Jump to content

Talk:Marjane Satrapi/Archive 1

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

Origins

I don't know much about Iranian history, but in Persepolis Satrapi's father tells her that her great-grandfather was the last emperor of Iran, so I assume that's Ahmad Shah Qajar. He also says that his son, Marjane's grandfather, became prime minister under Reza Pahlavi, and later became a Marxist. Who was this? I can't find any reference to anyone who meets this description. —Chowbok 18:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Neither can I. I just added to the article information from a newspaper article which indicates she isn't descended from the last Qajar Shah, but from one a few generations earlier. Guess the book isn't totally reliable for biographical data :) --Lukobe 06:03, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Nothing, its not that important. Westerners don't understand that it is part of Iranian culture to try to look important by referring to who you are related to, etc. Just look at how the article begins, saying that she comes from a "progressive family" (in other words, the writer, who is obviously Iranian, is claiming that Satrapi's family is better than some other Iranians' families).

In the West, people value themselves based on their own accomplishments - not on who they are related to.Johan77 (talk) 15:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Westerns do brag about family descendants. How many of you know a Mormon, or how many of you have pride in your British Heritage? Look at the American Scottish Campbell Clans, or how it seems every one in the south is related to General Lee or Billy the Kid? What about American Polotians envoking their Fathers, Great Grand Fathers of Great Great Grand Fathers....Kennedys? Eric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.227.118.127 (talk) 22:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

image gone

Ug. The image was deleted by a free content zealot. Perhaps someone who knows French can send her or her publicist an email asking for a CC/SA image? I just sent an English email to her French myspace website.[1] --Knulclunk 05:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes that action was unimpressive and took an uncivil turn. Unsure if concluded by Chowbok (talk · contribs) who initially tagged it, the delete template was marked as disputed with reason to address (but resulting in no AFD or orderly process), and had a deletion date at least 4 days later than the moment someone was too anxious to wait for.

Good luck with attaining permission. If my French was good enough I'd give the publishers a go, maybe an English approach would work? Murghdisc. 10:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so I can't delete images. I only tagged it.—Chowbok ☠ 17:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW. A few month ago the amazing Rama (who also provides Wikipedia with SEX drawings!) gave us an GFDL pic of Satrapi. I gave her props on her talk page, but neglected to thank her publicly here. Once again, thanks Rama! <3 --Knulclunk 01:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

"apparently"

This seems a bit lame: "She currently writes an illustrated column in the Op-Ed section of The New York Times, *APPARENTLY* (emphasis added) on an irregular schedule.

Can't the person(s) who wrote that be a little clearer on her *apparently irregular* schedule. DDD DDD 03:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I know she wrote at least one, about 18 months ago. But I suppose that's original research isn't it? --Knulclunk 03:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I could be wrong, but my understanding of *currently writing a column* involves more than just a one-off column 18 months ago.DDD DDD 04:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Made more accurate. --Knulclunk 14:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Veiled Bridget Jones

I am adding an article by an Iranian émigré, Marjane Satrapi and her veiled Bridget Jones. Although it is in French, the criticism is important as the article suggests — with considerable evidence — that Marjane Satrapi is not a real opponent to the régime in Tehran and, indeed, that the mullahs' opposition to the movie of her graphic novel was feigned. Asteriks 08:55, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I've just commented on this over at Talk:Persepolis (film) but I'll just add here that those don't meet WP:RS and those claims can't be added without better sources. (Emperor 12:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC))

Her visa problem

A part of an interview with her by NRP:

  • Interviewer: "You are still an Iranian citizen even though you live in France. Was it difficult to get visa to come to the United States?"
  • Marjane Satrapi: "Yes I had to stay two month and I have been kept for one and half hour in the airport. Yes it was very difficult. [...] They didn’t even look at my book. All they were interested was my passport, my evil side!" Reference: [2]

In another interview she said: "I am not a Westerner, I am an Iranian, and I'm very proud of being Iranian. [...] I am a free Iranian woman, and proud of being one." Ref: [3] Mitso Bel 16:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I just saw her website too, "Je suis Iranienne. Peut-être un jour aurais-je la double nationalité."[4] so until then there's not much to discuss. MURGH disc. 16:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Big objections to this article

I will write the sentences I object to and my reasons:

She attended the Lycée Français there and witnessed, as a child, the growing oppression of civil liberties and the everyday-life consequences of Iranian politics, including the fall of the Shah, the early regime of Ayatollah Khomeini and the first years of the Iran-Iraq war.

