text:
Shigesato Itoi

Shigesato Itoi (糸井 重里) is a Japanese copywriter, essayist, lyricist, game designer, and actor. Itoi is the editor-in-chief of his website and company Hobo Nikkan Itoi Shinbun ("Almost Daily Itoi Newspaper"). He is best known outside Japan for his work on Nintendo's Mother/EarthBound series of games, as well as his self-titled bass fishing video game.

Writing
During the 1980s Itoi established the profession of writing copy for advertisements among the general public in Japan. In 1981, he co-authored a collection of short stories titled Yume de Aimashou ("Let's meet in a dream") with writer Haruki Murakami. Later Itoi branched into writing essays, lyrics, and designing video games. He is best known outside of Japan for Nintendo's EarthBound, released in 1994 in Japan (as Mother 2: Giygas Strikes Back) and in 1995 in North America.

In 1997, Itoi began using the Internet and bought his first Macintosh. In 1998 he started the website and company Hobo Nikkan Itoi Shinbun ("Almost Daily Itoi Newspaper"), which is the center of his activity today. Under the theme of "creating good mood", the website has been updated every day for the past 15 years, with Itoi's essays on lifestyle, interviews and articles, and merchandise sales. He talks about his pet dogs and his interviews with artists, craftsmen, businessmen, etc., which tend to center on philosophical issues. Itoi has co-written several books modeled on these interviews, in which he has a series of long conversations with, for example, an expert on neurology Yūji Ikegaya, about how to live as a human being in the world. Books collecting Itoi's past essays written on the site's front page are also available for purchase.

Filmography
Itoi has voiced Satsuki's father, Tatsuo Kusakabe, in the original Japanese version of the 1988 Studio Ghibli film My Neighbor Totoro. He has been a judge on several episodes of the Japanese television shows Iron Chef and Hey! Spring of Trivia. He made his live-action acting debut in 2010, when he played the role of a professor in the film adaptation of Haruki Murakami's Norwegian Wood.

Video games
Itoi established the company Ape, Inc. as a venue for external developers to help make games for Nintendo. He was the creator of the Mother series. In the original Mother for the Famicom, he was lead designer, writer and director; on EarthBound for the SNES, Itoi was producer, director and writer while in Mother 3 for Game Boy Advance, Itoi was the writer of the story. Itoi was involved in the pet simulator video game Cabbage, which was canceled after years in development hell.

Itoi claims that the final battle of EarthBound with Giygas was inspired from his accidental childhood viewing of the Shintoho film titled The Military Policeman and the Dismembered Beauty. Specifically, the scene that inspired the battle was a scene depicting a woman being murdered, which he mistook for rape.

Itoi has said that he would not be involved in a fourth title of the series. Itoi's works have had an impact on other games and other media, including Undertale, and others.

Other ventures
Shigesato Itoi worked with Nintendo to design video game-themed haramaki.

Itoi is an avid Monopoly player and is President of the Japan Monopoly Association (日本モノポリー協会). He also competed in the 1992 Monopoly World Championships and placed eighth. Itoi's video game development company Ape, Inc. developed two Monopoly games for the Super Famicom, with Itoi serving as producer. These versions of Monopoly were not released outside of Japan and featured a more role-playing experience.

Itoi launched a photo creation tool called "Dokonoko", which is designed specifically to be used with pets. It has been described as an "Instagram for pets". Dokonoko is most famous for a particular Japanese Labrador Retriever named Corky, who made front line news because of the abnormal length of her tongue.

Personal life
Itoi was born on November 10, 1948, and raised in Maebashi, Gunma. He was a heavy smoker until he quit in 2002. Itoi has been married to actress Kanako Higuchi since 1993. In a 2019 interview, he mentioned that he has asthma, which causes him to cough when lying down. He would often play Mario when he was unable to sleep at night due to his asthma, and stated that he felt "indebted to Nintendo" and specifically wanted to work with them on Mother due to this. The protagonist of the game, Ninten, also has asthma, which was one of the first aspects of his character Itoi came up with.

title: Shigesato Itoi


text:
Talk:20th-century music

Title change to 20th-century popular music?
I wonder if we should change title to 20th-century popular music and exclude the classical stuff? An article on 20th-century classical music already exists. Any thoughts? -- Klein zach  04:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Heartily endorse. There is very little in this article on so-called "classical" twentieth-century music anyway, so that the only other alternative would be to beef up that section to redress a severe imbalance, and then create a new article on pop music to balance the present article on "classical".—Jerome Kohl (talk) 05:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I agree with the title change but, as per a comment I made here, I would like to see the classical dropped from both 20th century classical music and contemporary classical music. Measles (talk) 14:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Also endorse the title change, unless there is another article already covering 20th Century Pop Music. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsheehan5 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

 * A lot of water has flowed under the bridge since this issue was last discussed, more than five years ago now. For one thing, this article has accumulated quite a lot of information in the "classical" department. For another, there is the article Popular music, which has also grown and is largely coextensive with 20th-century popular music, since the topic is defined there as beginning only in the 1880s, and not a whole lot has changed yet in the 21st century. But there is another thing here that confuses me. There are actually two conflicting proposals for title changes. Initially, Kleinzach proposed adding the word "popular" to this article, but then Measles recommended dropping "classical" from both "20th century classical music" and "Contemporary classical music". If both these proposals were to be adopted, the current title of this article would become the new title of "20th-century classical music". Wouldn't it be simpler to create a new "20th-century popular music" article (if indeed it could be justified having two differently titled articles covering basically the same subject), splitting off the popular-music material from this article, and then merge the two remaining "classical" articles?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Aglo american centered
There should be more info about other cultures' modern music —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.158.134.49 (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

disco and hip hop
Hip hop sub genres are under disco. This needs to be moved to a seperate section for hip hop which does not exist yet in this article. Akronman27 (talk) 18:20, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * This comment also draws attention to the very lop-sided presentation of the entire popular-music section, which at the moment is reminiscent of the famous Steinberg New Yorker cover, showing 95% of "The United States" east of the Hudson River, and most of what remains as being New Jersey. At the moment, this section is not only heavily biased toward … no, make that entirely concerned with American popular music, but also heavily weighted toward the last quarter of the century, with dozens upon dozens of genres and sub-genres that didn't even exist before 1975. For the first quarter of the century, there is nothing at all, apart from a vague assertion that it extends "at least as far back as the mid-19th century" (which at least puts its beginnings before the focus of this article). I would say that, before sections are separated out for disco and hip-hop, the subdivisions of the popular-music section need to be balanced up across the entire century (for example, a section on popular music before and including the First World War, another for the postwar period through the "Roaring Twenties", another for the Depression era, another for the Second World War, then probably just one each for 1945–1970 and 1970–2000), and attention needs to be given to the popular music of, amongst others, Latin America, the British Isles, Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, Spain, Italy, the Balkans, Africa, India, China, and Japan (and not just the economic "colonization" of those areas after the Second World War). At the same time, it should be kept in mind that this is just a survey article, and there are main articles that do or should go into greater detail. I look forward to seeing soon a list of the sub-genres of ragtime and of tempo-doeloe Kroncong, to help balance up this section of the article.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Whoever wrote the article forgot about metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.95.48.30 (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Order
Can we maby put things into chronological sequence ragtime, jazz, swing, rock and roll, rock, funk, Disco, Pop.--J intela (talk) 16:14, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Why is that better than the present alphabetical (more or less) arrangement? Assuming that it would be preferable, how do we go about establishing a chronological sequence for, say, world music, blues, and country music?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well if its origen is befor the 20th century the we can put it at the top.--J intela (talk) 20:50, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The origin of everything is before the 20th century. We can't put everything at the top. This still doesn't address the question of whether chronological is better than alphabetical—in fact, it only deepens the doubt.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this is not the place to do somthing like this, but we do need some sort of History of popular music that talks about what was popular when, how trends lead into each other.--J intela (talk) 22:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC) sort of like the History of fashion seiries--J intela (talk) 22:02, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Shortened footnote template
A recent edit seemed to object to my use of the shortened footnote template: Template:Sfn. Could you please explain the objection, if there is one? If there is none, I might add some to the article. DougHill (talk) 01:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

 * That would have been my edit. The problem is that it introduced a conflicting reference format. There were two ways of resolving this problem: change the formats of all the existing references, or reject the sfn template. I chose the easy way. If the objective is to create links from the inline references to the alphabetical list or sources, there are a number of other options. Frankly, shortened footnotes are the clumsiest available option, since they force the use of three-point links (inline citation to footnote to source list). Let us start with what it is you want to accomplish, and then we can talk about the available options.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 02:17, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

