Jump to content

Talk:Anousheh Ansari/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Ramadan

I came here to add a link to this column which speculates that Ansari may, in the clarity of space, be able to see the moon of Ramadan before anyone else.

But this page deals with a current event. It should be unprotected as soon as possible. Septentrionalis 05:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

That is not a column, but a newsgroup posting and is not appropriate under WP:V (verifiability) and is obvious WP:OR (original research). The issue of Ramadan is 100% irrelevant to this article anyway. Khorshid 06:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
It's James Oberg and it's harmless. WP:V says Sometimes a statement can only be found in a publication of dubious reliability, so it's appropriate to say
James Oberg says in a newsgroup posting...
Original research does not apply to something cited in a source of dubious reliability. It's Oberg's research, not the editor's. If this had anything controversial or potentially defamatory about it, of course, it would be a different story, but I fail to see the harm done to Wikipedia here. Obert is a well-known author and commentator on space issues and frequently writes online during notable missions. --Dhartung | Talk 07:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
This is not question of harmlessness. This is question of verifiability. If this person published his opinion in a news report or journal or something, then that is something. But a newsgroup??? No way. Additionally as I said this issue of Ramadan has nothing to do with the article. For all we know Anousheh Ansari is a secular Muslim or non-observant. If the tourist in question was anyone else, we would not even be discussing this because so-and-so author would not decide to give his opinion about Ramadan. This is far from harmless, but insensitive and potentially misleading, among other things. Khorshid 07:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
According to the source used in the article she is a "liberal Muslim" [1]. She does not observe hijab obviously, and for all we know she does not pray (according to Islamic ritual method) or observe this and that. It is subjective. Perhaps someone like Oberg and many others like him assume all Muslims are the same. This is false. To add the information you call "harmless" is in fact controversial. This is a biography article and one should take care what is added, and there is a WP policy on this. Khorshid 07:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I think you're going to great lengths to interpret what is potentially harmful. (I just think it's interesting, for example. I have always found most Muslims are eager to have open-minded discussions about many things with regard to Islam, and would not expect this to offend.) This is not a fact about Ansari herself. Indeed, such religious questions have been raised before, when Prince Sultan flew (directing figuring into Ramadan) and when Ilan Ramon flew, and Malaysia in particular is formally investigating the issue for its Muslim astronauts.[2] That said, I agree the importance of the issue is low (and on her blog, she speaks of God as "it", the meaning of which choice is known only to her). --Dhartung | Talk 08:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
No but I am going to great lengths to illustrate something which is not always clear to non-Muslims. See for instance this quote from article on Ilan Ramon:
"Although a secular Jew, Ramon sought to follow Jewish observances while in orbit. In an interview he said, "I feel I am representing all Jews and all Israelis". He was the first astronaut on a NASA flight to request kosher food."
In that quote the astronaut has directly stated that he is religious and observant and feels as though he is "representing all Jews". So you see he has already brought the issue of religion into play. And Salman Abdulaziz is a blood member of the House of Saud - a royal family and like all members of monarchies a "representative" of whatever religion they belong to which in case of House of Saud is the extremist Salafist/Wahabi sect of Islam which al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden also belongs to and are dedicated to imposing on the entire world.
Anousheh Ansari has neither made issue of religion nor has any connection to religion. She was simply asked in an interview if she is Muslim and she replied that she is "liberal Muslim" which could mean lots of things. She has nowhere stated that she feels she is representing Muslims or anything having to do with religion or that she will observe Ramadan nor has she requested halal food or anything like that. Khorshid 09:02, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
The point you're making that she has not introduced the issue herself is a good one. I will just express my disappointment that you're jumping to some big conclusions about what was undoubtedly meant in a spirit of generosity. It's unfortunate that this divide between cultures remains so great and so full of suspicion. --Dhartung | Talk 11:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
What are you talking about? People like Oberg are directly responsible for the continuation of so-called "cultural divides" by assuming all Muslims are the same and that we have the same practices and beliefs etc. People like him are responsible for the misconception that "Middle Eastern" is a race and ethnicity or that everyone from that region is Arab or speaks Arabic or is Muslim. Cultural divides are put up by people who have racist views but who ironically deny that they are racist. Iran and America are more similar than people like him would like to accept. Before revolution there was no "divide" between America and Iran. It is people like him (and Jimmy Carter and BushCo. and the like) who wanted to see Iran become what it is today. But I am digressing here. Khorshid 06:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Where does Oberg say any of that? I think you are unable to separate your own biases, Khorshid. I find that sad, and it does not bode well if you assume the worst of a conciliatory gesture. --Dhartung | Talk 08:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to say that I pretty much agree with Korshid. I don't think including this piece of information is particularly harmful, but its accuracy is certainly questionable given its source and, much more importantly, it is not really at all relevant to a biographical article. -- Hux 09:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Again, James Oberg is a pre-eminent space journalist and author whose writings on the Soviet space program, for example, are the gold standard. It's unfortunate that we would discount what he says because of where he distributes it.--Dhartung | Talk 11:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Again the issue of Ramadan has nothing to do with Anousheh Ansari. If Oberg put up a post speculating whether Ansari will be eating chocolate bars in space would you be insisting on a link to it??? Put the link on his page but keep it as far away from here as possible. Personally I find the link and his insensitive opinions to be offending! Khorshid 06:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
How about the first "liberal" muslim in space. Well I think she is nominally muslim so stating it is okay also, but if some users objects, then it should be discussed. --alidoostzadeh 09:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Such furore. I agree that this is tangential, but (as I said) it's going into external links, not the text of the article. Septentrionalis 20:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm really not keen on this link. Including it implies it's something Ansari is interested in, when as far as I can tell, she has nothing to do with it. Using external links doesn't let us off the need to have it be encyclopedic and topical for the article. It should go on an appropriate article, otherwise it's a form of link spamming - using an article to push a site to more prominence, whether that's in order to make money, or to promote a particular issue/POV. --Siobhan Hansa 20:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I have no connection with the site, although I've heard of Oberg. I have no idea whether we have other links to it. I came across the article by chance and found it interesting; readers may too. The assumption of POV-pushing gets tiresome. Septentrionalis 21:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I have explained enough. It is not my problem if you do not understand. I have removed the link and will do so and if it is added again I will take this to the Admin noticeboard as it is a clear case of linkspamming. Khorshid 06:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
I do not care for non-negotiable demands. This is less severe than a legal threat, but has the same effect on discussion. Also, it is vacuous. Since nobody is linkspamming, Khorshid may find some difficulty convincing ANI. Septentrionalis 17:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Septentrionalis, i don't want the use of one term to get in the way of communication. The question is - in what way is the link you want to see connected to the subject of the article? And is the content linked to encyclopedic? In general usenet groups are not cosidered encylopedic because (among other things) it is not normally possible to verify the identity of the poster and are not subject to fact checking. And with this post specifically - it is not related to this article. The fact that a poster uses Ansari as a jumping off pointto talk about Ramadan is not sufficient connection to the subject of this wikipedia article. It might have been a reasonable connection had Ansari brought it up - but this is not. --Siobhan Hansa 18:12, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Without the abuse and threats, I probably wouldn't have added it back, and I certainly won't revert war with a civil editor. (I take it that Ansari wasn't actually watching for the New Moon?) However, I don't see the post as jumping off into Ramadan; this is a space buff discussing a possible effect of space flight. As for verifiability: we can certainly take the link to James Oberg off; the rest of it makes no assertion except that the post exists and has that title. If it were being cited for anything, that would be different. Septentrionalis 18:46, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Without Ansari (or someone else in a position to know) telling us, I don't see how we can know if she was watching or not. It's mere speculation. Which is one of the reasons I think the link is highly inappropriate. External links are still supposed to further the encylopedic purpose of the article. Even if the link was to a well respected, peer reviewed paper from an authority in the field, I think it would be inappropriate. But to a newsgroup posting? If we can't be sure the posting is by someone who's an expert then it's not really an appropriate link for any wikipedia article. Would you please consider removing the link yourself? With the recent increase in interest in the implications of space travel on religious experience and practice, it may be an appropriate subject for a well sourced article of its own, but it's relevence here escapes me. --Siobhan Hansa 19:15, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with Siobhan. Even if we completely ignore the fact that the source is a Usenet posting, at some point there is a line that must be drawn between "biographically relevant" and "connected, but tangental". The former belongs in the article; the latter does not. In my opinion, this particular example falls squarely in the latter category. It could prove very interesting and worthwhile as part of a separate article, but it's very much out of place in this one. -- Hux 20:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
For the record, I consider this point moot, and I've made personal peace (I hope) with Khorshid. The only reason I defended the link Pmanderson added was a) a naive hope it could be illuminating to non-Muslims, and b) the historical connection to Prince Sultan who did perform the sighting. James Oberg is certainly an "authority in the field" (history of space), the only question is how he posted his article. (Oberg freelances and if he doesn't sell an idea he tends to just post it.) --Dhartung | Talk 23:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protected

