mahsa Amini. Trying to shoehorn it into this article in order to create a political narrative is definitively not the job of an encyclopedia.

Let alone all the incorrect elements about the "Jina revolution" which is not used anywhere inside of Iran and only exists in Western newspapers. There was no "revolution" because obviously the same government is still in power and was never at any threat of exiting power. Or is it the "MLK revolution" or the "George Floyd revolution" or "BLM revolution" or any other thing? No it isn't, so use neutral, honest language. 178.131.171.209 (talk) 11:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple reliable sources make mention of the parallels to the unfortunate similar situation that happened with Mahsa Amini. We follow the sources. 133.106.47.67 (talk) 03:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, multiple Western news agencies are trying to create a narrative. An encyclopedia shouldn't be trying to create a narrative based on what biased news agencies are pushing. And that reliable sources page is total bullshit meant to only allow unreliable sources. So don't go and cite that bullshit that treats consistent liars as "reliable". Use an actual argument. 178.131.171.19 (talk) 09:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shortcut
WP:NOTADVOCACY
Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, scientific, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise. An article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view.
Using the narrative provided by the source as a means of advocacy and propaganda is not describing the topic from a neutral point of view.
Opinion pieces. Although some topics, particularly those concerning current affairs and politics, may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes", Wikipedia is not the medium for this.
Once again, what is being done here.
Scandal mongering, promoting things "heard through the grapevine" or gossiping. Articles and content about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous or infringe the subjects' right to privacy. Articles must not be written purely to attack the reputation of another person.
Done here as well except on a government level.
Just because a source mentions something does not mean that it is something that should be put into wikipedia as if it were neutral when it is pushing a narrative.
I am trying to make the article actually be about the event in question and not about another, unrelated event, only linked together by a news agency. She was not at a protest, hijab laws existed before and after Mahsa Amini, and any government involvement in her death is purely speculative. 178.131.171.19 (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a forum. Feel free to take your concerns about reliable sources to the proper talk page to get help, if you do indeed have specific issues to raise based on sourced, factual data or peer-reviewed studies/critiques/criticisms. Your opinion and WP:OR won't be helpful here, however. 133.106.47.67 (talk) 10:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not "my opinion" or "original research" and using a "reliable source" in a non-neutral way is against the purpose of wikipedia, which is completely relevant to this page in specific. You are dishonestly using hyperlinks and "rules" in order to police the page to your liking, when the same rules go against exactly what you're doing. 178.131.171.19 (talk) 10:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any relevant news from reliable sources that you would like added to the Wikipedia article here? 133.106.47.67 (talk) 10:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Multiple reliable sources make mention of the parallels to the unfortunate similar situation that happened with Mahsa Amini. We follow the sources."

This is exactly right. It's not for us to judge what's relevant and what's "trying to create a narrative'. All information regarding Mahsa's case was extracted from sources covering Armita's case. If the parallel bothers you, maybe get in touch with those sources. Rkieferbaum (talk) 13:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What sort of nonsense logic is that? It is not applied anywhere else. I know Westerners have 3 brain cells to share between them, but even that is too stupid for you. Which means it's intentional dishonesty as to be expected from Wikipedia editors who are entirely there to promote the CIA narrative. Oh because a Western news source says it, that means it's true, I guess like WMDs in Iraq. 178.131.169.35 (talk) 14:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since you brought nothing to the discussion, I have nothing else to add. Wikipedia belongs to the whole world, not just "westeners", so feel free to register an account and propose changes in our policies and recommendations as you see fit. As an added bonus, your IP wouldn't be visible. Maybe some of those extra brain cells of yours would get a little more creative if they didn’t feel your government could come knocking at your door just from what you post as an IP? Cheers. Rkieferbaum (talk) 16:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you're a racist neoliberal piece of shit, big surprise. That's not how things work, but your ignorant racist ass should stay focused on your own country. 178.131.169.8 (talk) 21:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@178.131.169.8: Figure out how to assume good faith or get ready to be blocked. 133.106.47.67 (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edited Video[edit]

The information is coming from the source given (Amnesty International), but given that the alleged altercation is alleged to have occurred on the train and the 3 minute gap in timestamps was not from the train (There were only a few seconds between when she entered and exited the train), it must have been at the station in between different camera footages that were shown on television, which Amnesty International analyzed (since that's the only footage they have access to). Similarly with speeding up the frame rate, all that took place in the station as well when there wasn't any alleged altercation said to have happened. Which means that the editing mentioned was probably done for the brevity of television viewing.