There is a pre-1979 and a post-1979 era in Iran. When for someone's very personal perspective civil liberties become oppressed from 1979 in a nation like Iran -of which the media says a lot but from which we must research checking for ourselves-, it means that person was enjoying the pre-1979 era of the last Iranian shah, under which far worse charges of oppression, tortures, state murderers and a huge etc. can be stated, documented and proven. Marjane Satrapi's "progressive family" was actually a political family active for a political marxist party called Toudeh. I invite you to go to Iran without prejudices and see what people think of their lives there, and then to meet a Toudeh supporter around the world, and the latter will always be casting very libelous propaganda against the Iranian government which you will never find inside Iran itself. As a very sincere and smart Iranian once told me: All the Toudeh's have got left now is to spread lies.

What I want to say is that these sentence is either expressing deep ignorance or bad intentions, in either case an insult to most 70 million Iranians in Iran, as it is not an absolute truth, but a very personal perspective of someone who grew up in a marxist family, and easily accepted by someone living in the Western culture who is used to the demonization of the Islamic Revolution. For does a movie like "Persepolis" wins the Oscar because it is a masterpiece portraying a sincere perspective, or is it just another piece of propaganda that says Iran = Evil?

Also, why is Iran always the Iranian "regime"? Why dont we ever talk about the Finnish regime, the Spanish regime, the French regime, the American regime and further on? Is it really neutral, not biased or even directed towards a more peaceful understanding of human beings to keep calling a democratically elected government of the world a "regime"? Isnt that in line with the absurd Axis of Evil of some? It really is an insult to millions of Iranians in Iran to give them a different treatment just because the propaganda against their widespread supported leaders has been stronger.


I am clearly new here, but my contributions to the article are reiteratedly deleted. How is it aggressive? How is neutral this article when it doesnt give a context? Im pointing out something the article is clearly omitting, for which it is becoming libelous and POV. Why should I try again? Shouldnt the article try again? Im willing to debate, but how do we debate here?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Germanicus24 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Germanicus24, your edits are extremely tendentious. I do not know whether the bias stems from a deliberate intention or simply from clumsiness, but the fact is that there are unacceptable points:
  • "supporter of the Toudeh (marxist) party of Iran, very active against the Islamic Republic out of the previous status it held under the Shah's dictatorship." : reference ? What authorises you to claim that Satrapi's family was "very active against the Islamic Republic" ? I am unaware of any claim that Satrapi's family ever mounted groups of opponents or engaged in illegal activities other than smuggling posters of rock music groups (which can hardly be seen as "very active against the Islamic Republic").
  • "The fact that her family didn't have problems with the dictatorship the Islamic Revolution overthrew -under which most unbiased sources agree that people was tortured, killed, exiled and purposely divided-, clearly indicates their political views, and predicted many Satrapi's perspectives on Iran related issues to later appear on her works." : Well, wrong. Satrapi's work clearly indicates that her parents were opposed to the regime of the Shah.
  • "In 1983, at the age of 14, Satrapi was sent to Vienna, Austria, by her parents in order to stay away from the Islamic Revolution.". By the end of 1979, the regime in Iran was stabilised. Calling it a "revolution" four years after the institutions of the islamic Republic were established is unacceptable. It is a rhetoric typical of the Iranian regime and is a poor portayal of reality. Wikipedia is not bound to the propaganda vocabulary of any particular government.
  • " Persepolis was adapted into an animated film of the same name, which debuted at the Cannes Film Festival in May 2007 -a very strategic date, as the Western pressures to attack Iran were on a rise during that spring-" is an unacceptable insinuation that Satrapi be linked in some way to all Western governments. Furthermore, you fail to adequately source the premise of your insinuation.
For all the above reasons, I cannot but support User:Knulclunk's revert of your edits. Rama 08:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry I did not give a better context for my revert. I think that Rama did a good job articulating some of my concerns. Although Satrapi's work may be critical of the Revolution, this article is quite neutral on the historical facts of her youth.
Are you implying there was not a constriction of civil-liberties? Her books certainly do not always paint the West, its ignorance of Iranian culture or its 20th century imperialism in a positive light. In fact, her autobiographical work is always quite honest about the prism of her world view. If we need to address criticism of her work or divisiveness of her celebrity, It should be lower in the article, as it relates to her current prominence, and it needs to be legitimately sourced. Thanks! --Knulclunk 12:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