I've moved the article into semi-protection, meaning it cannot be edited by IP users or new user accounts, but other editors can now edit.

Please note, if we return to the edit wars over this article, I will reprotect it. I will be strictly interpreting Wikipedia's policies on WP:3RR and WP:POV-pushing. Please use caution when editing this article, and work to achieve consensus before making changes. Thanks, Gwernol 12:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Astronaut, Cosmonaut or a Space Tourist?

This Wikipedia article says Anousheh Ansari is a cosmonaut? (normally used to identify the Russians). [Just below her image]. Can anyone correctly describe her official title? 130.194.5.129 06:35, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

She is a cosmonaut because she was launched aboard a Russian vehicle. Her cosmonaut rank is Spaceflight Participant, a title which was agreed on between the US and Russia for space tourists. --Dhartung | Talk 08:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. However, this explaination seems fussy and incorrect.

No where in NASA web sites state that Anousheh Ansari is a cosmonaut [3]. NASA web pages mention her as a Spaceflight Participant. Also, if the cosmonaut title is given to human who travels in a Russian spacecraft, then what about the commander of Expedition 14, Michael Lopez-Alegria?. He is called as an astronaut in NASA pages. Again Thomas Reiter is an astronaut [4] and has flown in both Russian and American spaceships (Euromir - 95) and the shuttle.

Hence, can anyone supply the exact defnition of the astronaut and cosmonaut titles ?. Can Anousheh Ansari be called as a cosmonaut?

In one of the Johnson Space Flight Center's web pages [5], the following is stated: The term cosmonaut refers to those space sailors who are members of the Russian space program.

This is a tricky question, because the word astronaut has a generic meaning as well as being an applied title. I'm going to open up a discussion at Template talk:Infobox Astronaut#Astronaut/Cosmonaut, because this applies to several different pages, not just this one. --Dhartung | Talk 06:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

