Talk:Jupiter/Archive 6

Interior structure needs rewrite - Juno data and diffuse core
It's been two years since the Juno mission made its discoveries about the diffuse core. I did a hack job of updating this section, but it really needs to be rewritten by someone who knows their stuff. It's not worthy of an FA as it was and now is. — kwami (talk) 08:21, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Comparing Jupiter interior structure models to Juno gravity measurements and the role of a dilute core may be the JUNO results (from first two perijoves) analysis suggesting, or consistent with, a diffuse core. It says "Our models suggest that a dilute core, expanded through a region 0.3–0.5 times the planet's radius is helpful for fitting the observed J n ." A Nature article Jupiter’s secrets revealed by NASA probe May 2017 reports this as "The core could be both larger and more diffuse than expected, extending out to as much as half of Jupiter’s 70,000-kilometre radius." Seems to justify a note about a suggestion rather than a rewrite. Could look for a secondary source based on an analysis of more JUNO passes. - Rod57 (talk) 07:53, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Has this been addressed ? Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

FA criteria
The article is tagged as needing update, does it still meet FA criteria? I also see MOS issues such as massive image sandwiching. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Looking at this article for WP:URFA/2020 and also for a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Today%27s_featured_article/requests&oldid=993081710#Once_in_800_years_! potential TFA on 2020-12-21]:


 * There is an update tag on the "Internal structure" section
 * There is an update tag on the "Juno mission" section
 * Tagged dated: The temperature at the core boundary is estimated to be 36,000 K (35,700 °C; 64,300 °F) and the interior pressure is roughly 3,000–4,500 GPa.[49][These estimates are out of date]
 * Has the issue in the section just above this one been resolved?
 * There are MOS:SANDWICH and image layout problems everywhere. If knowledgeable editors will delete those that are least useful (decorative), I am willing to go through and improve the layout.  There are considerable images here that are not aiding our understanding of the topic; by reducing those, we can get a better layout on the ones that stay.
 * There are considerable duplicate links. See WP:OVERLINK, but some may be deemed necessary and retained (editor discretion).  Installing this script will add an item to your toolbox that shows duplicate links in red: User:Evad37/duplinks-alt
 * External links probably could benefit from a trim, per WP:ELNO. FAs are supposed to be comprehensive, meaning there should be little in EL that can't be covered in the article.  Ditto for Further reading ... are they all necessary?  Do they add something to the article that we can't cover in a comprehensive article?
 * Does See also need trimming? That is, why aren't those worked in to the article (in instances where they can be)?
 * The "Impacts" section has a plethora of issues. WP:PROSELINE (rewrite it as prose), and MOS:CURRENT. WP:TRIVIA ???
 * It is easy to spot sporadic, uncited text. Samples in the "Moons" and "Interaction with the Solar System" sections.  The entire article should be scanned for uncited or outdated text.
 * The "Mythology" section looks like a collection of stuffy, one-sentence paragraph trivia; should be rationalized to paragraphs.
 * Keep an eye out for WP:CITATION OVERKILL and remove the unnecessary, sample, Interactions between charged particles generated from Io and the planet's strong magnetic field likely resulted in redistribution of heat flow, forming the Spot.[87][88][89][90]

Done for now, Sandy Georgia (Talk)  19:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Should Jumping-Jupiter scenario be linked from this article?
It seems to have been linked in the past but demoted to a hidden comment as it lacked a citation. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Abundances of heavier inert gases in Jupiter's atmosphere?
Article has hidden comment "Abundances of heavier inert gases in Jupiter's atmosphere are about two to three times that of the Sun." Any thoughts? Chidgk1 (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure. LittleJerry (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

How fast is Jupiter shrinking?
I am not an expert but if I understand right you agree that Jupiter is shrinking and the discussion is just about how quickly it is shrinking? So I thought it would be best to remove the rate from the article until it can be resolved here on the talk page. So I am copying your discussion below.