Dear friends,

My bias, compared to yours, stems from having checked the Iranian situation with my own senses. I am not saying that after doing so, everyone should think like I do, but all the sources you ask me for -which aren't even present in this article to prove any attack against Iran, and as well I can not only allegedly call this article as tendentious but show it to Iranians and they will prove me right- are really sincere and fed by the images I myself cared to look for with my own senses. All this article shows as absolute truths for Iran becoming oppressed are to be taken as neutral by people who is sincere? You really insult 70 million Iranians if you think like that, for how does Iran becomes increasingly oppressed when it is Iranians themselves democratically choosing their president and being smart enough to go for whichever revolution they choose?

While you ask me a reference for something which in Iran would be clearly understood as asking a reference to say George W. Bush is an American, you are perfectly fine with an article that without a reference talks about the growing oppression in Iran.

Yet how do you document that? How do you prove Iran became increasingly oppressed? Where is the sincerity/neutrality in that statement? Can you get your data for it outside of the CIA Worldfactbook and sources alike? There is this article published, yet I dont see a reference to any study included that shows a comparison between the pre and post-1979 eras, in order to take as non biased the fact that nothing happened between the 1969-1979 between Satrapi's birth and the Islamic Revolution. Why do you ask from me, a Wikipedia newbie, something you haven't even done yourself?

Why can't you admit all this article claims as realities of the Iranian situation nothing but the very personal and isolated perceptions of one woman who's family never had a problem with the Shah's dictatorship (is it tendentious or POV to say it was a dictatorship?), indeed regarded as a real state of oppression by the vast majority of Iranians, but all of a sudden was so bothered about the revolution of the Iranian people?

In that context, isnt it necessary to talk about the context in which she was raised? Or is people reading this article to believe that, out of nothing, this sincere woman became a poor victim of an innately evil "regime"?

Why do you call Iran a regime? Why don't you call France a regime as well? Isnt it not neutral to keep repeating Iran is a regime?

I am extremely sorry if I cant help it to get overly passionate in this discussion, but it seems to me that you're taking for truths some things that offend many people, just because you never cared to look at the situation from another perspective.

Why do you have to help the media campaign portraying Iran as deserving to be nuked, bombed, invaded or constantly sanctioned out of 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' sort of lies? Why do you help the lack of dialogue showing clear libelous tendencies of portraying Iran as evil in contrast to others who are free from evilness and according to you enjoying a supposed neutrality?

Isnt Wikipedia a free encyclopedia? How come it is not free from the official claims that led us all to become the accomplices of the 1,100,000 Iraqis exterminated according to JustForeignPolicy.org?

Why cant you be different and take a step towards the dialogue of different cultures? Why do you have to keep the prejudices alive here?

I am really sorry I couldnt start the debate like this, as I didnt even have a Wikipedia account, and I give you my respective apologies for that. Yet I wish you would stop defining that which is neutral as that which sounds OK according to your ideas, because it is not neutral to many, and actually taken as an offense for a whole nation for many people.