 * I'd recommend using the sfn template, along with template:cite web with the |ref=harv setting there. We'd still have a 3-point link, but then the middle link would be hyperlinked.  (This is a webpage, after all.)  But you don't want to do all of these at once and neither do I.  I'd say to make this change gradually as the page is edited.  But I will defer if you just want to leave the reference format in its present form. DougHill (talk) 23:09, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

 * What advantage does this offer over template:wikicite in the list of references, coupled to template:harvnb in the inline refs? This permits keeping the reference formats as they are, as well as accommodating sources other than web pages (dictionaries, encyclopedias, newspaper article not published online, etc.). This does not solve the problem with three-point links, either, but that is no worse than using the sfn template, which requires a selection of citation templates that in turn force changes on the citation style. Another option (though somewhat more complicated to edit) is to use template:anchor together with links in the list of references, which has the additional advantage of providing a return link—though in this case that return would only reach the footnote, not go back to the point in the text from which the reader departed to check the source. As far as I can tell, to accomplish the latter it would be necessary to change footnotes to parenthetical referencing, which would also reduce the three-point links to just two-point ones.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 00:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

 * These all seem more complicated and less standard than using template:sfn with template:citation. Here's what it says at the first wikilink you recommented:"This template is only needed for handwritten citations, or citations using non-standard citation templates, that are linked to by a shortened footnote or a parenthetical reference. If you don't mind using a citation template, it is more standard to use sfn or harv with a template such as citation, cite book, cite web, etc. (template:wikicite documentation)"  I won't change the current scheme unless there is a consensus here to do so.  But leaving the page with a non-standard format probably means that you'll have to continue to edit the contributions when other editors use a more standard format. DougHill (talk) 21:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

 * That is a very odd note. I imagine that "handwritten" actually means "manually formatted". I notice also that it somewhat defensively says, "If you don't mind using citation templates". This goes right to the core of the problem. For many Wikipedia editors, citation templates are a blessing; in my case it is the reverse. The reason is the same for both sides of the coin: the templates impose an orderly, consistent format on references. Unfortunately, the formats imposed are both inflexible and tend to be "one size fits all", especially in one monumentally inappropriate way. (This is a bit of an aside in the present case, but nevertheless bears mentioning.) This is that one and the same template is used both in footnotes and in alphabetical lists, where there are distinct rules for formatting in just about every style manual ever written. As a result, inexperienced editors routinely format footnotes as if they were in an alphabetical list, or conversely format items in an alphabetical list as if they were in footnotes. However, it is the failure of the currently available templates to accommodate several standard parameters (such as book series titles), and the forced placement of some parameters (such as editor, translator, illustrator, author of preface, etc.) in positions inappropriate in bibliography lists that leads me to reject them in favor of "handwritten" citations, linked with templates such as template:wikicite. Admittedly, this requires more of the editor, but I prefer getting things right to getting the best that the templates can manage.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 18:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The Pop Chronicles
I recently cited the Pop Chronicles music documentary. It was originally broadcast in 1969. Of the cited episodes, shows 9-10 ("Tennessee Firebird") aired April 6 & 13, show 22 ("Route 66") aired June 8, 1969. This source doesn't have a date for show 55 ("Pop Chronicles Crammer"), but I figure that it must have been in 1970 (see Template talk:Pop Chronicles). I think that this is a single work to be listed on reference list once. Currently show 22 is listed and linked there, but the shortened footnotes list the correct show. I appreciate the desire to get the citations correctly, so are we doing so in this case? DougHill (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Citations of media sources have always been more slippery than print media. With radio programs like these, it may be easier and more dependable to cite the archive where you have consulted them, if that archive has more precise data than can be found about the original broadcast. It is sometimes the case, for example, that an episode was recorded but never broadcast at all. In other cases, an episode may have been announced for transmission at a particular time on a particular day, but then a breaking news story caused a delay that never makes it into the public media, and may not even go into the broadcasting station's logbook. The most important thing is to clearly identify the individual programs, so that others have a reasonable hope of being able to find them. If a particular bit of data (such as the exact date of broadcast) is simply unobtainable, then the reference should say so, with something like, "date of transmission unknown". On Wikipedia, at least, this can always be rectified at a later date, if the missing information turns up.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 03:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Reform of this article
The present article has a number of serious defects. Amongst these are multiple violations of WP:CFORK, WP:SYNTH, WP:OR and WP:UNDUE. The lead of the article is a WP:OR essay which is not substantiated by content, references or citations in the article itself. The subheadings of the article are without systematic order, and some have little or no justification, being WP:UNDUE (e.g. the section on polka). The text under the various headings is of poor or negligible quality. Often it is no more than a definition of the heading followed by a link to a more detailed WP article. The section "Neofolklorism and nationalism" is entirely WP:OR. etc. etc. The illustrations provided are random and do not helpfully illustrate any points in the text. In all the article signifcantly fails all WP standards. (And not least, incidentally, that at some point in the past its title has been unilaterally changed from the standard format 'Twentieth-century music' by dropping the hyphen).

In an attempt to remove poor quality content and render the article useful to the WP reader, I effected a rewrite which listed the headings in some systmatic order, and reduced the content of the article to links to other WP articles, all of which are substantially more coherent and resourced than the present article. It seemed to me to present a btter way forward of improving the article than any attempt to rewrite the present article. I also added, with appropriate links, some headings (e.g. "musical theatre") which were missing from the original. My revision, which was intended as a basis on which a useful WP article, meeting WP standards, could be developed, can be found here.

This version was reverted by an editor and replaced by the old, faulty, article. (NB: my version has now been reinstated by a third-party editor - see below)  I therefore initiate a discussion here to seek support for reinstating the version I have proposed as the basis of a useful Wikipedia article meeting the WP criteria of quality. As part of this process I also seek support for changing the title back to 'Twentieth-century music'. --Smerus (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 * I support Smerus here. The article as it existed prior to his involvement was a mess. It also was far too US-centric. The musics of Latin America and Asia were ignored. It also isn't clear what this article is supposed to be about. Is it treating all musics created in the 20th century as if it were a single genre? Is it about how playback and communications technology changed how people hear and think of music? What is "20th century music" anyway? Why are images of performers prominently displayed, but not of the actual creators of these musics? The edit that Smerus made, far from being "indiscriminate and unjustified," was a much needed first step in putting this article in order. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:27, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I much prefer Smerus' version, which turns a badly written page on a non-existent concept into a navigational area. The idea of a coherent and academically supported "20th century music" period is nonsense. It is a common plague in Wikipedia to make things like "20th century music" "20th century literature" "20th century art" etc, which work better for categorization, if at all. The fact is, the world is an extremely diverse place, and no idea of "20th century music" exists that unites music of unbelievably different styles and genres from across the world. Aza24 (talk) 06:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Level of detail
I've replaced the entries for Japan and Latin America, both of which contained long lists of individual popular styles, for the 'cover' articles for both regions, which would give links to the separate styles. If we have an entry for every genre in each country or region, the article would become so extensive as to be unhelpful, I think. The purpose of the article as it stands should be I think to point readers in the general direction of what they are seeking, and let them sort out from there.--Smerus (talk) 13:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand your rationale, but it also seems unfair that musics from the Anglo-American world are not treated similarly. After all, there are such articles as Music of the United States, Music of the United Kingdom, etc. Why not cut down on potential clutter further and use these instead of the genres listed out? —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:14, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I accept your point, but - we come back to the whole problem of the article itself, I think. '20th-century music' is not really a topic. The article 19th-Century Music is about the magazine of that name. 21st century music is a lead to a half-baked article Contemporary classical music which exhibits all the problems of the original 20th-century music article, but with knobs on - enormous lists without rationale of composers and performers, WP:OR essays on various aspects; but no sense of it being an encyclopaedic article. With the present 20th-century article, it seems to me there is no simple answer. 'Art-music' is international, does not (I think) need to be split by country. And so, to an extent, is 'pop' music, versions of whose genres can be heard all over the world. The genres which are international can deserve separate headings; then the styles which are specific to regions or countries can be looked for in the articles devoted to the music of those regions and countries. No one who is seeking a non-intenrantial genre wouold necessarily expect to find it specified in an article of this title. That's a compromise which seems OK to me, but I perfectly understand that it may not be ideal for others. If editors can't agree on some compromise format, then we could indeed scrap the whole article - it would be no great loss at the end of the day. But maybe as it is it is (slightly) better than nothing.--Smerus (talk) 22:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m honestly not too invested in this article and am grateful for you to take the lead here. I just wanted to point the issue with musical genres outside the Anglophone world. Thank you very much for your good work in putting this article into order! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I've only just clocked this discussion, and I echo CurryTime's thanks to Smerus for putting the article in order. It will do pretty well now.  Tim riley  talk   18:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

what are the different musical atyles of 20th century music
what are the different musical atyles of 20th century music 124.105.206.185 (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:20th-century music


text:
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf

Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (abbr. HHU; Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf), named after German poet Heinrich Heine, is a public university in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany, which was founded in 1965. It is the successor organization to Düsseldorf's Medical Academy of 1907.

