Talk:Conservatism in Iran

Verification needed for the article's premise and "Conservative" taxonomy

I've been looking through this page and I'm concerned that the article is built on a premise that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It treats "Conservatism in Iran" as a unified political ideology, but the content seems to just group together completely different movements like Qajar-era figures, Pahlavi monarchists, and modern Khomeinist theocrats that don't actually share a common foundation.

"Conservative" is a loose descriptive term that journalists use in a dozen different ways, but it isn't an established, academic-defined movement in the context of Iran. By turning it into a defined taxonomy and a Navbox sidebar, the article is engaging in a lot of synthesis (WP:SYNTH) that I don't think is supported by the sources. The sources provided might describe an individual or group as "conservative" in a specific context, but that doesn't justify creating a meta-category that lumps antagonistic factions together.

I've considered the possibility that this article is intended to trace the evolution of traditionalist politics in Iran, but if that is the case, the title "Conservatism in Iran" is misleading. "Conservatism" is a specific political label that implies an ideological cohesion that does not exist among the disparate movements listed here. Using that label to bridge the gap between these movements is an act of editorial synthesis that forces them into a Western political container that the sources do not support.

Can anyone point to a secondary source that actually defines "Conservatism in Iran" as a coherent movement or school of thought? If not, we are basically just doing our own political mapping, which is a clear case of WP:Original Research. It there may be necessary to rename this page to something that accurately describes the content (e.g. "Traditionalist movements in Iran") or merge this content into a broader article like Politics of Iran to avoid creating taxonomies that aren't supported by reliable sources. —Biosketch (talk) 16:39, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm strongly opposed to changing the title of article and template to "Traditionalist movements in Iran". Look at the 'Principles' section or 'Politicians' section of the Template:Conservatism in Iran, Principlist groups and Monarchist groups (pre-1979) are separated individually. Conservatism in Iran articles also distinguish between before (Pahlavi dynasty [Monarchists]) and after 1979 (Islamic Right and Iranian principlists). Also, Conservatism in Iran article should not address Principlists alone or Qajar-era figures should not be removed; Hassan Modarres is respected by Principlists and Islamic conservatives in Iran today.

Conservative forces, Western or non-Western, are not always single. For example, both Ernst Jünger and Angela Merkel are part of the Conservatism in Germany, and are no less different than the difference between Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and Ruhollah Khomeini; Conservatism in Taiwan article deals with mainstream ROC nationalist conservatives, but also with pro-Beijing conservatives and Conservative Taiwanese nationalists, three of whom are dissimilar movements. ProgramT (talk) 02:57, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

ProgramT, pointing to other articles like Conservatism in Germany or Conservatism in Taiwan is a diversion. Each Wikipedia article must stand on its own merits based on its own independent, reliable secondary sources. Citing your own contributions to those articles as a precedent is circular referencing and does not satisfy the requirement for verifiable, academic consensus regarding Iran.

The fundamental issue here is that "Conservatism" is not an established, overarching school of political thought in Iranian history. It is a loose, Western-centric descriptor that journalists and analysts use in disparate, isolated contexts (e.g., distinguishing "hardliner" vs. "pragmatic" factions in post-revolutionary politics).

By creating a Navbox and meta-taxonomy that bridges Qajar-era figures, Pahlavi monarchists, and Khomeinist theocrats, this article engages in WP:SYNTH. You are combining disparate sources, some of which only use the term 'conservative' in passing or in entirely contradictory contexts, to imply the existence of a unified Iranian conservative ideology.

If you cannot provide a single, secondary academic source that explicitly defines "Conservatism in Iran" as a coherent movement, rather than an editorial bucket for vastly distinct factions, then the article's premise is an act of original research. If no such source exists, we should discuss renaming or merging this content. —Biosketch (talk) 04:00, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Should we also delete Liberalism in Iran articles then? I don't think so. It's not WP:SYNTH in the first place because there's an Iranian "conservative" or "conservatism" source.

As you pointed out, dividing Iranian politics into "hardliner" vs. "pragmatic" and equating "hardliner" with "conservative" is a Western prejudice. However, even the dissident media Iran International has shed light on moderate conservatism in Iran. Since "hardliner" and "conservative" must be distinguished in Iranian politics, the Conservatism in Iran article must still be maintained. Representatively, Ali Larijani is a centre-right conservative, not a "hardliner" but also a pragmatic-conservative who is not a reformist. ProgramT (talk) 06:33, 19 July 2026 (UTC)