That would be great. Yes, indeed it is a tricky one and that is why I thought of asking the question from Wikipedians. Once people/experts come to an agreement about using the words astronaut/cosmonaut, it could be applied to all Wikipedia pages. Personally, in Ansousheh Ansari's Bio, I would like her not calling as a cosmonaut [this is also consitent with NASA web pages]. As NASA and Russian space agency have agreed better to stick to the title Spaceflight Participant. 130.194.5.129 07:12, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I think there are two solutions:
    • Use only the astronaut term as a term established in English language for all those people.
    • Use both terms based on official qualification/rank of a person. So a person travelled in space of received special training could be cosmonaut, astronaut, or both, or neither, depending on their qualifications, official status and certificates. At least in Russia there are official terms (qualifications) "pilot-cosmonaut", "cosmonaut-tester" etc. But then we maybe should use not generic, but more specific term "pilot-cosmonaut" for example instead simply "cosmonaut" as any Russian encyclopedy does. But this approach requires additional research on every person.--Nixer 07:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I would Very strongly oppose the first option because it is a serious factual inaccuracy caused by the unnecisarry Americanisation of Wikipedia. --GW_SimulationsUser Page | Talk 13:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Using astronauts for those carried by NASA, and cosmonaut for those transported by the Soviet/Russian program appears to be usage; I would support that for simplicity. Septentrionalis 17:48, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • First things First:
    • ASTRONAUT is a word in the dictionary meaning: a person who travels beyond the earth's atmosphere; also : a trainee for spaceflight Source: Merriam-Webster
    • COSMONAUT is a word on the dictionary meaning: an astronaut of the Soviet or Russian space program Source: Merriam-Webster
    • SPACE TURIST: is a NON EXISTENT word in the dictionary Source Merriam-Webster

End of the discussion, why?, because that's why we have dictionaries to resolve disputes in terms, not for us to invent them, 'space turist' is clearly and apocriphous term invented byt the uneducated press, now, who rules the language?, the press or the academy? Ansari, Tito, Shuttleworth, Olsen, Simonyi, are COSMONAUTS, period. now, COSMONAUTS have RANKS, their rank is SPACE FLIGHT PARTICIPANT

Hi. Yelling doesn't make your point sound stronger. Certainly choosing the one generic term "astronaut" is one way of approaching this, but there is long-established usage precedent for calling everyone who goes up on a Russian vehicle a cosmonaut. On the other hand the Chinese government translates itself with the word "astronaut". Other countries insist on their own terminology. This will only become more difficult as more countries send people to space. We were unable to resolve this satisfactorily at Template_talk:Infobox Astronaut#Astronaut.2FCosmonaut, unfortunately. In any case, we are not limited to using only words that have dictionary definitions, especially since new words arrive all the time and dictionaries only come once every few years. The newspapers all use "space tourist", so are you going to write to them all and tell them they are using a made-up word? --Dhartung | Talk 20:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
In fact Ansari is not a member of Russian space program. She is a member of her own space program ;-). Chinese officials call their astronauts "cosmonaut" in Russian.--Nixer 20:57, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

a bit obvious...

In the section titled "No Politics" there is this line: "although Ansari was aware of the divisions between the governments of her adopted U.S. home and the land she left at age 16." Honestly, who in the world is not at least slightly aware of "divisions" in US-Iranian relations? Let alone a highly educated Iranian immigrant who presumably has family (parents?) still living in Iran. Anyone object to this being reworded? Messiahxi 15:23, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Her parents moved to the US with Ansari. Presumably there is other family still in Iran. The MoS does say to state the obvious, but I'm not sure they mean i quite like this. I'm not personally particularly attached to the current wording - but I guess it all depends on what you change it to. Be bold. It's a collaboration. --Siobhan Hansa 15:36, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Heh, just trying to be a respectful noob... to a fault perhaps. I changed the sentence to: "She and her husband have said no political message was intended, despite the increasing tension in US-Iran relations, which has dominated world headlines in the weeks leading up to her historic launch." Messiahxi 18:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The whole current events section, especially the parts based on interviews, is excessively detailed and written in a conversational style, not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Much of it is redundant. I was going to tackle it the other day but the article was protected due to a certain editor's shenanigans. But it could use a thorough rewrite and trim -- we don't need to keep track of everything she says to the media. (An interview isn't an "event", usually.) --Dhartung | Talk 21:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Amount Paid

According to the current article, "Her contract forbids disclosure of the amount paid, but previous space tourists have paid in excess of US$20 million." This article on smh.com.au states that she paid "$26.6 million". It does not state the currency (US or Australian) that this is supposed to be in but I thought someone might think it deserves inclusion Henare 02:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

As 26.6 AUD is roughly 20.0 USD, I think it simply means they translated the guesstimate into local currency for the benefit of their readers. --Dhartung | Talk 04:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Remove "Current Events"

When I first wrote "Interview" I tried to note her interview was politically charged underneath. The sentence that helped this in the text were later trimmed. (In interview she implicitly insisted on going free, etc.) "Current events" is in bad shape, which is it is not encyclopedic, and wants a thorough rewrite and trim; the talk about ".. series of experiments.." when the section begins would be kept. "Interview" and the rest may be deleted, except for the flag story which would be kept briefly. Indeed I suggest we delete the whole "current events" and keep the flag story and the experiments.

Previous discussions in note [a bit obvious..] above.

Downtownee 06:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

This image & Machocarioca's edit war

As astute editors will see from the history, Machocarioca keeps changing the image in the infobox, after which another editor immediately reverts it. This has been going on for several days and each reverter has requested that Machocarioca build consensus on the talk page, something that he has thus far failed to attempt. I am opening this specific discussion to attempt to build such a consensus on the legitimacy of this photo's use on Wikipedia.

The photo in question can be found at the sites listed below, all of which are relevant to my comments here:

As you can see, the photos on the first two links above do not show any copyright attribution. Ordinarily, one could assume from this that it is a NASA image (since NASA's policy is that all images on their site are NASA images "unless otherwise stated") and thus public domain. However, the third link above clearly attributes this photo to "AP Photo/Prodea Systems Inc". If this attribution is correct then according to Wikipedia policy we cannot use it when there are freely usable images available that will serve equally well on a biography article.