Following several expansions throughout the decades, the university has comprised five faculties since 1993. Currently, more than 36,000 full-time students are studying at HHU and a total staff of approximately 3,600 people (academic and non-academic).

History

Düsseldorf University began with the Düsseldorf Academy for Practical Medicine in 1907. The city's first real university, however, was only founded in 1965 by adding a combined Faculty of Natural Sciences–Arts and Humanities to the existing medical one. Only four years later, the university split the combined faculty into two separate bodies, which led to the constitution of a Faculty of Arts and Humanities as well as a Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. In 1979 a modern University and State Library was opened to the public, and a sports centre was added in 1980/81. Following a quarrel of more than 23 years, the "nameless" university of Düsseldorf was finally christened after the poet Heinrich Heine, one of Düsseldorf's most famous sons, in 1989. From this period on, the campus university has been opening up towards the city and its citizens. Heinrich Heine University's Faculty of Business Administration and Economics opened in 1990, and the Faculty of Law opened in 1993.

Campus and grounds
HHU's roughly triangular campus is located in the southeast of Düsseldorf, in the Bilk district. To the north, it borders the campus of the university hospital with which it forms a unit. Both campuses together expand over approximately 1,300,000 square metres (circa 130 hectares).

New sections, such as the Student Service Center (SSC), have been added to existing parts of the campus. Already completed are the new Oeconomicum building (Faculty of Business Administration and Economics) and the new O.A.S.E. library (medical literature) – the latter one of Germany's most up-to-date structures for individual study and group work

University and State Library (ULB) Düsseldorf

The ULB Düsseldorf is one of three state libraries in North Rhine-Westphalia and one of Germany's innovation leaders in the library sector due to its high service standards and the volume of its collections (currently 4 stars in the public library ratings). In its university library function, it collects, archives and cares for scientific resources. In its state library function, it does alike for regional literature.

Centre for Information and Media Technology (ZIM)
As a central unit and (multi) media centre of HHU, the ZIM provides competencies and services in the field of digital information delivery and processing. Further fields of activity are digital communication and digital media.

Botanical Garden
The Botanical Garden of Düsseldorf is a scientific institution of HHU, which cultivates about 6,000 different kinds of plants from all around the globe. It is open to visitors throughout the whole year.

Medicine

With more than 3,000 students in the winter semester 2011/12, the Medical Faculty is HHU's third largest unit. Study offers range from Medicine and Dentistry (state examination) through Toxicology (MSc) to Public Health and Endocrinology (both MSc, further education). Graduate studies have been institutionalised in the form of the faculty-wide Medical Research School Düsseldorf, which offers networking, services and counselling for both graduate students and their supervisors. Further structured doctorate support is provided by research training groups in neurosciences (RTG 1033, iBrain), in hepatology (research training in CRC 974) and in tumor research (Düsseldorf School of Oncology DSO). Research hubs with a significant volume of third-party founded collaborative projects are hepatology (CRC 974 and Research Unit 217), cardiovascular research, neurosciences, surgery (Research Unit 1585), infectiology and immunology (Research Unit 729), and diabetes and metabolism research. The Biomedical Research Centre (BMFZ), the Leibniz-Institute for Environmental Medicine (IUF), the C. and O. Vogt Institute for Brain Research and the German Diabetes Centre (DDZ) are important organisations that form the local research environment.

Arts and Humanities
About 8,000 students (winter semester 2011/12) in currently 26 B.A. and M.A. programmes make the Faculty of Arts and Humanities HHU's largest unit. It offers the prestigious M.A. in European Studies, a unique one-year English-taught course especially designed for exceptional graduates from universities in Israel, Palestine and Jordan. Recently, the program became increasingly popular with graduates from other regions globally. The German-French master programme Media Culture Analysis / Analyse de Pratiques Culturelles, enables students to obtain a double diploma of both the HHU and the University of Nantes. At doctoral level the academy of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, PhilGrad, offers a broad range of counselling and career-relevant courses. Further support for structured doctorates provide programmes in the history of art (RTG 1678), in linguistics (research training in CRC 991), in ageing-related studies and in democracy research (Link.De) as well as within two German-Italian programmes (Interculturality and Communication, "Doctor Europaeus"). Among the research hubs in the faculty are linguistics (CRC 991), politics (Research Unit 1381), ancient history (funded by the NRW Academy for the Arts and Sciences), the history of art, and editing studies (complete works editions of Max Weber and Martin Buber in progress). Beyond that, the Faculty of Arts and Humanities contributes to HHU's Institute of German and International Party Law and Party Research (PRuF).

Mathematics and Natural Sciences
HHU's second largest faculty offers its approximately 6,500 students (winter semester 2011/12) ten basic programmes (B.A. and state examination) and nine graduate programmes (MSc). Special programmes such as the four-year "bachelor plus", in which students spend one year at Michigan State University in East Lansing or at the University of Western Australia in Perth, and the international MSc in Biology enable students to gain international experience. The faculty has institutionalised support for doctoral studies in the form of iGRAD, the Interdisciplinary Graduate and Research Academy Düsseldorf to establish network structures and offer counselling and training services for doctoral students, supervisors and research training groups. Further backing for structured doctorates provide the following programmes: RTG 1203 Dynamics in Hot Plasms (DFG), Graduate Cluster CLIB, NRW Research Academy Biostruct, RTG "Molecules of Infection" (Manchot Foundation), the international graduate school iGRAD-Plant in collaboration with the Forschungszentrum Jülich and Michigan State University, US; and the internally funded initiatives vivid, e-norm, and iGRASPseed. Research hubs with a significant volume of third-party founded collaborative projects are biology (Cluster of Excellence on Plant Sciences CEPLAS) and physics (CRC-TR 6, CRC-TR 18). The Biomedical Research Center (BMFZ) and the Bioeconomy Science Center (a cluster of 54 departments of the universities of Aachen, Bonn and Düsseldorf, as well as the Forschungszentrum Jülich) are important organisations forming the local research environment.

Business Administration and Economics

One of HHU's smaller faculties, the Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, attracted about 1,100 students in the winter semester 2011/12. The faculty is housed in the futuristic Oeconomicum building and offers Business Administration (BSc and MSc), Economics (BSc and MSc) and Business Chemistry (BSc and MSc, in cooperation with the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences). Further education is provided by the Düsseldorf Business School (DBS), which offers MBA-Programmes against a tuition fee. Examples are General Management MBAs (in German as well as in English) and Health Management (in cooperation with the Health Care Academy Düsseldorf). A major research hub in economics is competition economics, funded through the DFG ANR Project and centred in the Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE). Business studies focus on finance, accounting, management and marketing.

Law

The Faculty of Law offers practically oriented courses for the state examination in law through cooperation with various local institutions (e.g. courts such as the Appeal Court, District Court and Fiscal Court).

Beyond that, a specialty is a German-French course of law studies organized together with the University of Cergy-Pontoise near Paris which annually gives 15 German and 15 French law students the possibility to study both legal systems since 2005. Graduates of this three year law course are awarded the German legal "Zwischenprüfung" (German LL.B. equivalent) as well as the French "licence mention droit" (French LL.B. equivalent). Since 2008, the universities offer a subsequent two-year course whose participants specialize in business, labor as well as employment law and graduate with the French "Master 2 mention droit de l'entreprise" (French J.D. equivalent). Subsequently, they are also eligible for the German state examination in law (German J.D. equivalent) and for an admission exam with a French attorney's law school (École de formation de barreau – EFB).

Another speciality is an extra-curricular qualification in Anglo-American law.

Further education is provided by Düsseldorf Law School (DLS), which offers postgraduate masters in the protection of commercial rights, information rights and medical rights against a tuition fee. Research focuses on commercial law, European law and international law. Hubs are the Centre for Information and Technology Law (ZfI), the Centre for Medical Law (IMR), the Insurance Law Institute, and the Institute of German and International Party Law and Party Research (PRuF).