Chidgk1 (talk) 18:37, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Article originally said "This additional heat is generated by the Kelvin–Helmholtz mechanism through contraction. This process causes Jupiter to shrink by about 2 cm each year. When it was first formed, Jupiter was much hotter and was about twice its current diameter. "

Christophe1946 commented:

This value of 2 cm/year seems much too high, because it would correspond to a flux of internal heat of ~150 W/m2, also a too high figure, whereas this effective flux is 20 times weaker, ~7.5 W/m2, what is compatible with an annual shrinking of only ~1 mm, a figure precisely given by Patrick Irwin in the second edition of his book ; citation, p. 4 : "the radius of Jupiter is estimated to be currently shrinking by approximately 1 mm/yr". A new figure for the internal flux of 7.485 ± 0.163 W/m2 is given by Liming Li et al. in their article. In this way they correct the old classical figure of 5.444 ± 0.425 W/m2 and also the figure of the Bond albedo of Jupiter with 0.503 ± 0.012 instead of the classical figure of 0.343 ± 0.032; all these new figures are resulting from the measurements made by the Cassini probe.

and also:

You can read the book by Patrick Irwin. On page 4 of its second edition (2009) it is clearly given 1 mm/yr and not 2 cm/year. From where is coming this last wrong figure, I don't know.

His value of 1 mm is corroborated by the paper by Liming Li et al. of 2018 giving an experimental flux of internal heat of 7.485 W/m^2 as measured on place by the Cassini probe. This correct reference to this paper is already given as n° 12, attesting the new figure, in the box, for the Bond albedo of 0.503 !

You can easy calculate yourself the effect and can get the observed figure of 1 mm/yr related to 7.5 W/m^2 with the derivative with respect to t of the formula giving the total gravitational energy of Jupiter (see here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin%E2%80%93Helmholtz_mechanism) :

U = (3/10)G M^2/R = 1.03 10^36 J,

i.e. dU/dt = -(3/10)G M^2/R^2 dR/dt = -1.46 10^28 dR/dt.

Introducing dR/dt = -1 mm/yr = -0.001 m/yr = -3.17 10^-11 m/s, you get dU/dt = 4.64 10^17 W.

Dividing by the whole area of Jupiter 6.14 10^16 m^2 you get 7.55 W/m^2.

Are you now convinced ?

If you introduce 2 cm/yr instead of 1 mm/yr, you'll get 150 W/m^2, clearly a much too high figure.
 * I agree that Jupiter is shrinking by 1 mm/yr, I just think the section needs to be hidden until it can be cleaned up. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The 2018 paper is open access so it would have been nice to have cited that - but I did not spot the shrinkage itself in there. Did I miss it? If not I guess it would be best to cite Irwin? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Here again are the two cited sources, on one side, the second edition of the book by Patrick Irwin from which a give a citation: "the radius of Jupiter is estimated to be currently shrinking by approximately 1 mm/yr"; and, on the other side, the article by Liming Li et al. giving the corresponding figure of 7.485 W/m^2. --Christophe1946 (talk) 15:39, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Done. Thanks for clarifying

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2021
How long is a day in Jupiter? 0d 9h 56m How long is Jupiter's year? 12 years How long does it take for the Sun's light to reach Jupiter? about 43 minutes What is the surface temperature like in Jupiter? With an average temperature of minus 234 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 145 degrees Celsius), Jupiter is frigid even in its warmest weather How many moons does Jupiter have? Jupiter has 79 confirmed moons orbiting it. The four most famous moons, the Galilean Moons, are among the biggest moons in the Solar System. Moons here are very different from Earthś Pick two moons and describe the differences.79 and more moons