So clearly Amnesty International in this instance is not being very clear about what exactly was edited in that video and which portions and how it relates to the allegation. Context should be added based off of logical reasoning of the sequence of events, since Amnesty International is an advocacy organization and not one that is always looking to report things accurately 178.131.168.112 (talk) 11:40, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manipulation of CCTV video - Of the manipulations and distortions that Western hostile media pressed ahead with, the most obvious example was the distribution of a shortened, inconclusive video from the metro station. Full footage published by Iranian media, including Press TV, showed a group of girls waiting at a metro station, who enter the metro as it halts at the Shohada station, and soon Armita collapses, after which her friends are seen taking her out. In the shortened, edited footage shared in the Western web-sphere, the initial part where they enter a metro wagon has been intentionally cut, so it begins with Armita falling and being pulled out of a wagon, leaving viewers wondering what actually happened before that. [1]
This is an undeniable fact. It was the Western groups & media who manipulated with CCTV video, not Iran. Currently the section "Incident" is describing the event based on shortened video, not mentioning the fact that Armita collapsed only a second after entering, which excludes possibility of arguing and beating. Too short time. This manipulation is visible on the referenced German media (Tagesschau) [2] which intentionally shortened the original IRNA video [3].
Current article also claims Iranian video "does not show the events inside the train car leading up to Geravand's coma", indirectly suggesting Iran is trying to hide something. That's a baseless accusation since Iranian media reported that 100 series trains do not have cameras inside. [4][5] That's also an undeniable fact, there are tourist videos from 100 series trains [6] where we can see it is the same train type like on Armita video (3:45), and more important, we clearly see there are no cameras inside (5:04). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.115.244.105 (talk) 08:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification, the article should be edited to reflect what you have mentioned. 178.131.171.19 (talk) 09:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian: Iran arrests lawyer at funeral of girl who died after metro incident - Nasrin Sotoudeh arrested at funeral of Armita Garawand, who died after alleged encounter with morality police[edit]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/iran-arrests-top-rights-lawyer-at-funeral-of-teenage-girl-who-died-after-metro-incident

Nasrin Sotoudeh was arrested on Sunday in Tehran during the funeral of 16-year-old Armita Garawand, who died a day earlier after nearly a month in intensive care.

Sotoudeh, 60, who was awarded the European parliament’s 2012 Sakharov prize for her human rights work, has been arrested several times in recent years.

“My wife was arrested during the funeral of Armita Garawand along with others,” Reza Khandan, Sotoudeh’s husband, told Agence France-Presse, saying she was “violently beaten” during the arrest.

Some mention of this should probably be added to the Wikipedia article here. 133.106.47.67 (talk) 11:02, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another story on the topic, from The New York Times.
Famed Iranian Rights Lawyer Reportedly Jailed and Beaten
or an archived version here.
Nasrin Sotoudeh was one of several activists arrested at the funeral of Armita Geravand, a 16-year-old girl who died after not wearing a head covering in public, in a case that drew parallels to that of Mahsa Amini.

A prominent Iranian human rights lawyer, Nasrin Sotoudeh, was arrested and severely beaten, her husband said on Monday — one of several activists taken into custody at the funeral in Tehran of a girl who was fatally injured after a reported confrontation with the enforcers of Iran’s strict dress code for women.
Please add to the Wikipedia article. 133.106.47.67 (talk) 08:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to edit this article[edit]

I wanted to fix an embarrassing spelling error in the current version of this article, but was prevented from doing so since it appears to be blocked from editing. Please fix this ridiculous situation! 2605:A000:FFC0:5F:F9BD:9D:B97C:57D4 (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where at specifically? If you could provide the fixed sentence, I could add it. Prairie Astronomer Contributions 21:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Death_of_Armita_Geravand&oldid=1207393294"