I have been reading the english Wikipedia article on the Iranian revolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution

As an Iranian, I know that the revolution is still a hotly debated subject by my people today and anecdotes prevail over accuracy when discussing it.

There are some passages that caught my eye in the article:

The Shah's regime became increasingly oppressive, brutal,[35][36] corrupt, and extravagant.[35][37] It also suffered from basic functional failures that brought economic bottlenecks, shortages, and inflation.[38] The Shah was perceived by many as beholden to — if not a puppet of — a non-Muslim Western power (the United States)[39][40] whose culture was affecting that of Iran. At the same time, support for the Shah may have waned among Western politicians and media – especially under the administration of U.S. President Jimmy Carter – as a result of the Shah's support for OPEC petroleum price increases earlier in the decade.[41] When President Carter enacted a human-rights policy which said countries guilty of human-rights violations would be deprived American arms or aid, this helped give some Iranians the courage to post open letters and petitions in the hope that the repression by the government might subside.[42]

Hoping to break Khomeini's contacts with the opposition, the Shah pressured the Iraqi government to expel him from Najaf. Khomeini left Iraq, instead moving to a house bought by Iranian exiles in Neauphle-le-Château, a village near Paris, France. The Shah hoped that Khomeini would be cut off from the mosques of Najaf and be cut off from the protest movement. Instead, the plan backfired badly. With superior French telephone and postal connections (compared to Iraqi ones), his supporters flooded Iran with tapes and recordings of his sermons.[16][91][103]

Worse for the Shah, Khomeini immediately put himself into the spotlight of the Western media, especially in the broadcasts of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).[16][120] Khomeini rapidly became a household name in the west, portraying himself as an "Eastern mystic" who did not seek power, but instead sought to "free" his people from "oppression". The normally critical western media rapidly became a docile tool in Khomeini's hands.[16][91]

In addition, the media coverage eroded the influence of other, more moderate clergy such as Ayatollah Shariatmadari and Ayatollah Taleghani.[94][99][103] The BBC itself later issued a statement admitting to having a "critical" disposition to the Shah, saying that its broadcasts helped to "change the collective perception of the population." [15]

What can the wonderful users of /r/askhistorians contribute to this? In addition, how reliable are the sources of the wikipedia article? Do any of you have any experience reading them?

I dare not read the Persian article on this subject because I highly doubt it will be impartial and accurate.

Thanks for your time.