About your space probe: i. How long did your space probe take to get to Jupiter? 5 years

ii. What five instruments (there are more than five ) did it have on the space probe? A gravity/radio science system (Gravity Science) A six-wavelength microwave radiometer for atmospheric sounding and composition (MWR) A vector magnetometer (MAG) Plasma and energetic particle detectors (JADE and JEDI) A radio/plasma wave experiment (Waves) An ultraviolet imager/spectrometer (UVS)

iii. What is the purpose of each of these five instruments? Gravity science Monitors gravity in Jupiter Juno Microwave Radiometer investigates the deep atmosphere of Jupiter. Magnetic Field Experiment to understand the origin and evolution of Jupiter. Underneath its dense cloud cover JEDI (Jupiter Energetic-particle Detector Instrument) JADE (Jovian Auroral Distributions Experiment) Waves Waves is an experiment on the Juno spacecraft to study radio and plasma waves. ... The Waves instrument is designed to help understand the interaction between Jupiter's atmosphere, its magnetic field, its magnetosphere, and to understand Jupiter's auroras. UVR Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is defined as the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum between 100 nanometers (nm) and 400nm.

Name at least three discoveries this space probe made. Juno has revealed the chaotic beauty of Jupiter's stormy cloud tops. ... Jupiter's invisible Great Blue Spot is a concentration of magnetic field lines that appears to shift over time. ... Earth isn't the only planet with aurora. ... Jupiter's polar orbit has enabled it to capture images of the gas giant from a unique perspective.

What part of the electromagnetic spectrum does this space probe use? The Waves instrument is designed to help understand the interaction between Jupiter's atmosphere, its magnetic field, its magnetosphere, and to understand Jupiter's auroras. It is designed to detect radio frequencies from 50 Hz up to 40,000,000 Hz (40 MHz), and magnetic fields from 50 Hz to 20,000 Hz (20 kHz).

Radio waves travel at the speed of light. How long does it take to send or receive a message from the space probe?(Another way to think about it - How long does it take information traveling the speed of light to travel the distance between Earth and the space probe?) The spacecraft will travel so far from Earth, it can't be steered in real-time by mission controllers. A signal sent from Earth would take about 45 minutes to reach Jupiter, and it would take another 45 minutes to receive the spacecraft's reply.

Where is the located in our solar system? Position in the Solar System - Jupiter. In the Solar System Jupiter is positioned as the fifth closest to the sun whereas Earth is the third closest to the sun. The average distance from Jupiter to the Sun is 778,330,000 kilometers. The difference between Earth's distance to the Sun and Jupiter's distance is 628,730,000 kilometers. Where is it located in our solar system? Jupiter is the fifth planet from the Sun and the largest in the Solar System How far away is it? 588 million kilometers Any special features of this location? Jupiter Is The Fastest Spinning Planet In The Solar System The Clouds On Jupiter Are Only 50 km Thick: ... The Great Red Spot Has Been Around For A Long Time: … 150 years. Jupiter Has Rings: ... Jupiter's Magnetic Field Is 14 Times Stronger Than Earth's: ... Jupiter Has 67 Moons: How long will it take to get there? The distance between Earth and Jupiter depends on the orbits of each planet but can reach more than 600 million miles. Depending on what the missions do and where they go, it can take around two years to six years to reach Jupiter. How long does it take to communicate with it? 33 - 53 minutes

How does distance impact what instruments you will put on the space probe? Because what you do will impact the whole thing so if you put space in between the parts you are putting space where things should go. Why did you choose this location? We chose this location because Jupiter has lots of interesting facts about it and the probe looked cool. What instruments did you decide to put on your probe? Solar arrays, Gravity Science, Waves What is the purpose of each of these instruments? Gravity science is a monitors gravity in Jupiter A solar array is a collection of multiple solar panels that generate electricity as a system WAVES-Waves is an experiment on the Juno spacecraft to study radio and plasma waves

Based on the purpose of your instruments what could they possibly discover? The purpose of the probe is to find, gravitational field, magnetic field, and polar magnetosphere. NASA's Juno mission has provided its first science results on the amount of water in Jupiter's atmosphere. Published recently in the journal Nature Astronomy, the Juno results estimate that at the equator, water makes up about 0.25% of the molecules in Jupiter's atmosphere — almost three times that of the Sun