The President's Office
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf is a public corporation of the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia. Its degree of autonomy from state ministries and other legal bodies is defined in the Higher Education Autonomy Act (HFG) of 31 October 2006. The rectorate (also called the president's office, see HFG §15) manages the university. Its members are the president, four vice-presidents and the chancellor. From October 2008 to 2014, the president has been the physiologist Professor Michael Piper. Since November 2014 Professor Anja Steinbeck is the president of the HHU.

The University Council
The University Council consists of three internal and five external members. It gives advice to the president's office and supervises their administration of university business (§21,3 HFG). The first University Council was inaugurated in October 2007. Current chairperson of the council is Anne-José Paulsen, a judge and president of the Appeal Court of Düsseldorf (Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf).

The Senate
The Senate is the central democratic organ for discussions between the university's various status groups. Their representatives are elected by the university public. Further senate members are the chancellor and the president. University law gives the senate the right to confirm elected rectorate members in their office. Furthermore, it can give "recommendations and statements" concerning the university's development. To a certain extent, statements have a binding character for the President's Office.

Faculty council
Each faculty council represents the interests of the various status groups within a faculty. It elects a dean as the head of faculty management (Dean's Office). Deans represent a faculty and its interests to the president's office.

Student representation
The student parliament is the highest plenary organ of all matriculated students at HHU. The central representative of student life and the voice of students' demands in university politics is the AStA (Allgemeiner Studierendenausschuss). One student association for each academic subject represents the interests of the students within the university community.

Central Administration
The central administration has five departments: student affairs, academic management, personnel and organisation, finance, and facility management. It is the backbone of the university in terms of formal structures and governance processes. Head of approximately 340 administrative staff is the chancellor. Furthermore, the chancellor's three staff offices are responsible for legal advisory, work safety and protection of the environment, and internal auditing. Current tasks for the university administration are the implementation of a campus management system as well as the renovation and improvement of campus infrastructure.

National
In 2012 HHU and its partner institutions – the University of Cologne, the Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research and Forschungszentrum Jülich – received the grant for the Cluster of Excellence CEPLAS in the Excellence Initiative of the German Federal and State Governments.

International
HHU is currently involved in 23 international projects funded within the EU's Seventh Framework Programme. 11 further international projects have just ended. Twelve HHU researchers at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences currently have the prestigious ERC Grants.

A culture of entrepreneurship
HHU promotes research- and knowledge-based start-ups. Its concept to strengthen an entrepreneurial culture at and around HHU was successful in the EXIST competition of the Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (Germany).

International study programmes and doctoral studies
At present five degree programmes at HHU are taught in English: The Faculty of Arts and Humanities offers English Studies (B.A.), Comparative Studies in English and American Literature (M.A.) and European Studies (M.A.); furthermore, an International MSc in biology and an English-language MSc in Physics address students at the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. International doctoral research programmes are available in the "Faculties" section.

International partners in higher education
Key regions of HHU's internationalisation activities are Europe, United States, Japan and the Near East. At the moment there are 13 collaborations at university level, 80 collaborations in research or teaching at faculty or institute level, and over 140 Erasmus partnerships.

Student life
The Student Service Centre (SSC) offers counselling and services.

Sports are coordinated by the students' representation (AStA) of Düsseldorf's four higher education institutions in a joint initiative. On offer are about 100 kinds of sports, workshops and sports holidays. Once a year the four AStAs organise a common sports day.

Musical initiatives include the AStA's Local Heroes event, a platform for local bands, as well as jam sessions. There is also a semi-professional university orchestra. Once a year the short film competition for young talents from the region takes place on campus. There are various (student) associations, clubs, networks and societies. Examples are the local UNICEF group, a debating club, the European Student Network and the campus radio.

Since 1989 the Heinrich Heine Guest Lecture has repeatedly drawn high-profile speakers to the university's campus. These guest professors usually perform a small series of lectures for the general public on topic(s) that are currently in the focus of public attention. Speakers have included, for example, Marcel Reich-Ranicki, Helmut Schmidt and Joschka Fischer. New traditions have come to supplement the guest lecture: since 2010 the "University Speech" and since 2011 the "Heinrich Heine Professorship for Business and Economics", both performed by external speakers of high calibre.

Study fees and scholarships

As a German public university, HHU receives funding from the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia and therefore does not charge tuition fees. However, a small service charge of currently about 230 Euros per semester (winter semester 2012/13) has become necessary to cover the expenses of the AStA, of student services such as housing and canteen organisation (Studentenwerk) and the semester ticket for free rides on all local trains and busses. Various scholarships are available to cover specific student expenses and/or needs. For example, there are bursary programmes to cover living costs, facilitate stays abroad, or to finish one's final thesis. Within the National Scholarship Programme at German universities, for example, HHU currently ranks among the top 5 providers of scholarships.

Rankings
According to the 2024 QS World University Rankings, the university ranks in the 801-850 tier globally, placing it 43rd nationally. In the 2024 THE World University Rankings, it is ranked in the 251-300 range internationally, positioning it between 25th and 31st within the nation. Further, the 2023 ARWU World University Rankings places the university within the 301-400 global bracket, translating to a national ranking between 20th and 24th.

title: Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf


text:
University of Olivet

The University of Olivet, formerly known as Olivet College, is a private Christian college in Olivet, Michigan. The college is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission. It was founded in 1844 by missionaries from Oberlin College, and it followed Oberlin in becoming the second coeducational college or university in the United States. The University of Olivet is affiliated with the United Church of Christ and the National Association of Congregational Christian Churches and stands in the Reformed tradition of Protestantism.

History

In 1844, after founding Oberlin College, John Jay Shipherd and 39 missionaries, including Oberlin faculty, students, and alumni, came to Michigan to create a college, which Shipherd deemed "New Oberlin."

The original land for the college was to be in Grand River City, aka Delta Mills, in Delta Township, Eaton County, approximately 28 mi from where the college stands. Olivetian lore says that while Shipherd was on a trip to the site in Eaton County, his horse continued to get lost, and would always wander back to a hill with an oak grove, which is where Olivet's Campus Square exists today. Shipherd decided that powers from above must be drawing the horse back to this site, and Shipherd deemed that this would become the site for "New Oberlin." He then chose to name it Olivet, however, after the biblical Mount of Olives.

The first courses began in December 1844. Because President Reuben Hatch's petition for a charter was denied, Olivet became the Olivet Institute, and remained a two-year school until chartered in 1859.

The 20th century saw Olivet College become a liberal arts school, with a short-lived attempt at an Oxford-style curriculum from 1934 to 1944.

A marker designating the college as a Michigan Historic Site was erected in 1960 by the Michigan Historical Commission. The inscription reads:

"On February 24, 1844, the Reverend John J. 'Father' Shipherd and thirty-nine followers arrived by ox-cart on this wilderness hilltop, driving their herds before them. They felt God had directed them to this oak grove for the purpose of founding a coeducational Christian college open to students of all races. First chartered as Olivet Institute, the school received its charter as a college in 1859. For over a century it has given a broad liberal arts education, with strong support from the Congregational church. Many alumni have gone forth 'Pro Christo et Humanitate'." After assuming leadership in 2010, President Steven Corey announced the "Olivet College 2020 and Beyond Strategic Plan", which includes renovating existing buildings and facilities, creating a new student center, increasing endowment, and expand the student population to 1,500.

The board of trustees unanimously approved a change in the institution's name to University of Olivet in 2023.

Academics
Olivet offers 35 programs that lead to a bachelor's degree and a master's degree of Business Administration, Counseling, and Leadership. Its most popular undergraduate majors, in terms of 2021 graduates, were:
 * Criminal Justice/Safety Studies (19)
 * Psychology (18)
 * Business Administration & Management (15)
 * Insurance (14)
 * Registered Nursing/Registered Nurse (11)
 * Exercise Science & Kinesiology (10)

Olivet College has approximately 1,040 students, 40% female and 60% male. 74% of classes have less than 24 students, and there is a 16:1 student/faculty ratio. The college has a 59% retention rate for first to second year students.

Greek life
The Soronian Society or Iota Kappa Omicron was founded at Olivet in 1847 and was the first women's literary society in the United States. Phi Alpha Pi was founded at the institution in 1861 and is the oldest active fraternity on campus.

Olivet College radio
Olivet College has an FCC-licensed non-commercial educational student-run radio station, broadcasting in the Olivet area at 89.1 MHz FM with the callsign WOCR. The broadcast is also available for people outside the studio range online at. Students can volunteer for a radio shift from 7:30am to midnight Monday through Friday to broadcast music, campus events, news, and talk shows. Comet Football and Basketball is also often broadcast live from the game site.