I have emailed Mrs Ansari's press contact to see if she can clear up the copyright issue. Hopefully that will put a lid on this. In the meantime, Machocarioca: will you please stop repeatedly inserting this image until we can sort this out. Comments anyone? -- Hux 14:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

This is the correct way to proceed. I agree that until copyright is established we shouldn't use that image, even though its a pretty nice picture. Gwernol 14:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
If you want we can start a Biography RfC on this topic along with the Helen Sharman being the first space tourist claim. That way we can get everything out of the way in one discussion in case we eventually need to go to arbitration to determine a solution.--Burzum 15:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Isn't the image issue more of a copyright one (i.e. one that needs expertize in law rather than in appropriate biography writing)? An RfC on the space tourist issue would be good if that's the next step in dealling with a single disagreeing editor. Might help the article anyway to get more eyes on it. Machocarioca is on a 48 hour block at the moment, are we supposed to wait until he's able to participate? --Siobhan Hansa 16:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
A couple of hours ago I received a friendly email back from Erin, Mrs Ansari's press contact, to say she was looking into this for me and a few minutes ago I got her reply: she says that the photo should be correctly credited to NASA. Can we all agree that the photo is okay for Wikipedia then?
As far as the Helen Sharman controversy goes, I think that Burzum's RfC idea is a good one. -- Hux 20:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Nice work Hux. Sounds good to me. I remember reading somewhere (though I have no idea where) that emails about copyright should be forwarded to some wikimedia foundation address. Just FYI. Someone else might know more.
Has anyone here started an RfC before? Do we need to prepare at all, or just have someone list and we all jump on in? I just went and read, so I guess we don't have to prepare. Is the suggestion to ask for an RfC on Machocarioca's conduct, or on the article content? --Siobhan Hansa 20:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
An RFC is just a neutral request for people to come by and comment. It isn't a complicated process. Regarding the photo credit, the simplest approach would probably be to ask for a photo credit to NASA on the anoushehansari.com website. --Dhartung | Talk 21:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Incidentally, that address is at Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission#When_permission_is_confirmed. It should be acceptable for them to confirm that the original is public domain, without separately contacting NASA. NASA does have its own photo department which might be amenable to further confirmation. --Dhartung | Talk 22:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
I forwarded the email conversation to the address above. Also, the image uploaded by Machocarioca doesn't appear to be working properly (it's as if it's been half-deleted, in that you can still see the image but if you try to edit that page it says no page exists). I had previously uploaded a better quality version anyway so I've edited the notes there to reflect the email and this discussion. If anyone wants to use this image, use this version of it. -- Hux 06:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Machocarioca: since you are just "out of prison" so-to-speak, will you be willing to not reverting the article for a while so that an Biography RfC can take place and perhaps resolve the issue of whether or not she is the first female space tourist? If so, I'll start the RfC.--Burzum 00:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

This Image was mirrored from NASA's International Space Station Imagery JSC2006-E-38876, there it is written in clear letters, that this photo is credited to "Roscosmos / Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center". The NASA GUIDELINES FOR USE OF NASA IMAGERY (PDF) says, that "NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted." and here it is noted! So if you want a copyright agreement, you have to e-mail/ask "Roscosmos / Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center" and NOT Ansari's Pressguys! Ansyri's Pressguys can only sanction this image for personal interest, not for copyright interest. --TH-Foreigner 03:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Of course this is totally wrong, 'cause it's a different image, I thought I've reverted this edit properly yesterday. Sorry for your stolen time, next time I proof my intented reverts.--TH-Foreigner 22:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The basic point is that the editor advocating for and uploading an image should have the primary responsibility to the community for seeking out permissions. Unfortunately, that obvious polite course of action has not occurred to someone. --Dhartung | Talk 03:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
TH-Foreigner: Read the whole discussion - you are mistaken. The image you linked to is NOT THE SAME IMAGE as the image we are discussing. This image (which is just a better quality version of the one Machocarioca uploaded) is perfectly acceptable for use on Wikipedia since I have researched the source and confirmed that it is a Nasa image. All this has already been dealt with above. -- Hux 06:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
You have second hand information from the Ansari company guys, but you have no direct info from NASA. Frankly, I think now we need an email from NASA PR to confirm the rules at this point. This image seems like one from a set, and since one is copyrighted Roscosmos, I would like to be sure that all of them are not copyrighted by Roscosmos. Since we don't know the copyright agreements between NASA and Roscosmos, the fact that the image can be found in a NASA press kit is not definitive proof for me. All we know for sure is that a very similar image, taken in the same context, is copyrighted. Hektor 09:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I take your point. Any idea how to contact NASA on this? I'd be happy to do it since I've already gone this far with it. However, I don't think that just because one is a Roscosmos image that all similar ones must also be. It could easily be that the Roscosmos photographer took the first one and the NASA photographer took this one at the same time. That would make sense given that they wouldn't want to set everything up for the official photo more than once. Much easier to get all the photographers together in one place and let them get their shots. -- Hux 15:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
But why then should NASA put Roscosmos images in the image gallery and not their own? You should note that all images of this set (cosmonauts in Sokol space suits in front of their land's flag) are credited to Roscosmos, many other images instead (see [6]) are taken by the NASA photograph Victor Zelentsov and so credited to NASA. I fear the discussed Ansari image is indeed a Roscosmos one, but the best way to know this would be to contact NASA in the matter of using Roscosmos images (there are many of them in NASA's gallery, e.g. some of the official photos of Soyuz crews, which could be usefull for us). If someone could do it, it would be great. --Bricktop 16:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
NASA say on their website that everything is available for free use unless otherwise stated. How does NASA normally state an image isn't free? Because while I see that the image is credited to Roscosmos, the page doesn't say that he has copyright. It is possible (some would even say good practice) to credit an author even if the work is public domain. --Siobhan Hansa 18:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
My email to NASA dated Sep 23: "Dear Mr XXX - Could you clarify for me the rules of usage of images such as this one : http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-14/html/jsc2006e38876.html which can be found on a NASA web site gallery, but which bear the mention : "Photo credit: Roscosmos / Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center" Should they be employed under different rules than plain NASA images? Kind regards" Answer from NASA from today : "Yes, they should. They are not NASA photos and therefore may not be in the public domain. You need to contact the Russian Space Agency. "Hektor 19:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Great perseverance Hektor. That should pretty much clear that up then. Hopefully more free images will come availble over the coming months. --Siobhan Hansa 19:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh for crying out loud! I really don't know how many times I'm going to have to say this before it sticks, but I guess I'll try one more time: THE PHOTO WE ARE DISCUSSING may look similar the one that is credited to Roscosmos in Bricktop's link, but it is not the same photo. The photo we are discussing does not appear anywhere in that photo gallery. The only place on NASA's site that I have seen it is on Ansari's bio page, where it is not credited to anyone. In addition to this, I have received a communication from Ansari's press contact that the image should be credited to NASA. Therefore, as it stands right now it should be considered a NASA image. The last thing to do, just to be absolutely 100% certain, is to get confirmation from NASA themselves. -- Hux 21:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
So you think that NASA shipped a photograph at 5000USD the roundtrip plane ticket from Houston to Moscow plus 300 USD the hotel night in Moscow these days, just for the fun to take the same picture as Roscosmos, and, by the way, not put this picture in their galleries and just on the Press Kit ? Hektor 05:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree. A photo inside a press release is specifically released to the press to be used in news stories. Since the press release doesn't explicitly cite whether the photos are by NASA (being public domain) or a copyrighted work of Roskosmos, we are in sort of a tough position. I think we have a strong argument that use of the photo in Wikipedia is acceptable since there is a very strong indication that the photo was released specifically for news and information by a reputable government organization even if it doesn't properly cite ownership. If this image is copyrighted, then we probably have implicit permission to use it since it was in a press release (and presumably NASA received permission to include it for the purpose of disseminating it to the press for use). I think this is sort of a silly issue since there are many PD images with Anousheh Ansari on the ISS that can used just as easily. This image is not worth all the energy that people have been expending.--Burzum 06:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I concur with Burzum on all points. --Dhartung | Talk 06:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I have the details for the relevant contact at NASA and have fired off an email to try and sort this out. Yes, Burzum, in hindsight it was probably not worth the effort but now that I've come this far I may as well go all the way and have something to show for it! Oh and Hektor: all I'll say is that I wish I had your faith in the efficiency of government bureaucracy! ;) -- Hux 15:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
If you're giving this the college try, may as well contact Roskosmos at their press office. --Dhartung | Talk 09:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Done, in my best level 1 Russian! We'll see what happens. -- Hux 11:25, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
I have one update: the NASA guy wrote back to me, but the email was pretty much useless. He basically doesn't know who the photo should be attributed to, but wrote the email in that way a lot of people do when they're deliberately trying to avoid actually saying "I don't know." Don't you just hate it when people do that? ::sigh:: Hopefully the Roscosmos folks will write back. -- Hux 06:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
If NASA does not know whose image it is, I guess we can assume this image is not NASA.Hektor 17:09, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