How did the destination in space impact what instruments you wanted your space probe to have? Because Jupiter is very cold and you would have to use — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:3341:1810:2163:2515:95EB:9739 (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

First photographs of Jupiter
I'd like to add a paragraph in the "Ground based telescope research" section on the first photograph of Jupiter, taken by G P Bond on 22 March 1851, which revealed that Jupiter was much brighter than expected and could be emitting its own light, and the first detailed photograph of another planet, taken by Andrew Ainslie Common on 3 September 1879. I can't do this yet as I have only just created my account. References http://www.gutenberg.org/files/28247/28247-h/28247-h.htm#Page_407 https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/301575.pdf (page 563 & Figure 4) The Common photograph is sometimes miscredited to Clerke. RobertMcLachlan (talk) 05:35, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Jupiter's Age
Jupiter's age is estimated to be 632-731 million years old, according to its D/H ratios. https://vixra.org/pdf/1905.0467v1.pdfAirpeka (talk) 12:56, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * That young, huh? Interesting. However, it lacks any citations and appears mistaken in its conclusion. Praemonitus (talk) 14:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Surface pressure?
I'm unclear why this information is included into the infobox. The pressures listed are in the cloud deck at arbitrary altitudes and tell the reader essentially nothing. I'd like to instead suggest we use the values from this reference: This gives the levels of significant visual cloud opacity as 2–6 bars (200–600 kPa); essentially the viewing "surface" from our perspective. Praemonitus (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As there was no comment, I was WP:BOLD and implemented this. Praemonitus (talk) 14:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Interior structure needs rewrite - Juno data and diffuse core - Copied from archive 6, to answer
It's been two years since the Juno mission made its discoveries about the diffuse core. I did a hack job of updating this section, but it really needs to be rewritten by someone who knows their stuff. It's not worthy of an FA as it was and now is. — kwami (talk) 08:21, 20 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Comparing Jupiter interior structure models to Juno gravity measurements and the role of a dilute core may be the JUNO results (from first two perijoves) analysis suggesting, or consistent with, a diffuse core. It says "Our models suggest that a dilute core, expanded through a region 0.3–0.5 times the planet's radius is helpful for fitting the observed J n ." A Nature article Jupiter’s secrets revealed by NASA probe May 2017 reports this as "The core could be both larger and more diffuse than expected, extending out to as much as half of Jupiter’s 70,000-kilometre radius." Seems to justify a note about a suggestion rather than a rewrite. Could look for a secondary source based on an analysis of more JUNO passes. - Rod57 (talk) 07:53, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Has this been addressed ? Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)


 * It now says ""it found that Jupiter has a very diffuse core that mixes into its mantle.[55] A possible cause is an impact from a planet of about ten Earth masses a few million years after Jupiter's formation, which would have disrupted an originally solid Jovian core.[56][57] It is estimated that the core is 30–50% of the planet's radius, and contains heavy elements 7–25 times the mass of Earth.[58]"


 * Which seems ok at first sight. - Rod57 (talk) 12:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Helium rain experiment draft
Just for any editors who pass this, I started a draft (Draft:Helium rain experiments) based on some experiments that showed the possibility of "helium rain" inside gas giants. Elijahandskip (talk) 20:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2021
I think Jupiter now has 80 known moons, according to the Moons of Jupiter Wikipedia article 2A02:C7F:BEA4:DD00:470:E53A:9207:60E1 (talk) 15:05, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Gallery
The first image on the left has the caption: "The tempestuous atmosphere of Jupiter, captured by the Wide Field Camera 3 on the Hubble Space Telescope in infrared." This is incorrect! The image on Commons states: "This infrared view of Jupiter was created from data captured on 11 January 2017 with the Near-InfraRed Imager (NIRI) instrument at Gemini North in Hawaiʻi, the northern member of the international Gemini Observatory, a Program of NSF’s NOIRLab. It is actually a mosaic of individual frames that were combined to produce a global portrait of the planet. In the image warmer areas appear bright, including four large hot spots that appear in a row just north of the equator. South of the equator, the oval-shaped and cloud-covered Great Red Spot appears dark." --Marshallsumter (talk) 00:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Two gas giants, not four
Under "Physical characteristics" header, first sentence says Jupiter is one of the *four* gas giants. According to the page on gas giants, Jupiter and Saturn are the only two gas giants. Uranus and Neptune are now referred to as ice giants.