Please, when it comes to Iran decide for yourself and not from a persistent background noise that has been directing your steps on how to approach that which is a different system of doing things around, but never less civilized, never less evolutioned, for the dimensions of human understanding are vast.

Regards from Santiago de Chile, Germán —Preceding unsigned comment added by Germanicus24 (talk • contribs) 06:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It is painfully easy to show that a variety of things are now forbidden in Iran which were perfectly allowed under the Shah. That the Iranian people is subject of a variety of interdictions and obligations introduced by the present regime on no other grounds than supposed "morality" is a matter of no debate.
As for the elections, you are displaying a great naivety if you believe that holding elections is in itself sufficient to put the people in power. The Soviet Union, the Communist Party of China, present Iraq, etc. do hold elections ; the question is whether the election is held freely, whether people are properly informed, and whether the outcome of the election reflects the ballots.
Incidentally, this article is about Marjane Satrapi, not the regime in Iran nor the entirety of the Middle East. Rama 13:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


Dear Rama,

Your first parragraph shows you didnt even read what I wrote: does caring to take a look at the situation from another perspective means nothing to you? What is forbidden in Iran? To listen to music. Yet everyone knows everyone listens to music and no one is persecuted for it. It is also forbidden to watch certain TV stations. Yet everyone knows everyone watches satellite TV and no one is persecuted for it.

Cant you understand that laws that are easily bypassed are the moral recommendations? The Iranian government doesnt care what you do behind closed doors, and everyone is perfectly fine with that.

What was forbidden under the Shah? To associate in religious political parties? And the consequence? Death. That simple. Do you just defend the Shah because you love the French regime which elected a racist president who isnt even French but someone full of hatred and who has -even according to Le Figaro- served the Israeli Mossad?

Iranian elections have not been questioned by anyone officialy, only by people like you who just take the picture of Iran being a rogue state and feel great with it. Is it painfully easy to prove Iranian elections are not free? I dont think so, and 70 million Iranians are being insulted by your irresponsible remarks. You are displaying your naivety being pleased with the media telling you Iran is evil, arent you?

Incidently, my remarks which were all taken out and regarded POV, aggressive and whatsoever, were all about Marjane Satrapi. If this article explains her childhood (context) saying she supposedly witnesses a growing oppression in Iran, how is it irrelevant to explain her family belonged to the Tudeh party and profited from the Shah's bloody dictatorship? Doesnt that actually explain why he regards Iran as evil and just like you has created an evil picture of Iran unlike 70 million Iranians living there who you can and should visit on your free time to check for yourself? If one has to explain how the movie Persepolis has achieved momentum lately, do you really believe it is absolutely independent of a campaign of portraying Iran as evil?

Furthermore, if I ask you not to call Iran a regime, and you insist in calling it a regime (while not answering me why you do it and why you dont call France a regime), arent you simply being against taking an independent stand in the global issue of the lack of dialogue between world nations? If me saying Iran is a government bothers you so much, arent you really having a huge issue to get solved for you to understand in which planet you're living in?

I have seen you have this big interest for gays Rama, and you probably believe gays are persecuted and killed in Iran just because they are gay, and all of this plays a major role in the easy way in which you fell for Iran being evil. But not even that is true, and the EU has researched on it according to the Spanish journal El País, never finding a single evidence supporting the claim that Iran persecutes gays. If your media tells you that those executed ones, instead of being terrorist or absolutely veiled the whole story behind were innocent gays, and you willingly believe it, should you even be moderating anyone in Wikipedia which intends to be a result of free thinking?

