Talk:Assadism

Hello. Me and another user had another conflict of interest, so I created this topic to reach a consensus. My position is to place a lead image in the article, which will be the main one in the article and, for example, will be visible in the preview, as in other articles (such as articles about Maoism, Hoxhaism, Stalinism and others) - he opposed this idea, stating that there was no consensus about placing my photo. What is the position of the rest of the discussion members, except for me and "another user"?

1. No image
2. Add image (variant 1, that was already there)
3. Add image (but another from deleted image in variant 2, topic for another discussion)

Lead Image that was deleted by "another user": File:A Syrian propaganda image showing Hafez al-Assad and his two sons, Bassel and Bashar.jpg Algirr (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Abo Yemen, @FarHarBard, @CamelGunner, @Yue, as I saw above you discussed here before so I am asking you to participate here too. Algirr (talk) 18:24, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

2 IMO it is a really discriptive image of the ideology and its cult of personality and should be added. Btw Algirr you need to add the RfC template below the section header 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:30, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I don't know how to add such templates, I even don't know how to put citations in infobox Algirr (talk) 18:32, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

read WP:RFC, Help:Referencing for beginners, and MOS:INFOBOXCITE :) 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:38, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

thanks, but here a lot of text, and also I still will not get it Algirr (talk) 18:58, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

All my abilities is just read and write in English, for creating new articles and nothing anymore Algirr (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Algirr I've added it for you, but seriously, you'll need to read all that. Your English will become better with time, but you need to familiarize yourself with most of wikipedia's policies and guidelines 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 19:06, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I got you. Also, I recently wrote a few new articles that on my user page, hope you will check them Algirr (talk) 19:09, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

1: The proposed image is of really bad quality and its licensing is uncertain. There are much better options out there (e.g. a portrait of Bashar). Skitash (talk) 18:47, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Any or almost all removal or replacement of images that you do, you justify by the allegedly poor quality of the replaced images. Algirr (talk) 19:03, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I'd also recommend that you don't reply to every single comment in a discussion per WP:BLUDGEON. People might agree with you, and others might disagree with you. You'll just need to wait for the RfC to be over 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 19:08, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Algirr (talk) 19:09, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

btw, how much do I need to wait for RFC? Algirr (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

no less than a week 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:10, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

1: As Skitash stated, an image of Assad, or maybe the Assad Syrian flag, would be much better. The image on option two is of evident poor quality. Coeusin (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

In this case there is variant 3 Algirr (talk) 19:06, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

1: Deleted photo has poor quality and may also have copyright issues. It is also better to have one photo of the subject, rather than a photo collage of 3.Darkm777 (talk) 18:57, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean "may also have copyright issues"? It does not violate any copyright, all sources that showed it indicated that it is from the 1980s or 90s, i.e. no longer protected by any copyright. As for the poor quality, I honestly do not understand by what criteria you even made such a conclusion. And I do not understand what collage you are talking about, if this is a single original photograph - it is not a splice. If you were not satisfied with this image, you could have chosen option 3. Algirr (talk) 19:04, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

@Darkm777 so what about image i sent you before? You just ignore it or very busy? Algirr (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

In most of the world, a photo is copyrighted until the photographer has been dead for 70 years. That means that nearly all images from the 1980s are copyrighted. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:14, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Syrian works are currently in the public domain in the United States if their copyright had expired in Syria on the date of restoration (June 11, 2004) and the work was published before this date.

On Wikipedia (as well as in Wikimedia), the main concern is whether a photo is copyrighted in the US and the country where it was taken. Both photos are no longer copyrighted in either Syria or the US. Algirr (talk) 04:20, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

@Algirr Copyright protection lasts 95 years, so if they are from the 80s then they are still protected.