Propose changing "four" to "two." 2603:7080:F207:F422:101F:85AE:F8D8:B8A3 (talk) 11:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Corrected. Ruslik_ Zero 20:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Visibility of the Great Red Spot through Earth-based telescopes
I cannot edit the article, so I post it here. In the article someone wrote “The storm is visible through Earth-based telescopes with an aperture of 12 cm or larger.”, citing Covington, Michael A. (2002), Celestial Objects for Modern Telescopes, Cambridge University Press, p. 53, ISBN 978-0-521-52419-3. That is not what the book says on page 53: “[…] a [12-cm] or larger telescope reveals a wealth of detail.” In fact, I think I have seen the spot through a Newtonian telescope with an aperture smaller than 120mm. That was last year, so I am not absolutely sure any more, but either way the book is being quoted wrongly. --Saiphhares (talk) 12:57, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 25 minutes ago (20:25 UTC), I saw the GRS through a slightly smaller telescope, with an aperture of 114mm, at magnifications of ~43×, 90× and 180×. --Saiphhares (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

ಭಾರತೀಯರು ಇಂದ್ರ ಎಂದು ಕರೆಯಲ್ಪಡುವ ಗ್ರಹ
ಭಾರತೀಯರು ಇಂದ್ರ ಎಂದು ಕರೆಯಲ್ಪಡುವ ಗ್ರಹ 2401:4900:4BD4:88B2:1:0:885F:A01B (talk) 13:10, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * That may be useful information for the Kannada Wikipedia article kn:ಗುರು_(ಗ್ರಹ), but we only need the English name here. Certes (talk) 14:10, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2022
Paragraph 1, sentence 3. Change "and it has been observed it since prehistoric times" to "and it has been observed since prehistoric times." HOptimas (talk) 17:21, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ SPF121188  (talk this way) (contribs) 17:28, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

== The outer atmosphere is visibly segregated into several bands at different latitudes, with turbulence and storms along their interacting boundaries. A prominent result of this is the Great Red Spot, a giant storm known to have existed since at least the 17th century when telescopes first saw it. ==

"A prominent result of this is the Great Red Spot, a giant storm known to have existed since at least the 17th century when telescopes first saw it."

It is not known that the Great Red spot has existed since the 17th century since there is long gap until its next observance in 1830. The wiki page on the Great Red Spot has this correctly stated: The Great Red Spot may have existed since before 1665, but it could also be the case that the present spot was first seen only in 1830, and well-studied only after a prominent apparition in 1879. The storm that was seen in the 17th century may have been different than the storm that exists today.[4] A long gap separates its period of current study after 1830 from its 17th century discovery. Whether the original spot dissipated and reformed, whether it faded, or if the observational record was simply poor is unknown.[5]

Suggest changing wording to convey that it may have existed since the 17th century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:A7E0:3C40:245F:7F0C:1378:343D (talk) 09:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I updated the text. Praemonitus (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Max atmospheric temperature
In the infobox, the maximum temperature at 0.1 bar was listed as $~1,000 K$. This is a valid temperature, but it doesn't appear to occur at the 0.1 bar altitude. Praemonitus (talk) 16:14, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Jupiter masses and fusion
I removed the following statement because it appears false. A quick check shows that there are very low mass star evolutionary models with a radius smaller than $0.1 solar mass$, which is a Jupiter radius.


 * Although Jupiter would need to be about 75 times more massive to fuse hydrogen and become a star, the smallest red dwarf is only about 30 percent larger in radius than Jupiter.

