Talk:Persian Constitutional Revolution

"detrimental"

"People like Sattar Khan and Bagher Khan and cities like Tabriz played detrimental roles in this movement"

I'm not sure what is meant by 'detrimental' here. Anyway, isn't this word rather POV? By detrimental does the author mean they succeeded or failed in advancing the cause of the movement - we can only interpret this if we know the author's point of view. I've substituted the word 'significant' which is more neutral.

- Your change improved it but the sentence still doesn't really make sense. Significant how? People can play a role in a movement but not at the same level as cities.

The aftermath / effects

The section on the aftermath of the revolution and its eventual effects was removed. While grossly incomplete I believe that this is a critical section that allows future historical events to be put into context given a very important event. Tototom 07:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The Constitutionalists story?

So little is so far being said about the Constitutionalists themselves, the people and their story, the origin of their activism. And, suddenly in the article we discover that, they were actually militant! Indeed, it is quite interesting to see that a group of reformers and constitutionalists were at the same time militant, and successfully - also the details of this arrangement need be told here. Just thought to give those hints since I cannot add anything myself. Thanks, __Maysara 08:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio

The article contained a lot of material copied from http://www.iranchamber.com/history/constitutional_revolution/constitutional_revolution.php which I just removed, reverting to the latest version that did not include copies of text from that website. roozbeh 12:27, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've started rewriting the article to take care of copyvio issues without losing the information. can we maybe hold of on the reverting for a while? Thanks L0b0t 16:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

A rewrite that keeps the copyright-violating parts does not make the resulting article clean. It will make it a copy of a copy, which will still be a copy. For having a clean article, I suggest rethinking the whole structure of presenting the material. Use various sources, arrive at a conclusion, and then write those. Use original prose, your own words, instead of minor changes made to another's. roozbeh 15:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

UNBELIVABLE!!! Roozbeh, why do you have to be so unhelpful. As opposed to just trashing the article you could have made the effort to copy out the sections that were okay - now all that work needs to be re-done. The article was going to be re-written, but obviously that wasn't good enough for you. Sometimes I wonder why the fuck i bother with wikipedia when there are ***** like you around. Tototom 22:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually you know what... screw wikipedia. you can delete my account if you want. at least i wont be wasting my free time anymore.

Tags

Article needs a lot of work. For one thing the revolution ran from 1905 to 1911 but there is no information about what happened after 1906. Sentences like "The revolution created new opportunities and opened up seemingly boundless possibilities for Persia’s future. Many different groups fought to shape the course of the Revolution, and all sections of society were ultimately to be in some way changed by it." seem like filler. --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Name should be changed to "Persian Constitutional Revolution"

In 1906 the international name of Iran was Persia and also this event was recorded in English-language materals as "Persian Constitutional Revolution", not "Iranian...". Most of English-language books and articles about this revolution also natually called that "Persian Cons..." thanks. $Insertformulahere$ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shayan7 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)