File talk:Astronomers Father and Son Mikhailov.jpg

Not Struve, but Mikhailov

This 1903 photo was published by Marat Balyshev as a photo of astronomers Ludwig Struve (1858-1920) and his son Otto Struve (1897-1963), although the child in the photo looks much younger than 6 years of age.

Lidia Opanasenko, the keeper of Kharkiv museum of astronomy, at Kharkiv observatory (at which Struve worked during the period when the photo was taken) states that her investigations prove that the photo portrays not father and son Struve, but another father and son astronomical dynasty of the same period and from the same observatory, namely Aleksandr Varsonofievich Mikhailov and Vladimir Aleksandrovich Mikhailov. The latter was born in 1901, and thus is approximately 2 years old in the photo.

Marat Balyshev, the author of the original publication, agrees with this amendment, and in his e-mail allowed me to publish on this discussion page the following statement on his behalf:

“	After careful study of a number of documents from the Archive, after their careful attribution, and after discussing them with a wide range of specialists, it turns out that the illustrations presented in documents from the late 19th to early 20th centuries require some adjustments. Thus, some photographs, previously thought to portray the family of Prof. L.O. Struve, in fact portray the family of the astronomer V.A. Mikhailov, in whose personal archive they were found. This particular photo shows A.V. Mikhailov with his son V.A. Mikhailov as a child.	”
—Marat Balyshev

Although it is hard to consider unpublished statements of even renown experts as reliable sources, we must recognize that the attribution of this photo was made by mistake, and almost certainly it does not represent father and son Struve, and thus misinforms our readers. Unfortunately, the photo went viral and got pasted into a dozen Wikipedia articles, as well as other sites. Therefore, I suggest that either the name and the description of the file are changed to refer to Mikhailov, or the file is deleted. I'll also erase the photo from all the Wikipedia articles where it is used in the moment. I think that re-naming of this photo is preferable at least for the reason of Mikhailov being notable by the standards of many Wikipedias (historic figure remembered many years after his death, e.g. publication of the same Marat Balyshev), and thus probable eventual creation of an article about him, where this photo could be used appropriately (hopefully by that moment Balyshev, or Opanasenko, or another specialist in astronomical history of Kharkiv will have published the correct attribution of this photo in a reliable source. Oleksiy.golubov (留言) 10:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)