Burrows et al (2001) give values of around 0.07– for hydrogen fusion with solar abundances, which is 73–$77 solar mass$, so that part is okay.

The star EBLM J0555–57Ab though is only slightly larger than Saturn.

Okay, that should be enough for a rewrite... done. Praemonitus (talk) 17:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Finding a "Saturn-size low-mass star at the hydrogen-burning limit" is just, well, cool. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 04:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 201 Thu

 * Please note that the article is currently undergoing a good article review, so it will be subject to change in order to satisfy the issues. This might not be the best time for major edits. Praemonitus (talk) 14:34, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Deepest atmosphere?
The article contained the following statement that was not confirmed by the references:


 * Jupiter has the deepest planetary atmosphere in the Solar System, spanning over 5000 km in altitude.

Is it the deepest? Intuitively one might think so, but this is not necessarily true. I could not locate a reliable source for the assertion, so for now I modified it to match what can be confirmed. Praemonitus (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

The Aphelion and Perihelion are incorrect
The page list AU and Gm for these categories. Gm is 1 billion meters. Mm is 1 million meters. Saturn is correct at just over 1 Gm (1,000 million meters) for its Aphelion and Perihelion, but Jupiter states it is incorrectly at 816 Gm for its Aphelion and 740 Gm for its Perihelion, which is quite a bit off. 2600:1005:B0F0:4BB8:C5F6:566:C83:2148 (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The source used in the article says those figures at 816.3 and 740.5 Gm. Not all planets have a near circular orbit like us so those figures are likely to be right for Jupiter. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 20:01, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Jupiter's numbers are good. Saturn has aphelion at 10.0 AU which is notably more than 1 billion km. -- Kheider (talk) 12:33, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A Gm is a million km. Per the Jupiter Fact Sheet source, Jupiter has a semi-major axis of 816.363 × 106 km, or 816.363 Gm. Praemonitus (talk) 15:24, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2022
In Vedic astrology, Hindu astrologers named the planet after Brihaspati, the religious teacher of the gods, and often called it "Guru", which literally means the "Heavy One".[233] 86.10.33.74 (talk) 21:31, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

"Guru" which literally means "the teacher" Jupiter is 1,000 times larger in mass than Earth. We should understand each other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.102.139 (talk) 06:56, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Updated. Praemonitus (talk) 13:43, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Speculation about life in Jupiter's clouds
Carl Sagan article mentions that he speculated about life in Jupiter's clouds with Edwin E. Salpeter (in section "Scientific achievements"), with a link to this article. However it seems this text disappeared. Nothing either in Atmosphere of Jupiter. Any idea? Yann (talk) 14:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It's briefly mentioned at Atmosphere of Jupiter. Praemonitus (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

https://www.thecut.com/article/what-is-jupiter-retrograde.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.102.173 (talk) 07:12, 3 August 2022 (UTC) https://www.space.com/jupiter-mesmerizing-storms-north-pole-juno-images — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.83.102.173 (talk) 07:15, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2023
The age is unknown. 216.249.88.28 (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

rotation rate
I remember reading as a wee lad that Jupiter rotates in less than six hours (with the comment, perhaps in one of Asimov's magazine essays, "no wonder its equator bulges"). Here we say ten hours (similar to Saturn). Is my memory that bad? Has something been redefined? —Tamfang (talk) 02:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

The discovery of Jupiter's belts
Please, can someone look at this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Soldan~itwiki#c-331dot-20230428153000-Soldan~itwiki-20230428145300

Thank you

Soldan Soldan~itwiki (talk) 07:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

