Talk:Abbas Araghchi

Inconsistencies in bio

Two of Aragchi's official bios conflict.

• Birth date: His current bio on Iran's MFA site says 1960. His ambassador bio from webpage of the Iranian embassy in Finland says 1962.
• Began working at Iran's MFA: His current bio on Iran's MFA site says 1989. His ambassador bio from webpage of the Iranian embassy in Finland says 1990.
• Phd: * His current bio on Iran's MFA site says he earned it in 1996. His ambassador bio from webpage of the Iranian embassy in Finland says 1995.

A bit confusing... Plot Spoiler (talk) 22:54, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

And his curriculum vitae from the webpage of the Iranian embassy in Japan doesn't help much either as it presents different date as well. Strange. Plot Spoiler (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

his last name in English

Iraqchi or Araghchi?--۝ ۝ (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abbas Araghchi. 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/20160531035121/http://isna.ir/en/print/94111912217/Iran-s-FM-nuclear-chief-DM-receive-medals to http://isna.ir/en/print/94111912217/Iran-s-FM-nuclear-chief-DM-receive-medals

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) 00:07, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Biases In book.

Hello, I am seeing bias on the Book section saying that his negotiations were a failure due to him. I need extra information and proof, Thank you ~2026-18554-58 (talk) 02:19, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi! First of all, our text did not say that the failure was due to him. It said that he led the negotiations and that those negotiations failed - both of which is true. Furthermore, this text is sourced. Now I don't have access to the source, but neither do I have any reason to suspect that the text is not confirmed by the source. Friendly, Lova Falk (talk) 17:49, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Infobox Images

What image should be used in the infobox?

File:Abbas Araghchi in a interview with khamenei.ir (cropped).jpg [Image A]

OR

File:Iranian Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi 12th January 2026.jpg [Image B]

What image should be used in the infobox? 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 13:49, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

You wrote that while infobox images are meant to be natural. That in MOS:LEADIMAGE does not mean casual or candid. Why do you say that? Posed seems less natural than non-posed. AI says "Natural" in photos refers to a style emphasizing authenticity, capturing subjects as they appear in real life without heavy staging, artificial lighting, or intense digital manipulation. But you are deleting a non-posed photo in favor of a heavily staged and posed photo. ~2026-24112-43 (talk) 07:05, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Here, “Natural” in MOS:LEADIMAGE is about accurately representing the subject, not simply whether the photo is posed or candid. Many lead images for politicians, diplomats, bishops, and heads of state are formal portraits because those better identify the person in their public role. A posed image is not automatically less neutral or less encyclopedic,

The issue with the cropped interview image is not that it is candid, but that it is tied to a specific event and framed as an interview still rather than a general identifying portrait. The standing portrait is also natural in the encyclopedic sense: it is clear, neutral, and representative without unnecessary contextual framing. Wikipedia tends to favor the image that best serves long-term identification, not simply the least posed one. 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 11:52, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

The word Wikipedia uses in that MOS:LEADIMAGE to describe what it wants is the word natural. The word natural has a meaning. I showed you what that meaning actually is. You instead want an image that is is posed and staged, which is the opposite of what the word natural really means as defined. You also want the image that is two years older. That's not good for accuracy. I agree with the editor i don't know who just put back the more natural image. More natural is better. Older and staged is not good. --~2026-24112-43 (talk) 18:56, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Bro, if “natural” simply meant “least posed", then most articles on presidents, ministers, bishops, and diplomats would not use formal portraits at all. However they do, because “natural” in MOS:LEADIMAGE is about faithful representation, not candidness. A formal portrait can be perfectly natural. The cropped interview still is tied to one moment; the standing portrait works better as a neutral long-term identifying image. 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

And also, since this is a content dispute about the article’s infobox image, discussion should be on the article talk page rather than my user talk page, so wider consensus can be reached there. Abbas Araghchi 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

RfC Infobox image

Which image is more appropriate for the infobox: the cropped interview image or the standing portrait, per MOS:LEADIMAGE and WP:BLP? Brief context:

• Image A is a cropped still from an interview in 2026.
• Image B is a formal standing portrait from 2024.
• MOS:LEADIMAGE states that "natural" means the usual or expected type of image, not necessarily casual or informal.(see note c)

Additional input is needed 2x2x2x2x2 (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Image A

Image B

Image C

I saw this at WP:RFC/All. Either A or C. Some1 (talk) 01:49, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

• Image C because the lighting and framing is best. The footnote says "Natural means the obvious or usual type of image. [...] Natural does not mean casual or informal." It's normal for a public figure to have a portrait image.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 04:11, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
• Image C (summoned by bot) for reasons given by Grorp, but I don't think there is a need for an RfC on this if there is local agreement (or at least no objectors).Pincrete (talk) 05:59, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
• Image C We all seem to agree on this. Lova Falk (talk) 11:33, 9 May 2026 (UTC)