Athletics
Along with Albion College and Michigan Agricultural College (now Michigan State University), Olivet founded the Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association (MIAA) in 1888. The MIAA is the nation's oldest collegiate conference. Olivet College athletic teams, nicknamed the Comets, participate in the following intercollegiate sports as a member of the MIAA include:

Men: baseball, basketball, bowling, cross country, football, golf, soccer, swimming & diving, tennis, track and field (indoor and outdoor), volleyball and wrestling. Volleyball became a full varsity sport in 2015–16 (2016 season), competing in the Midwest Collegiate Volleyball League.

Women: basketball, bowling, cross country, golf, soccer, softball, swimming & diving, tennis, track and field (indoor and outdoor), volleyball, and cheerleading.

Notable alumni

 * Edith Vosburgh Alvord (1895), President of Twentieth Century Club of Detroit 1913, President Detroit Federation of Women’s Clubs 1914
 * John Henry Barrows (1867), fifth President of Oberlin College
 * Hamilton King (1878), United States Minister to Siam (Thailand) from 1898 to 1912
 * Augusta Jane Chapin, 2010 inductee into Michigan Women's Hall of Fame
 * Adeola Fayehun (2007), Nigerian journalist
 * Daron Cruickshank, current mixed martial artist competing in the UFC's Lightweight Division
 * Dave Cutler (1965), software engineer, designer and developer of operating systems including Windows NT at Microsoft and RSX-11M, VMS and VAXELN at Digital Equipment Corporation
 * W. Mont Ferry, Utah State Senator and the mayor of Salt Lake City.
 * Mary E. Green (ca. 1858), physician
 * James C. Harrison (did not graduate), artist
 * James McCloughan (1968), Recipient of the Medal of Honor in 2017
 * Wolfgang Mieder, educator
 * Joseph S. Murphy (1955), President of Queens College, President of Bennington College, and Chancellor of the City University of New York
 * George Pyne III (1965) football player
 * John Ray (1950), football player and coach
 * Sugar Chile Robinson, child musical prodigy
 * Vern Ruhle (1975), MLB pitcher and coach
 * Claressa Shields, Olympic boxing gold medalist
 * Scott Sigler, author of science-fiction and horror, podcaster
 * John Swainson, 42nd Governor of Michigan
 * Ralph Thacker (1909), college football coach
 * Robie Macauley (did not graduate), editor, novelist and critic whose literary career spanned more than 50 years
 * Justin Jaynes, current mixed martial artist competing in UFC Featherweight division.

Notable faculty

 * Sherwood Anderson, creative writing
 * George Whitefield Chadwick, composer
 * Hubert Lyman Clark, zoology
 * Amos Dresser, abolitionist and pacifist minister, one of the founders
 * Ford Madox Ford, creative writing
 * Alfred Korzybski, semantics
 * Golo Mann, history
 * Gertrude Stein, guest lecturer, creative writing

title: University of Olivet


text:
Tail o' the Pup

Tail o’ the Pup is an iconic Los Angeles, California hot dog stand actually shaped like a hot dog. Built in 1946, the small, walk-up stand has been noted as a prime example of "programmatic" or "mimetic" novelty architecture. It was one of the last surviving mid-20th century buildings that were built in the shapes of the products they sold.

History
Designed by architect Milton Black, the stand opened at 311 La Cienega Boulevard in June 1946 to luminary-studded, searchlight-lit fanfare. Eddie Blake purchased the Pup in 1976 from its celebrity owners, the dance team of Veloz and Yolanda.

Despite its appearance in countless movies, television programs and commercials, the stand faced demolition in the mid-1980s, creating an outcry that resulted in the stand being moved a couple of blocks from its original location at 311 North La Cienega Boulevard to 329 North San Vicente Boulevard.

The hot dog stand closed in December 2005. The structure was moved into a Torrance warehouse after Regent Properties, a development company, purchased the Pup's site from landlord Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and announced plans to build 152 condominium and apartment units.

The City of Los Angeles in 2006 declared Tail o’ the Pup to be a cultural landmark.

Blake's grandson Jay Miller and his wife Nicole inherited the Pup in 2017. After a failed attempt to have it reopened in a partnership with Killer Shrimp, the structure was donated to the Valley Relics Museum.

The 1933 Group purchased the structure in 2018 with plans to restore the stand to its original appearance, find a new location, and reopen it.

The stand reopened in July 2022 in West Hollywood.

title: Tail o' the Pup


text:
William W. Blackney

William Wallace Blackney (August 28, 1876 – March 14, 1963) was a politician from the U.S. state of Michigan. He served eight terms in the United States House of Representatives.

Early life and education
Blackney was born in Clio, Michigan, and attended the public schools there. He went to Olivet College, Olivet, Michigan, and Ferris School (now Ferris State University) in Big Rapids. He moved to Flint, in 1904 and served as county clerk of Genesee County 1905–1912. He was graduated from the law department of the University of Michigan in 1912, was admitted to the bar the same year, and commenced practice in Flint.

He served as assistant prosecuting attorney of Genesee County 1913–1917, member of the Flint School Board 1924–1934, member of the Republican State central committee 1925–1930, and instructor in the General Motors Company technical night school for sixteen years. He was a delegate to the 1932 Republican National Convention.

Congress
In 1934, Blackney defeated incumbent Claude E. Cady to be elected as a Republican from Michigan's 6th congressional district to the U.S. House for the 74th Congress, serving from January 3, 1935, to January 3, 1937. He lost to Democrat Andrew J. Transue in 1936, but defeated him to be re-elected in 1938 to the 76th Congress. He was subsequently re-elected to the six succeeding Congresses, serving from January 3, 1939, to January 3, 1953.

A report created for President Harry S. Truman in September 1948 claimed that Blackney had a "reactionary record in Congress".

He was not a candidate for re-election in 1952 and retired to Flint, where he resided until his death, aged 86. He is interred in Woodlawn Cemetery in his birthplace of Clio, Michigan.

title: William W. Blackney


text:
DNS zone transfer

DNS zone transfer, also sometimes known by the inducing DNS query type AXFR, is a type of DNS transaction. It is one of the many mechanisms available for administrators to replicate DNS databases across a set of DNS servers.

A zone transfer uses the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) for transport, and takes the form of a client–server transaction. The client requesting a zone transfer may be a secondary server requesting data from a primary server. The portion of the database that is replicated is a zone.

Operation
Zone transfer consists of a preamble, followed by the actual data transfer. The preamble comprises a lookup of the Start of Authority (SOA) resource record for the "zone apex", the node of the DNS namespace that is at the top of the "zone". The fields of this SOA resource record, in particular the "serial number", determine whether the actual data transfer need to occur at all. The client compares the serial number of the SOA resource record with the serial number in the last copy of that resource record that it has. If the serial number of the record being transferred is greater, the data in the zone are deemed to have "changed" (in some fashion) and the secondary proceeds to request the actual zone data transfer. If the serial numbers are identical, the data in the zone are deemed not to have "changed", and the client may continue to use the copy of the database that it already has, if it has one.

The actual data transfer process begins by the client sending a query (opcode 0) with the special query type AXFR (value 252) over the TCP connection to the server. Although DNS technically supports AXFR over User Datagram Protocol (UDP), it is considered not acceptable due to the risk of lost, or spoofed packets. The server responds with a series of response messages, comprising all of the resource records for every domain name in the "zone". The first response comprises the SOA resource record for the zone apex. The other data follows in no specified order. The end of the data is signaled by the server repeating the response containing the SOA resource record for the zone apex.

Some zone transfer clients perform the SOA lookup of the preamble using their system's normal DNS query resolution mechanism. These clients do not open a TCP connection to the server until they have determined that they need to perform the actual data transfer. However, since TCP can be used for normal DNS transactions, as well as for zone transfer, other zone transfer clients perform the SOA lookup preamble over the same TCP connection as they then (may) perform the actual data transfer. These clients open the TCP connection to the server before they even perform the preamble.

The preceding describes full zone transfer. Incremental zone transfer differs from full zone transfer in the following respects:
 * The client uses the special QTYPE IXFR (value 251) instead of the AXFR QTYPE.
 * The client sends the SOA resource record for the zone apex that it currently has, if any, in the IXFR message, letting the server know which version of the "zone" it believes to be current.
 * Though the server may respond in the normal AXFR manner with the full data for the zone, it may also instead respond with an "incremental" data transfer. This latter comprises the list of changes to the zone data, in zone serial number order, between the version of the zone that the client reported to the server as having and the version of the zone that is current at the server. The changes comprise two lists, one of resource records that are deleted and one of resource records that are inserted. (A modification to a resource record is represented as a deletion followed by an insertion.)