First blogger

I'm not sure if it's wise to bring this sort of thing up again but... First blogger from space seems a little trivial for the opening paragraph. I was thinking about moving it down to the current events section. What do you all think? --Siobhan Hansa 00:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

It's an interesting point, but we should have a citation. Other astronauts have certainly had e-mails published online. --Dhartung | Talk 04:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree that it doesn't need to be in the leader, but I'd say it's better placed in a "Trivia" section rather than "Current Events", assuming we can all agree on whether or not she is the first space blogger, of course. ;) -- Hux 04:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm loath to start a trivia section. In most cases they seem to become breeding grounds for unencyclopedic and tangential information. If the claim shouldn't be there (a decision I'd live with easily) we should just take it out. If we do keep it it could sit in with the sentance about her blogging in the "stay" section.--Siobhan Hansa 12:18, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I think since it is a first, it is not a bad information to include. --alidoostzadeh 15:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
I mean in the begining. --alidoostzadeh 15:57, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox astronaut

An insult to Iran

Why do you call her Iranian-American? It is an insult to Iranians. She is US citizen and hence american. She is not an Iranian citizen hence non-Iranian. She does not call herself Iranian (maybe ashamed) and you call her Iranian?

I simply do not understand this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.70.14.134 (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair use image policy

  • Right now we have a fair use image. You can only use a fair use image in the absence of a free alternative, but there is a free public domain NASA image in the Commons, which is used by the German language wiki and others. So I think that the fair use in unjustified. Hektor 06:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
And what a terrible, distorted image it is -- How hard would it be to pull something nice from NASA. Something where she shows the Iran colors on her uniform would be good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.226.204.58 (talk) 04:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Ansari's background, she is not from Tehran but Mashhad