Cant you see the movie goes, Iran is evil (turned down as an excuse to attack Iran), then Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map (turned down again as they never even said that), then Iran wants nukes to wipe Israel and the whole infidel world off the map (once more turned down because the IAEA didnt find a single trace of a weaponization programme and the UN unanimously passed on a worldwide nuclear disarment authored by an Iran whose leaders dont believe in nuclear bombs and forbid them), then Iran supports militias in Iraq (turned down again as no one ever presented a single proof while the West does indeed supports the PKK against Iraq and Turkey to murder civilians in the borders of Kurdistan). You are still struggling with that which they first tried to use as an excuse to sanction and make interventions in Iran, but nothing you say has ever been proven, and has nothing to do with how Iran is working not for you, but in Iran and for Iranians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Germanicus24 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

For one more time, this is not the place to discuss Iran, but improvements to the article about Marjane Satrapi, a French citizen and national. Your discourse is irrelevant.
Also I'd appreciate that you'd refrain from telling factual stupidities (like denying Sarkozy's French nationality) and making wild guesses about my personal beliefs; I am not calling you a gay-murdering illiterate oaf because you try to defend Ahmadinejad's regime, am I ? Rama 22:20, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


Dear Germanicus24, As an Iranian that has lived in Tehran all my life, and who's family has never been connected to politics, I can tell you that you don't speak for the millions of Iranians that live here (here being Spain on vacation, where I can get news on my country, because most of the time things like the Internet are restricted). Please don't think you speak for them, that you can somehow link them to Iraqis (hey! We aren't arabs!), or that my choice to worship God is somehow secondary to the Iranian REGIME (it's a regime when it has no voice of the people) placing Islamic restrictions on my life. Stop with youre conspiracy theories about Marjane and go read a book (if you can; most Iranians can't get unbiased information anymore).

Thank you, Sanaam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.6.219.103 (talk) 00:02, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

In [5] for instance, Satrapi alludes to the fact that she acquired the French nationality:

Son rapport à la France et aux Français
Marjane Satrapi s’est installée en France en 1994, à l’âge de 25 ans. « J’ai été très bien accueillie et je n’oublierai jamais que j’ai été naturalisée grâce à Jack Lang. »

I don't know how [6] is relevant on this, her nationality is not alluded to. It just says "Satrapi was born in 1969 in Iran", which says absolutely nothing about her nationality (based on this, she might actually never have been an Iranian national, for what we know). Rama (talk) 11:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you read this? [7] MURGH disc. 12:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Murgh is correct. There is no need for an icon.--Knulclunk (talk) 12:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I have no problem with not having a flag (much to the contrary). But I really want correct information to be displayed.
MURGH, what are you thinking of with regard to the link you provide ? Rama (talk) 12:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
That she states in a section titled 'Une perse en France': "Je suis Iranienne. Peut-être un jour aurais-je la double nationalité." MURGH disc. 15:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Correct, and this dates from 2002. She seems to have been naturalised in 2006.
What this tells us is that she probably did not renounce her Iranian nationality, and he now a bi-national (French and also Iranian); but it's not a firm source, only a conjecture. Rama (talk) 16:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not on board concluding Nationality:French -full stop from the lesechos.fr source, but would prefer to follow this source.[8] MURGH disc. 18:32, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I have never said that I had any element suggesting that Satrapi has only the French nationality. Only that I have very good reasons to believe that she has the French nationality, nonwithstanding others. And I am just taken aback that her French nationality was removed from the article with the argument that naturalisation be irrelevant to nationality [9]. Also, Les Echos say that she was naturalised, not that she is French single-national. That she is also an Iranian national is just left aside.
Besides, congratulation on finding a sourced to confirm the obvious (or very likely at least).
And I'm so jealous of the guy who took this photograph... I wish I could have such conditions more often. Rama (talk) 21:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Cool. Hopefully this is satisfying for everyone. MURGH disc. 22:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Names