Zone transfer is entirely client-initiated. Though servers can send a NOTIFY message to clients (that they have been informed about) whenever a change to the zone data has been made, the scheduling of zone transfers is entirely under the control of the clients. Clients schedule zone transfers initially, when their databases are empty, and thereafter at regular intervals, in a pattern controlled by the values in the "refresh", "retry", and "expire" fields in the SOA resource record of the zone apex.

Limitations
Though it is standardized, full-zone transfer being described as one of the possible database replication mechanisms in RFC 1034 and RFC 5936 (incremental zone transfer described in RFC 1995), zone transfer is the most limited of those database replication mechanisms. Zone transfer operates in terms of "wire format" resource records, i.e. resource records as they are transferred using the DNS protocol. However, the schema of wire format resource records may not be identical to the database schema used by the back ends of the DNS servers themselves.

Serial number changes
The preamble portion of zone transfer relies on the serial number, and only the serial number, to determine whether a zone's data have changed, and thus whether the actual data transfer is required. For some DNS server packages, the serial numbers of SOA resource records are maintained by administrators by hand. Every edit to the database involves making two changes, one to the record being changed and the other to the zone serial number. The process requires accuracy: the administrator may forget to change the serial number or change it incorrectly (reduce it). RFC 1912 (section 2.2 SOA records) recommends using the value YYYYMMDDnn as the number (YYYY=year, MM=month, DD=day, nn=revision number). This won't overflow until the year 4294.

Some DNS server packages have overcome this problem by automatically constructing the serial number from the last modification timestamp of the database file on disk. This is the case for djbdns, for example. The operating system ensures that the last modification timestamp is updated whenever an administrator edits the database file, effectively automatically updating the serial number, and thus relieving administrators of the need to make two edits (in two different places) for every single change.

Furthermore, the paradigm of database replication for which the serial number check (and indeed zone transfer itself) is designed, which involves a single central DNS server holding the primary version of the database with all other DNS servers merely holding copies, simply does not match that of many modern DNS server packages. Modern DNS server packages with sophisticated database back ends such as SQL servers and Active Directory allow administrators to make updates to the database in multiple places (such systems employ multi-master replication), with the database back end's own replication mechanism handling the replication to all other servers. This paradigm simply does not match that of a single, central, monotonically increasing number to record changes, and thus is incompatible with zone transfer to a large extent. Modern DNS server packages with sophisticated database back ends often will create a "shim" serial number, simulating the existence of a single central place where updates are made, but this is at best imperfect.

Fortunately, for this and several reasons outlined later, DNS servers that use such sophisticated database back ends in general rarely use zone transfer as their database replication mechanism in the first place, and usually instead employ the vastly superior distributed database replication mechanisms that the back ends themselves provide.

Serial number comparisons
Serial number comparisons are intended to use Serial Number Arithmetic as defined in RFC 1982. However, this was not clearly specified in RFC 1034, resulting in not all clients perform the serial number check, in the preamble, in the same way. Some clients check merely that the serial number supplied by the server is different from that known by the client, or non-zero. Other clients check that the serial number supplied by the server is within a given range of the serial number already known by the client. Yet other clients still perform the latter check and additionally check that the serial number supplied by the server is not zero.

Multiple resource records
Originally, in the actual data transfer each set of resource records for a single domain name and type was transferred in a separate response message from the server to the client. However, this is inefficient, and some DNS server software implemented optimizations, geared at allowing the response compression mechanism in the DNS protocol to reduce the total bandwidth requirements of data transfers, such as:
 * performing "additional section processing" to include any "glue" resource record sets in the same response as an NS, SRV, or MX resource record set
 * collecting all of the resource record sets relating to a single domain name together and sending them, if they fit, in a single response

Some clients were written to expect only the original response format, and would fail to perform data transfer if such optimizations were employed. Several DNS server packages thus have a configuration setting allowing administrators to specify the use of "single answer format" responses for those clients that require it.

Exposure of data
The data contained in a DNS zone may be sensitive from an operational security aspect. This is because information such as server hostnames may become public knowledge, which can be used to discover information about an organization and even provide a larger attack surface. In June 2017 the registrar responsible for Russian top-level-domains accidentally enabled DNS zone transfers via AXFR which led to 5.6 million records being accidentally exposed.

In 2008 a court in North Dakota, USA, ruled that performing a zone transfer as an unauthorized outsider to obtain information that was not publicly accessible constitutes a violation of North Dakota law.

Security standards information

 * CAPEC-291 DNS Zone Transfers
 * CVE-1999-0532 A DNS server allows zone transfers.
 * CWE-16 Configuration
 * CWE-276 Incorrect Default permissions

Related Request for Comments

 * DNS Zone Transfer Protocol (defines AXFR, updates RFC 1034 Domain Names - Concepts and Facilities, and RFC 1035 Domain Names - Implementation and Specification)
 * Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS
 * A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS NOTIFY)
 * draft-ietf-dnsext-axfr-clarify DNS Zone Transfer Protocol (AXFR) Internet Draft

title: DNS zone transfer


text:
Talk:Giant planet

modified paragraph
I modified this paragraph beyond recognition:

Many of the extrasolar planets which have been discovered have masses of several times Jupiter's mass, and on the basis of this it has been suggested that these may be gas giants. However, it is important to note that the detection techniques that have been used to identify extrasolar planets so far (detecting doppler shift in the star's spectrum due to the wobble induced by the planet's orbit) are much more adept at detecting giant planets than smaller ones and therefore this sample may be biased. In addition, with a few exceptions, the actual composition and structure of extrasolar planets have not been observed and many of the extrasolar planets are much closer to their parent stars and hence much hotter than gas giants in the solar system, making it possible that some of those planets are a type not observed in the solar system.

I think the new version is better, but ymmv. Mark Foskey

This article could be clearer about the difference between gas giants and brown dwarves. The latter article says: "Density is a clear giveaway. Brown dwarfs are all about the same radius and volume; so anything that size with over 10 Jupiter masses is unlikely to be a planet" while this article says gas giants are planets and can exist up to ~70 Jupiter masses. Horatio 12:09, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Merge with Sudarsky classification system

 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I created the Sudarsky classification system article, however on reflection I feel that giving it an entire article gives too much weight to a theoretical classification system for which very little observational data exists to back it up. Also, the existence of the article seems to be giving the impression that Extrasolar Visions-style speculations should be applied to every extrasolar system in existence. I feel that this system of predicting the appearance of extrasolar gas giant planets would be better as a subsection of this article. Chaos syndrome 22:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

 * OBJECT I don't think Sudarsky is prevalent enough to merge into here, besides, it'd clutter the article alot. Zzzzzzzzzzz 03:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

There seem to be a lot of objection responses to this one, I'll retract the merger suggestion. Chaos syndrome 10:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Liquid Helium???
The article has gotten long and I do not want to jump in while it is changing in so many places, but I feel that this statement: "the name is defensible because their compositions are dominated by hydrogen and helium, which are gases in the outer solar system when not under pressure." is misleading. Helium will be in gaseous state anywhere in these planets, I believe, because it has to be cooled so much to liquefy. I also thought hydrogen could be in a metalllic state in Jupiter (helping explain the magnetic field). So I think "gas giants" refers mainly to the paucity of rock. Carrionluggage 17:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi, I created that sentence, but I was just copyediting for clarity and have no scientific background, so if you think it's wrong you should change it. The Singing Badger 18:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

OK - I fixed it so it is correct, but the section is much too long now and refers to "misnomer" or a synonymous phraseology twice. It might have been OK as it was before - do not know why S.B. changed it. By the way, I linked in a page that briefly discusses "critical point" because the Wikipedia page Phases_of_matter containing critical phenomena is quite verbose, with too much in it, and the phase diagram showing a critical point is way down the page.Carrionluggage 04:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Mass gap?
"Interestingly there appears to be a mass gap between the heaviest gas giant planets detected (about 10 times the mass of Jupiter) and the lightest red dwarfs." - is there? The missing objects would presumably be brown dwarfs, of which we now know a fair few. And there doesn't seem to be much of a gap between the brown dwarfs and large planets either - OTS 44 and Cha 110913-773444 seem to bridge the gap between planets and brown dwarfs. Am I missing something or is the article statement now outdated? Chaos syndrome 22:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Floating cities
I wonder who put the "floating cities" in the "See also"--Spaceman 09:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

To scale or not to scale?
There are two pictures in the article, one "to scale" the other "not to scale". Yet both have pretty much the same relative sizes of the 4 planets. Maybe they are both "to scale"?--345Kai 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Moons
I noticed there is a small comment about moons in the article, but perhaps we should elaborate. Maybe we should discuss the debris cloud that surrounds the gas giants when they are being formed and how the cloud matter can build moons and rings.