I reverted the new (?) user Goldorack based on the following rational. The Azeri press (I believe some political group started it ) had claimed originally she was born in Tehran and her parents where from Tabriz. For example a site brought before my revert: [UNDP Azerbaijan, "ETHNIC AZERI WOMAN TO TRAVEL TO SPACE", Azernews, August 30, 2006], mentions her wrongly born in Tehran! So the 4 english sources from Azerbaijan republic sites are not reliable. Then it is the Russian sources, and they quote Azeri press. I just google translated some of the Russian language sources. The Russian source mentions the same invalid information [7] (She was born in Tehran!), so there is really no English source that mentions her as an Azeri and such news reports really not WP:RS. Another Russian source quoted [8] again mentions wrongly she was born Tehran. Another one quoting an Azerbaijani republic news source mentions wrongly [9] again she was born in Tehran. The last Russian source is quoting Azerbaijani newspaper echo, so it is not reliable. None of these press reports mention she is from Mash-had. Anyhow I know the reason behind this story , and the first group that falsified this was Gamoh (Chehregani's group) claiming she is related to this Azerbaijani figure by the name Ansari. But actually her last name is Raiasiyan and Ansari is her husband's name. But they claimed it was some Ansari and her parents are from Tabriz and She was born in Tehran. But anyhow that information is false, but it was past to the press of Azerbaijan republic (they should have checked the validity), but these spurious news died at after a couple of weeks. I have friends that know her, she does not speak a word of Azeri nor is Azeri. Actually if this is an issue, she has a website and neutral admin with other users can ask her representative. But I am not going by personal experience. Since Wikipedia works with reliable sources (one can always asks her if necessary). For example : [10]. She only speaks French and Farsi and English as mentioned. Ny times is also clear she was born in Mashhad and native language is Persian [11]. So I think these are more reliable than Russian sources (which quote Azeri press) and Azeri sources that wrongly mention her born in Tehran. None of these sources seem to mention she was born in Mashhad and her native language is Persian. But the NY times link is of autobiographical nature. But the reason I am sure of this is because I know a friend who asked her about this and she says she is Persian/Mashhadi. But again NYTIMES and the other link is clear her native language is Persian and has done an actual story on her as can be seen. Note there is a lot of sources "Persian Ansari".. but one has to look to see that only a few sources did a autobiographical story on her (NT times link) and they mention her native language as Persian and she was born in the Persian speaking city of Mashhad. They also mention the languages she knows as Persian, French and English. Obviously if she was Azeri, it would be mentioned she knows Azeri, as would her city would not be from mashhad. For example another source: [12] quote: "Though she knew only Farsi and French when her family immigrated to the USA, Ansari mastered English quickly enough to graduate from college within five years of her arrival". Hope this clarifies the information. Her own website also calls her only of Iranian descendant and she has an organization to help iranians in particular Persian women. And here is a direct interview [13]. "I have always advertised my Persian roots and I’m proud to do so. I always start my story by telling everyone that I was born in Iran and show the map of Iran with my place of birth, Mashhad. My Iranian root is a big part of who I am the same way that my life in America has shaped my life". So based on her websites, Iranian descent should be mentioned, as it is now and she was born in Mashhad (Ethnic Persian city in Khorasan and not Tehran as these sources claimed based on one faulty source), and her native language is Persian (as mentioned by the sources, which makes her an ethnic Persian and she knew only Persian and English before coming to US). But I think Iranian descent is good enough as she has in her own website as identifies her as such and the place she was born Mashhad is also valid. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 21:50, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Inquiry on what I mentioned above

This was an email sent by me and three Wikipedia admins were copied: " Dear Anousheh Ansari (or reader of this email)

We are a group of Wikipedia editors (which comes second in google) and recently had been show some sites mainly from the republic of Azerbaijan claiming Mrs. Ansari was born in Tehran and her parents are Azeris from Tabriz. On the other hand, the NY times states that she was born in Mashhad and she speaks Persian as a native language.

I would like to know if Mrs. Ansari is of Azeri background or Persian from Mashhad in order so that correct information is reflected in Wikipedia. I have cc'ed couple of Wikipedia admins who will ensure correct information is provided once we receive an answer.

Thank You and best wishes for Mrs. Ansari and her family."

The email was sent to [[14]] Anousheh Ansari and Elham Naddaf (Media Representative).

This was the response of Madam Naddaf:

"Dear Wikipedia editors, As Anousheh has state in numerous presentations, she was born in Mashhad and speaks Persian as her native language. Regards, Elham Naddaf"

Any reader who is interested can confirm with admins Alex Bakharev, Khoikhoi or email the Anousheh Ansari site directly. Based on WP:BLP, any source that is obscure should be removed. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 15:51, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The multiple sources quoted are reliable and authoritative, which does not preclude them from making minor biographical errors about the city of birth, which they have mixed up with the city where she spent more time in her younger years. None of the articles quoted are about her biography or just personal life, all of them are about the space, cosmonauts, research, her persona as a businesswoman, and only in a few words mention some of the more personal or basic details, such as ethnicity, place of birth, language, etc.

Then, the Russian sources do not quote Azerbaijani sources. One of the Russian newspapers is Rossiyskaya Gazeta - the official government newspaper. The other, Profile, is a respected business weekly, like The Economist, or US News and World Report. Nor can you declare the diverse Azerbaijani sources as "unrealiable" - none of them quote any Chehregani or any group.

Finally, the response you got ''says nothing about her ethnicity, indeed, they actually ignored or sidestepped it, proving that she is ethnically Azeri''. It was very easy for her to disprove any "allegations" and just state plainly: "I am/She is 100% ethnically Persian" - but they didn't do it, and actually ignored the question altogether, since they don't want to lie. An ethnically Azeri person does not need to speak Azerbaijani language at all, and can speak Persian "natively", as well as be born in Mashhad, Tehran, Khorasan, Fiji, Tokyo, Khartum, New York, Moscow, Paris, London, etc., etc., etc. -- you get the point. Just like Persians living in US don't need to speak Persian at all (or natively), and a Persian born in Los Angeles is no less Persian than a Persian born in Shiraz. Hence, according to all the rules of Wikipedia, not to mention common sense, the information is valid and authoritative, and stays. --Goldorack (talk) 17:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I asked specifically if she is Azeri and they said no, she was born in Mashhad and her native language is Persian. If you have an email, you can email me and we can do another question, to set the matter straight, if you do not believe it. If she was Azeri, they would have mentioned it when I asked if she was Azeri. I asked specifically if she was Azeri and they said no, she was born in Mashhad and speaks Persian as a native language. That ends the issue. The Russian reports quote Echo, or mention she was born in Tehran and other misinformation. Those newsreports are not authoritative. Native Mashhadi is a Persian in Iranian culture. Specially if they speak Persian. If she was Azeri, they would not mention she speaks Persian as her native language and mention something about her being Azeri. In Iran, ethnicity is determined by native language and nothing else. The Azeri reports were misinformations (she was born in Tehran) and Russian reports copied it. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 20:05, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

No, ethnicity has never been determined by language -- kindly provide a source for such a groundbraking claim. And no, she has never said she was Persian, or that she was not Azeri - re-read your question:

  • "I would like to know if Mrs. Ansari is of Azeri background or Persian from Mashhad in order so that correct information is reflected in Wikipedia."

and her publicists' response to you:

  • "Dear Wikipedia editors, As Anousheh has stated in numerous presentations, she was born in Mashhad and speaks Persian as her native language".