The question of eccentricity dampening
I don't see any discussion of eccentricity and inclination dampening of Jupiter while it was forming (and migrating). In contrast we know of a number of Jupiter-mass exoplanets that have much higher eccentricities. I think an explanation is needed for the low eccentricity in the Formation and Migration section. Thanks. Praemonitus (talk) 02:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
 * added.  Serendi pod ous  18:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 17:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Referencing
and, you two are the most active editors here. The article is GA but there are still some unreferenced sentences here and there at the end of paragraphs (possibly within them too). Is a quick fix possible? Cheers - Wretchskull (talk) 10:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could apply cn tags (with the date option) where you think it is lacking? I'm not seeing any of those right now and the article looks fairly extensively cited already. Thanks. Praemonitus (talk) 17:42, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Most of them have been amended by Serendipodous, but I've added two that remain. Wretchskull (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Added.  Serendi pod ous  08:35, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 13:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 August 2023
In the "Composition" section, under "Physical Characteristics", change "...silicon-based compoundsm as..." to "...silicon-based compounds, as..." Omalley10 (talk) 16:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  16:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

OK, so what's needed for the FA re-promotion?
I don't want to start the FA and suddenly find out the fan belt's missing from the engine.  Serendi pod ous  16:41, 19 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The reasons for it are in Featured article review/Jupiter/archive1. Cambalachero (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Comments: There are some errors in the References list. The lead doesn't mention the formation of the planet, its orbital period or orbital resonance with Saturn, the internal structure, or interaction with the Solar System. The section on "Space-based telescope research" tells me absolutely nothing of value. That should be tossed, or expanded. Praemonitus (talk) 22:08, 18 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Most issues resolved. As for formation in the lede, well if we did that for Jupiter we'd have to do that for all the other planets as well.  Serendi pod ous  22:55, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The lead is supposed to summarize the article, and the formation section isn't covered. In addition, the formation of Jupiter shaped the remainder of the system, so it's an important point. If nothing else, it should at least discuss what impact the migration had. Praemonitus (talk) 00:32, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've tried to address my concerns without making significant changes or requiring revisions to the other planet articles. Praemonitus (talk) 16:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Typo under Orbit and Rotation Section
In the sentence, "This low eccentricity is at odds with exoplanet discoveries, which have revealed Juiter-sized planets with very high eccentricities."

"Juiter-sized" should be corrected to "Jupiter-sized" AtheyMoira (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅. Thanks for pointing out the error, . Cullen328 (talk) 22:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Namesake
It seems very odd to say that Thursday is a namesake of Thor. For sure, the name of the day is related to the name of the god, but is it a namesake? To be honest, I don't know, but it's jarring, and throws you off following the main sense of what's written. Dominic Cronin (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * A 'name derived from Thor' perhaps? Praemonitus (talk) 01:19, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"Jupiter." listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jupiter.&redirect=no Jupiter.] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Gonnym (talk) 12:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Jupiter diameter
several other credible websites list Jupiter diameter as 142984 km, far more than this Wikipedia artlcal 152.117.114.38 (talk) 00:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What you have listed there is the equatorial diameter. Divide that by two to get 71,492 km, the equatorial radius, which is the amount listed in the article. Praemonitus (talk) 04:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * you are correct; the small value that I had seen was in one of the early paragraphs, but I can't find it now. Should have taken a screen shot... 152.117.114.38 (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Image
Would we not want an image that actually displays the Great Red Spot clearly? 2A02:C7C:DD25:6900:D9D2:CD36:939F:52DA (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Displaying iconic features is not necessarily a priority for infobox images. ArkHyena (talk) 23:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * That’s exactly what the image is doing, albeit very poorly. 2A02:C7C:DD25:6900:D8BD:274F:37C2:20CE (talk) 18:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, and replacing an image solely to show an iconic feature more prominently isn't a very strong justification to change the infobox image, especially over other factors such as image quality and color. ArkHyena (talk) 00:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Abnormality
It's abnormal that Jupiter, with its diverse array of characteristics, has not yet attained the status of a featured article. Bennett1203 (talk) 01:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * It has achieved the status of featured article, but was subsequently WP:FARC-ed. I suggest reading the review from the last FAC review for suggestions on how to improve it. Praemonitus (talk) 02:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)