Ice Giant
The scientific community has adopted the term "ice giant" to describe Uranus and Neptune, since they differ in both composition and evolution from their fellow giant planets Jupiter and Saturn. This term is quickly gaining common usage; a separate article should be established for Ice Giant, preferably written by someone within the astrophysics field, and the link for such should no longer redirect to this page.PJtP 21:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

 * If this article is renamed giant planet, and gas giant and ice giant are broken out as separate articles... 132.205.44.134 22:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

 * This is now under consideration, see -- 70.24.248.23 (talk) 14:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Uranus and Neptune
Is Uranus really the most foul smelling gas giant?Astroman1111 11:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes I think so. Or Neptune. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 09:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

What causes the atmospheric banding exactly?
I have ascribed this to tidal force for the time being - rapid rotation does not explain it fully. It makes sense given that Jupiter has extremely turbulent bands (closest to the sun) while Uranus has very weak banding. I do not understand exactly how tidal forces can account for this at the mechanical level, but it seems reasonable. Comment please, and perhaps we can get some citations for it.--ChrisJMoor 00:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you for trying to improve Wikipedia. Unfortunately, ascribing the banding on Jupiter to tidal forces based on it seeming reasonable is original research. The bands are caused by a combination of the Coriolis force and convection, the same mechanism that produces the jet streams and trade winds on Earth. Neitherday 05:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Discovery
Asking for a bit of info I've never been able to find anywhere: When was Jupiter found to be a gaseous planet? this page was created by marysa--88.149.232.208 22:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Gas planet size
Technical question: Allowing for variations in gas-mixture composition (ie relative quantities of hydrogen, helium, methane "and all other possible components") what is the smallest size a gas giant could be and be persistant on an astronomical scale? Jackiespeel (talk) 17:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you mean geometrical size, or mass of a planet? Sometimes people say "size", but actually mean mass. Ruslik (talk) 18:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * "Either or both" (as can be relevant). Will "proximity to star being orbited" be a factor?
 * A suitable link would suffice. Jackiespeel (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * You need to consider Ruslik's question to find the answer. Neptune, for example, is only about 31 times smaller in diameter, but 16,000 times smaller in volume, and 19,000 times smaller in mass (weight) than the Sun. Also, your question belongs at the answer desk, not on an article's Talk page. David Spector (talk) 13:03, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

 * BTW, given the atmospheric mass density continuum, how are diameter resp. volume of a gas giant defined? --Mkratz (talk) 02:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Color Spectrum Seen in the Jovian Planets
Has anyone ever noticed that the color of the Jovian planets rougly matches the color spectrum: 1. Red - Jupiter is somewhat reddish/orangish/brownish, especially towards the middle. 2. Yellow - Saturn is yellowish/tanish. 3. Green - Uranus is greenish-blue. 4. Blue - Neptune is deep blue.

Augustus Alyosius Amadeus Ambrosius duGracie III (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Question
If you throw a thermonuclear bomb at a gas giant, will it initiate a chain reaction and blow the planet up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.180.234 (talk) 20:55, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

 * No.
 * But even if you could get fusion started (with a giant much much much more massive than Jupiter), it would turn into a star, not blow up.
 * There's a reference desk to ask questions like this. kwami (talk) 20:58, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Ice Giants vs. Gas Giants, Again
I notice that somebody was pointing out this distinction well over a year ago. It's true -- Uranus and Neptune are not currently regarded within the astronomical community as gas giants. They are ice giants. Only Jupiter and Saturn, among the 8 Solar planets, are true gas giants. The distinction between Jupiter-type planets (gas giants) and Neptune-type planets (ice giants) is regularly made in the literature on extrasolar planets. I see the same two possibilities that were suggested previously: 1. Rename this article "giant planets" and separate it into two sections, one for gas giants and one for ice giants; or 2. Limit this article to true gas giants, and create a new article about ice giants. Option 1 would be easier, but it would also be less scientific, because, as I'm saying, planetary astronomers no longer lump the four Solar System giants into one category. What is the chain of decision-making here?Thuvan Dihn (talk) 23:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Two years have now passed since User:PJtP pointed out that Uranus and Neptune are no longer regarded as "gas giant planets." I just did a little research to back up this claim.

 * In an article in the October 1999 issue of Science, Tristan Guillot was already employing the distinction gas giant/ice giant in his discussion of the Solar System's four giant planets (T. Guillot, "Interiors of Giant Planets Inside and Outside the Solar System," Science, 1999: vol. 286, pages 72-76). Jupiter and Saturn are gas giants; Uranus and Neptune are ice giants.

 * A search of the Smithsonian/NASA Astrophysics Data System (query form at http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abstract_service.html), using the keyword "gas giant planet" and limited to the years 2007 to 2009, yields 135 results. In all 135 cases, "gas giant planet" refers to Jupiter, Saturn, or an extrasolar planet of comparable or greater mass.  "Ice giant planet" refers to Neptune, Uranus, or an extrasolar planet of comparable mass.

Is it important for a scientific article in Wikipedia to conform with current scientific research? If so, Wikipedia's handling of giant planets needs a major overhaul. Thuvan Dihn (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

 * This is now under consideration, see -- 70.24.248.23 (talk) 14:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Super??
Superjovian planet and kin redirects here but the string "super" doesn't occur in the article. I cannot remember exactly where or what, but I think there is a definition (somewhere) of what constitutes a superjovian as opposed to jovian. It should then be noted that the maximum radius (and hence volume) of a superjovian approx equals that of Jupiter, with the exception of hot jupiters, whose atms are heated so that they inflate. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 09:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

 * There was something about superjovians/superplanets/supergiant planets being more massive than the mass of the planet with the largest volume possible for a cold planet (roughly the size and mass of Jupiter) ... more massive planets being smaller than this most large cold planet. PDF (p126). According to PDF (section4) the limit is . The calculations are based on the 1969 paper. 64.229.100.61 (talk) 00:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Redundancies in the "See Also" section
I don't know if anybody's noticed, but the first two items in the See Also section link to the exact same place. Specifically, "Appearance of extrasolar planets" and "Sudarsky extrasolar planet classification" both link to "Sudarsky extrasolar planet classification." Since the Sudarsky extrasolar planet classification is simply a way to classify the appearance of extrasolar planets, I would suggest the "Appearance" link be removed. 66.56.63.233 (talk) 11:13, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Should Jovian be capitalized?
I'm under the impression that "jovian" (lowercase) can refer to any gas planets, while "Jovian" (uppercase) usually refers specifically to Jupiter and its system of moons. Jovian, when used to mention all gas giants, should be lowercase in the article here much in the same way terrestrial, when referring to rocky planets, is lowercase in the same manner. Would I be out of place to edit the article's mentions of the word "jovian" when pertaining to gas giants and not the Jovian system?184.19.49.77 (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Requested move I

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 20:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

In the last half decade, terminology has shifted, and "gas giant" is now no longer predominant when speaking of giant planets, and are more likely to only refer to the subclass of giant planets known as gas giants (such as Jupiter and Saturn), and the use of ice giants has come into regular usage (planets such as Neptune and Uranus), and these mass classes are also frequently referred to as Jovian and Neptunian, with Jovian no longer predominantly representing all giant planets, but just the gas giant subclass.
 * Google Scholar (since 2009)
 * "giant planet" -"gas-giant planet" 1880 hits
 * "gas giant" -"giant planet" -oil -"oil giant" 748 hits