As I wrote above, she ignored your question, and only answered where she was born and which language she speaks best (natively). That has nothing to do with her being ethnically Azeri. A person cannot wish to become, or cease to become, of any ethnicity - that, unlike citizenship/nationality/language/place of living is not a matter of choice.

Millions of Azeris speak Persian or Russian as their native language, just as millions of Persians, Greeks, Turks, Russians, Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, etc., speak English or French or some other language as their native language. Native is determined by place of living and/or birth, not ethnic or racial heritage. Barack Obama does not speak any Kenyan dialect, but that does not stop him from being half-Kenyan American. Prince Reza Pahlavi, whose mother, Queen Farah, is Azeri, and father had some Azeri blood, does not speak Azerbaijani language, nor was born in Azerbaijan - that doesn't stop him from being partly Azeri. So let's refrain from illogical and non-sensical arguments here. Also, the sources cited are reputable and reliable, them making some mistake about her place of birth is inconsequential, as they just mixed it up with her place of living. If they would have said she was born in Shiraz, or worse, in Dushanbe, with which she had no links, then your point would have been valid. But Mrs. Ansari lived in Tehran for many years, so the mistake is minor, and has nothing to do with the question of her being Azeri. --Goldorack (talk) 20:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

First I brought a direct interview with her that she states: "I have always advertised my Persian roots"[15]. Can it be clearer than that? It is not a news story from obscure reports, but rather a direct interview with her. The only direct interview currently available in the sources mentioned. In Iran, "Fars-zaban" means Persian. That is Zaban (or Dili) in Turkish. Torkzaban (Turcophone) means Azeri or other Turkic speaking groups. So the context is clear. Native Persian speaker is a direct from "Fars Zaban" which is how people identify themselves in Iran if they are Persian.
On the other hand every single Russian item brought either quotes echo(Azeri newspaper) or violates WP:BLP by claiming she was born in Tehran, giving false information which directly violates WP:BLP. Obviously with such a gross mistake, that is not even knowing the city she was born, they are not reliable. She always has said she is is proud to say she is from Mashhad. So these news sources obviously had no connection to her. So those reports by this simple fact that they do not even know her birthplace are invalid. And it was precisely such rumors that made this whole mistakeup, and the rumor first appeared in some gamoh website. Else she is a native Persian speaker from Mashhad (a Persian) and before coming to the US, it is explicitly says she spoke Persian and French only. Native language is actually the hallmark of ethnicity in Iran (we are not talking about migrants to the US). We can't synthesize here and say "Proud of Persian roots , Azeri origin (based on faulty Russian sources with information violating WP:BLP), native Persian speaker". So if you need more clarity, although for me it is clear, then former version should stay.
As per my question. I asked specifically if she is of Azeri background or Native Persian speaker from Mashhad. Native Persian speaker is what is called "Fars zaban" (Persian) in Iran. It means Persian. And the question is clear. Is she Azeri or native Persian speaker from Mashhad. It is either one or the other. There is no sidestepping in the issue. And they responded she was born in Mashhad and is a native Persian speaker. Several things. Mashhad is a Persian speaking city and she is native Persian speaker. That makes it more than clear. The third thing, she totally was silent on the Azeri part, but confirmed Mashhad and that she is a native Persian speaker. So this does not confirm she was Azeri, but disproves it as it is either one or the other. Since my question is clear, is she an Azeri or native Persian speaker. And it was native Persian speaker. Indeed if she was Azeri, they would have answered it directly and said Yes. What is the big deal afterall? If she is Azeri, they would say yes. Why sidestep the question. Sidestepping that is not responding is actually more of a "no" rather than "yes". But they were silent to the direct question, which means no. If you are Iranian, this is clear enough and she does not need to say she is explicitly not Azeri. If she was Azeri, they would have identified her as so directly. If she was Azeri, they would have mentioned it. But the fact that they mention Mashhad and native Persian speaker actually denies any Azeri link, when specifically asked if she is Azeri. In Iran if you speak Persian as your native language and are from Mashhad, you are Persian. The issue is simple. If she was born in Tabriz, that would be an issue. But not Mashhad, which is a Persian speaking city. Farah is from Zanjan/Tabriz and it is clear. You cannot put sources that make a mistake, and WP:BLP has strict requirements. We cannot put cotnradictory statement until this matter is verified, we have an interview that says she spoke Farsi and French. Farah by the way speaks some Azeri-Turkic as did RezaShah. I am not sure about Mohammad Reza Shah. Obama was raised by his American side. Both Pahlavids/Obama are of mixed rotos. But if Anousheh had Azeri parents, then Azeri would be her native language, like any full Azeri parents in Iran. But she is explicit that Persian is her native language and in other sources (NY Times), it only mentions she knows Persian and French. Also ethnicity in Iran is very fluid and can change in two generations. Ethnicity is not a constant, ethnic groups are formed, they reach stage and sometimes even disappear and merge into other groups. Say Caucasian Albanians. I am sure there are paternal ancestors of some people who were Caucasian Albanians, but no one is a Caucasian Albanian. So ethnicity disappears. Anyhow this is about sources. We have contradictory sources.
I will ask specifically again though if she is Azeri and have admins CC'ed when I enquire. This should clear it up for good, although in this case, I asked specifically if she was an Azeri and they said no she is from Mashhad (Persian city) and speaks Persian as her native language. Plus those news sources (all from 2006 when the story got hot and nothing after) are not reliable unless it is something like Ny times or well known. She states in one interview she is proud of her Persian. Else what is above and when she states in an interview (and not news reports about her) that she states: "I have always advertised my Persian roots and I’m proud to do so."[16](Note the interview is from 2008 which is more recent than 2006). Then now we know Persian is her native language. If she had Azeri parents, then Azeri should be her native language, like any full Azeri family in Iran. Even in cities like Mashhad, someone that is half Azeri, can learn Azeri. But in this case the reports from Western English sources mention she only knew Persian and French. Marriage between Persian/Azeri though depends on location (say Tabriz or Tehran), but usually the kids will know both languages if it is in Tabriz or Tehran. We can't put cotradictory sources in Wikipedia on a biography of a person and so we will have to put Iranian and just wait for more clarity. Thanks--Nepaheshgar (talk) 03:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
I sent another clear email yesterday though incase it is unclear for anyone and hopefully will get response. Admins were cc'ed. If there is no response, then given the contradictory nature of the source, Iranian is all we know. Ethnicity also is not emphasized in the first sentence for modern biographies. I have no issue with whatever background she has, since she is Iranian foremost and is proud of it. But given the fact that a false news was made with this regard, it is important to correct it, since the false news had political intent behind it. The false news died out around that September 2006 time frame and was not spread and I believe interviews from Anousheh Ansari are clear enough. --Nepaheshgar (talk) 16:46, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