Also which other photo are you talking about? Please link it here. Darkm777 (talk) 00:20, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

This contradicts what I copied above from the copyrights for works from Syria, as well as to article 25 - "Photographic, fine arts or plastic arts shall be enforceable for ten years as of the date of producing such work." Algirr (talk) 00:23, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

@Darkm777 ok, in your opinion, for example this photo is better for lead? No copyright, certain year of creation, presumably "better" quality. Algirr (talk) 19:17, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

This is also not good! Darkm777 (talk) 01:16, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

lol so surprising Algirr (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

1 – The lead is already noisy enough with two sidebars showing Hafez and Bashar. An additional image with the two would not be an improvement and would just clutter the start of the article even more. Yue🌙 06:48, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

@Yue Portraits of Hafez and Bashar are not shown in the preview and are not conspicuous Algirr (talk) 07:09, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

@Yue And about sidebars - you can check articles about Hoxhaism or Stalinism, there that "problem" even worse, but nothing bad with articles - both they have own lead images that showing in preview and no complains about them there. Same with the article about Saddamism too. Algirr (talk) 07:13, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

@Algirr: WP:OTHERCONTENT arguments aside (i.e. just because a problem exists elsewhere doesn't mean it should be replicated here), I also don't think any of the images you've proposed are of good quality. My opinion is that if images are included in the lead, the best would be photograph portraits of Hafez and Bashar, which are already provided by the sidebars.

Also, unrelated side note but "conflict of interest" does not mean you have a dispute with someone, it means you're related to the topic at hand. I don't think you meant to imply you and another editor are connected to the Assad family. Yue🌙 05:28, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@Yue the problem is here, that's why it is reproduced. What do you mean "none of the images"? I basically suggested 1 image or any other. As I already said, the portraits depicted in the sidebars are too small and do not appear in the preview. And I have to repeat to you that the articles about Stalinism or Hoxhaism have a similar situation, but there is nothing bad in the articles - except that Hoxhaism is too brief, which is not the case in this article Algirr (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

@Algirr: You suggested File:A Syrian propaganda image showing Hafez al-Assad and his two sons, Bassel and Bashar.jpg then File:Statue of Hafez al-Assad and a portrait of him and his sons (Bashar and Bassel) in the background, 1994.jpg.

I think the first image would fit the articles Hafez al-Assad's cult of personality or Assad family, but not an article about Assadism, the ideology. The imagery is related but not directly correlated, especially when it includes Bassel who is unmentioned.

The second image is worse because the Assads are not the focus of the image (MOS:IMAGEQUALITY), and again I think that kind of propaganda of the Assads is more suited for an article about the Assad family and their cult of personality rather than their neo-Baathist ideology.

And yes, I understand your WP:OTHERCONTENT argument and it's not going to change my opinion because it isn't policy-based. You're requesting for comments, not debating every user whose vote is contrary to yours. Some people will agree with you, others will not, but nobody in this discussion is required to respond to you because they can just leave comments with their thoughts. If you're going to ping every responding user, at least be ready with policy-based reasons for your proposals to help you change other people's minds.

Also, because this was initially a disagreement between just you and another user, you could have asked for a third opinion first for a (possibly) quicker resolution. Yue🌙 04:53, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

I can well enter into a discussion, because I would always like to convince people. I give them arguments, they either do not answer or repeat themselves. And I did not say that someone is obliged to answer me.

Moreover, the claim to the first image is unclear. Bassel is not mentioned in the article - it sounds like nonsense, are you suggesting that I work on editing and specifically distort the historical image to remove Bassel? Regarding "this is suitable for other articles but not for these", in this case a counter question - what are the images of books about Hoxhaism doing in the corresponding article or the portrait of Stalin in the article about Stalinism? The claim to the second image is also not very clear - there is literally a huge statue and a portrait of all three Assads. And Assadism is a personalistic ideology and in any case it has strong ties to the cult of personality. In addition, the user's complaint was about the quality of the image and copyright, which in itself sounds strange since neither the first nor the second image violates them. Moreover, I have previously inserted an image here where only the central figure of the ideology (Hafez) was depicted, and it was also removed for vague reasons. I have already substantiated my proposals based on examples from other articles.

So what's wrong? I asked for a third opinion in the form of creating a discussion, because I am always obliged to do this and not another user. Algirr (talk) 05:24, 9 September 2025 (UTC)