How is her name pronounced?76.189.112.51 (talk) 00:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Marge-an Sa-tra-pea. Rama (talk) 07:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, fair try, though she might not recognize her name if you tried to pronounce it based on that!
Here’s her name in Persian: مرجان ساتراپی
A phonetic transliteration in roman characters, based on English consonant and vowel sounds, is:
mar-DJAAN saa-traa-PI
caps = stressed syllable
a = short a, as in cat
aa = long a, as in tar
dj = hard j, as in jam
i = long i, as in tee
In “mar”, the first syllable, the “r” is pronounced, though not rolled, like the first syllable of marriage.
Nb: “mar”, with short a, must be pronounced as in marriage and not as in the Italian name “Mario” or her first name means “dear snake”!
Marjan is a name of Arabic origin meaning coral. The final “e” in the French transliteration is silent.
Satrapi is a name formed from “satrap”, the ancient Greek form of Old Persian (and Sanskrit) words for regional viceroys or governors in the Achaemenid empire.
Audio examples:
Behnud Mokri of VOA says her name very clearly and correctly at 0:04-0.05 in this discussion of her film “Poulet aux prunes” (2011). Note that he links her first and second names in the formal Persian way with an ezafe (linking “e”) — Marjan-e Satrapi; this e is a linking particle and not part of her first name:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2o1ENcZIYw
Confusingly there are examples where she introduces herself in English or French interviews in a way that’s easy for Europeans to pronounce, e.g. in the first seconds of “I am film”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttHRWxiYU50
She wouldn’t use this pronunciation with other Persians or in Iran! Romillyh (talk) 17:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Picture

Could the main picture be changed to this? http://i33.tinypic.com/ta0pqo.jpg (Gta40 (talk) 06:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC))

Not unless the image to which you link is release under a Free licence. Rama (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Her Religion

I think the article could also show what's her current religious stance. She seems not to be a practising Muslim anymore, but that's all we can guess from the article.85.240.23.218 (talk) 15:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Is that really of much relevance to the article? Besides, she lives in a secular nation where religion would be considered a private matter, I'm unsure whether she really has discussed her religion in the media. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 18:01, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
"She is an Atheist" should be removed from the biography section, as the source cited doesn't say that. The related text says: "When people ask me what is my religion, I say I don’t have any. And some people are shocked. They don’t understand. I say I don’t need it. I respect humanity. That’s my religion." To make the leap that her rejection of religion means she identitfies as Atheist is original research. Especially considering the common argument that Atheism itself is a religion. Air (talk) 01:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

NYT blog

http://satrapi.blogs.nytimes.com/ has a blog that she wrote for the NYT WhisperToMe (talk) 11:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Graphic Novel Section

Adding information about Satrapi's artistic background and how her drawings evolved over time would be interesting. I listened to an NPR interview with her and she described some interesting stories about her artistic endeavors. Grapefr00t (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC).

Outline

Up for review Your instructor has asked me to look at the outlines for changes that you plan to make to this article. It appears that you have yet to create an outline on this talk page, so it's not possible for me to provide feedback. Please bear in mind that I will be happy to help you, but I can't do that if you don't make any effort yourself. Pacing yourself is key to this assignment and since semester is mostly over, you really need to ensure that you're keeping up with project. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

More sources

WhisperToMe (talk) 07:16, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Her claim to be of Qajar descent

I have already heard doubts expressed about her claims by some members of Qajar's descent I know. Nevertheless, things have to be done correctly: first ask for some serious references (here on wikipédia, and not at a private meeting!), and if those are not provided after a reasonable delay, then one can delete the whole claim. For this reason I have reverted the last blanking of this claim. Sapphorain (talk) 08:07, 23 August 2015 (UTC) She never claimed she is descendant of Qajar's, although in reality she is. She is quite distant from her origins. She explained that because Qajar shahs used to have dozens of wives and hundreds of children, majority of Teheran is currently related to Qajar dynasty in some degree. It is quite common in Middle East: current House of Saud has 15'000 members, but only 2'000 of them has some political prominence, rest are just plain commoners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.60.6.163 (talk) 02:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Re: Questions regarding her history/ background

Here is a detailed investigation of Satrapi's claims and the background against which they should be considered: http://www.iran-resist.org/article3811.html

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marjane Satrapi. 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) 20:18, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marjane Satrapi. 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) 22:01, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marjane_Satrapi/Archive_1&oldid=1176081636"