final clarity

Okay here is are all the responses. Three Wikipedia admins were also CC'ed for the record. The latest response is on the top. The person enquired is her official spokeperson [17] who is in direct contact with her.

Elham Naddaf: Ms. Ansari is not Azeri Iranian.


Nepaheshgar

Thank you Elham. Yes all Iranians are proud of her, and for all Iranians it is important that she is Iranian. But several users from the republic of Azerbaijan are pushing a point of view. Your answers were clear enough for me, but if you can just say: "She is not Azeri Iranian" if she is not, that would be enough to remove the faulty sources in Wikipedia. Again sorry to bother you with the question and I wish Mrs. Ansari and you the best.



Elham:

Dear Mr. .....

I assure you that MS. Ansari’s parents are both from the province of Khorasan, and she, herself, was born in Mashhad. Her native language is Persian.

She loves her country of birth as a whole, from Azerbayjan to KhorAsan to Khouzestan and everything in between, however she doesn’t speak other dialects/languages including Azeri.

Hope this is satisfying as I think this is clear enough and should suffice.

Thank you

Elham Naddaf.


Nepaheshgar:

Dear Elham, It seems a zealous user in Wikipedia is still claiming that your statement was not clear and language is not a clear criterion.

Do you confirm that Mrs. Ansari is or is not Azeri? Is she Persian or Azeri?

Thank you for your response.


Elham:

Dear Wikipedia editors,

As Anousheh has state in numerous presentations, she was born in Mashhad and speaks Persian as her native language.

Regards,

Elham Naddaf


Nepaheshgar:

Dear Anousheh Ansari (or reader of this email)

We are a group of Wikipedia editors (which comes second in google) and recently had been show some sites mainly from the republic of Azerbaijan claiming Mrs. Ansari was born in Tehran and her parents are Azeris from Tabriz. On the other hand, the NY times states that she was born in Mashhad and she speaks Persian as a native language.

I would like to know if Mrs. Ansari is of Azeri background or Persian from Mashhad in order so that correct information is reflected in Wikipedia. I have cc'ed couple of Wikipedia admins who will ensure correct information is provided once we receive an answer.

Thank You and best wishes for Mrs. Ansari and her family.

Note I really and personally did not care as she is a proud Iranian. I have distant relatives that are Azeri myself (like my great half aunt). But the issue of her being born in Tehran to Tabrizi parents was madeup by Chehregani's group first (I remember the news) and then spread into Azeri media and from there couple of Russian media picked it up. Since it was madeup by a political group, there could some political intention and I pursued the matter. These medias (all from a very short time period of 2006) all made the same mistakes of not double checking facts and did not even know she was born in Mashhad (which is not a simple mistake but shows they did not have any first hand account). --Nepaheshgar (talk) 15:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Summary of a life, per WP:BLP

The current lead infobox says (2011-03-28) summarizes the career/life of Anousheh Ansari as "Space Adventures Tourist". This strikes me as a bit narrow. She is fairly clearly both a businesswoman and also someone who paid for the means to go to space. I don't take exception to mentioning the space part in the summary, but I think it a bit narrow. I will consult WP:BLP to see what guidance may exist for these sorts of situations. In the meantime, do others have thoughts on the matter? Cheers. N2e (talk) 22:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Confusing

Under the heading "Reactions in Iran" is the Sentence "Reactions to the flight in Ansari's native Iran were generally mixed." Only positive reactions are shown. If reactions were mixed, it should show negative as well as positive reactions. If reactions were all positive, it should read: a). "were all positive" b). or "were highly positive" or c). "were generally positive" or d). "were positive." I don't read Persian, so the one reference for the paragraph doesn't let me correct the paragraph. Option d). is the preferred, English expression; it is succinct and the noun, not the adjective does the work. Use option c). if middle eastern modesty/language/cultural tradition requires. Use a). or b). if emphases is needed, especially if correcting a misunderstanding. But please Clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.225.146.106 (talk) 17:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Anousheh Ansari. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 03:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Anousheh Ansari. 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:

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) 23:12, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anousheh_Ansari/Archive_2&oldid=1144156165"