Gas giant → Giant planet — In the last half decade, terminology has shifted, and "gas giant" is now no longer predominant when speaking of giant planets, and are more likely to only refer to the subclass of giant planets known as gas giants (such as Jupiter and Saturn), and the use of ice giants has come into regular usage (planets such as Neptune and Uranus), and these mass classes are also frequently referred to as Jovian and Neptunian, with Jovian no longer predominantly representing all giant planets, but just the gas giant subclass.
 * Google Scholar (since 2009)
 * "giant planet" -"gas-giant planet" 1880 hits
 * "gas giant" -"giant planet" -oil -"oil giant" 748 hits
 * 70.24.248.23 (talk) 13:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * These searches are wrong. The first page of the "giant planet" search has two results including the phrase "gas giant" in the snippets shown. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 07:16, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Since gas giant is a type of giant planet, there would be results with "gas giant" when searching for "giant planet", if they were referring to the specific subtype as well. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 11:26, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Is that what is going on here? ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 16:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears to be the case, since the mass regime being investigated is 1-4 Jupiter masses, which are gas giants/Jovians, and not ice giants/Neptunians. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 05:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Comment—I'm somewhat on the fence about this one. I'm not sure this change in terminology has become sufficiently predominant to make "giant planet" the primary naming convention. In fact, in a number of cases, I see journal authors combining both terms, per "gas giant planet". Is it possible that the "giant planet" terminology is presently seeing increased usage because astronomers haven't been able to resolve (or spectroscopically analyze) many of the newly discovered exoplanets? That being said, "giant planet" is a logical naming convention that corresponds nicely to "dwarf planet". Regards, RJH (talk) 17:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I haven't done a literature search yet on the naming convention. I did ask planet-expert Mike Brown today what he thought (pinged him through twitter). My question was: "What is the current term for big, Jovian-style planets: 'gas giants', 'giant planets', or something else?" He said: "usually 'gas giants', I'd say." Of course, he's just one planet researcher, but I figured I'd start near the top. Another good person to ask might be Geoff Marcy, of exoplanets fame. Of course, it really comes down to how the community uses the term. And which community do we mean? General astronomers, solar system astronomers, exoplanet astronomers, the general public? A way to measure usage in the astronomer community would be to look at recent abstracts for AAS and DPS meetings. My planetary-geologist colleague down the hall just told me that she never hears either term "gas giant" or "giant planet" used. She said it's more common to hear "Jovian planet" or "hot Jupiter" or something like that. Anyway, I'll keep at it and revisit this another time. AstroCog (talk) 20:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply does she hear "hot Jupiter" also encompassing "hot Neptunes"? Or that "Jovian planet" also encompassing "Neptunian planet"? Ofcourse, did your colleagues interpret your question on "gas giants" as meaning Jupter/Saturn type planets, or Jupter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune type planets? (Your question to Mike Brown leads to this query... Jovian-style planet meaning Jupiter/Saturn or J/S/U/N? ) 70.24.248.23 (talk) 22:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess my suggestion would be this: if the scientific literature and other published media has enough support for separate terms such as "Jovian planet" and "Neptunian planet", then why have this discussion? Just break up "gas giant" into several stand-alone articles. If the literature/sources are not substantial enough to support stand-alone articles, keep "gas giant" and use redirects rather than renaming, and have major sections in the article for the separate types. If "gas giant" as a general term is still common usage in the astronomical community, then it will very likely be the same for the general public, who are the readership for WP. Changing the article titles and not first using a redirect system first seems to me to make it harder for general readers to find the content they want. AstroCog (talk) 15:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Dividing the article in two with Jovian planet and Neptunian planet is fine by me. As for this discussion, even if we split the article, I think the edit history should be stored with "giant planet", since we'll still need an overview article, and the history of the unified subjects should be with the overview article. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 08:30, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

This has been pointed out on this talk page since 2007, and WP:ASTRO since 2005. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 13:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Ice Giants and "molten ice"
The following sentence caught my eye: "...Uranus and Neptune which are sometimes called ice giants, as they are mostly composed of water, ammonia, and methane molten ices." What is a "molten ice"? The only other mentions of molten ice I can find on Wikipedia refer to fiction. Ischaldirh (talk) 23:18, 4 March 2012 (UTC)Ischaldirh

Requested move II

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Jenks24 (talk) 07:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Gas giant → Gas giant planet – According to this CfD "Gas giant" is ambiguous. Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 13:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose it should be called Giant planet, since this article covers both gas giants and ice giants. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 03:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose as not necessary and excessive. The term gas giant is well accepted. If anything Gas Giants should be moved to Gas Giants (band). -- Kheider (talk) 08:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:23, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Ice giants as subset of gas giants
''From the Neptune article, which is currently a featured article. Astronomers sometimes categorise Uranus and Neptune as "ice giants" in order to emphasise these distinctions.[13] Neptune and Uranus are often considered a sub-class of gas giant termed "ice giants", due to their smaller size and higher concentrations of volatiles relative to Jupiter and Saturn.[44]'' Note these sources do not exclude Neptune from the category of gas giant, although they suggest that ice giant as a sub-category.Limefrost Spiral (talk) 01:02, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The term is evolving and I can see it both ways. Can we find a wording that leaves it somewhat open? Definitions for a planet, dwarf planet, meteoroid, or gas giant should have some wiggle room. -- Kheider (talk) 01:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * More fuzziness. Are super-Earths really mini-Neptunes? (Royal Astronomical Society 04 February 2013) -- Kheider (talk) 22:51, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Requested move III

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved Philg88 ♦talk 09:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Gas giant → Giant planet – The ice giants Uranus and Neptune are often distinguished from the gas giants proper Jupiter and Saturn because of their distinct difference in composition. When they are not, "giant planet" and "gas giant" are simply synonymous. Therefore, the neutral article title is "Giant planet". JorisvS (talk) 12:09, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per RM1 and various other comment sections on this talk page for about a decade ; "giant planet" is a better term, as "gas giant" is a subtype of giant planet, as are ice giants. It makes a better logical separation of the topics for this to use the term "giant planet" as it distinctly indicates that there is a subtype called gas giants. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:14, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Splitting the article in two is also fine by me. The edit history should remain with the "giant planet" article, since that is the history of the article. So, the page should still be moved before splitting it, as it is the general article, not the gas giant subtype article. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:17, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

 *  Oppose  there already is a planet based article on Ice giant. Gas Giant is the more commonly known term.  The article should be fixed not moved.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  12:01, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. Then there would still have to be an overarching article, which then be logically located at "giant planet". Would you support such a split? Though note that that overarching article is really currently this article, and that that's the reason I initiated this RM in the first place. --JorisvS (talk) 12:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a positive move might be the creation of a Giant planet article with content based on either of the two existing articles. However as "giant planet" is a comparatively rarely used term, I'd personally suggest that it might be advised for such an article to have comparatively limited content.  Other editors may disagree.  The important thing is that a logical presentation of information be made.  A possible title for a merged article could be Gas and ice giants.  There would need to be good justification. Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  01:44, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * In fact, something like that would be the goal! But because this article is now really about giant planets in general, this article should first be moved to preserve the edit history. Then, the content specifically about gas giants can be split off. Let's see how much would remain in this (moved) article with the specific content split off to a new "gas giant" article. A merged titled like "gas and ice giants" makes no sense, and is not in line with WP:TITLE, specifically that titles should use the singular form (WP:SINGULAR), and that, if a title can sensibly avoid having "and", it should (WP:AND), and possibly conciseness (WP:CONCISE), too. --JorisvS (talk) 11:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The priority for Wikipedia is that it provides good information and, if the best way to do this is to make this move then fair enough. It would be preferable I think to have Gas giant to be a major article on the basis that this is the major term.  I have made my vote! as oppose but hope that, if the vote is close that admin ignore this and allow the article to move quickly.  I think that it would be as easy to copy content into a new article and keep most content where it is. gregkaye  ✍ ♪  17:09, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
 * You could strike through your vote to be sure. I, too, hope that the new gas giant article will grow. --JorisvS (talk) 19:28, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

 * Support three separate articles Giant planet, Gas giant and Ice giant along the lines that have been outlined above, with the gas giant article mentioning that Uranus and Neptune used to be lumped together with the gas giants but not anymore. Astredita (talk) 19:54, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Defining the Difference between a Planet and a Star
The difference between a planet (a planetary body) and a star (a stellar body) in modern astronomy is significantly at issue.

Currently, many people understand that Jupiter and Saturn are planets in the solar system. This needs to be changed. The definition of our solar system needs to be updated.

I propose that Wikipedia assists with this update by defining our planet's 'solar system' as ending at the asteroid belt. Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune all have their own planetary systems, and are all much larger than a typical planetary system's planetary body. They are all gas giants at various stages of decomposition. It is misinformation to continue to assert that these stellar bodies are planets, and the discussion holds us back from going to explore them - as they are, in fact, the nearest stars. If people realized that these stellar bodies were the nearest stars, there would be more impetus to invest in their exploration.

I propose that a planet be defined as a planetary body, that does not emit it's own light, with an atmosphere transparent enough to allow the solid surface to be observable from space.

Alternatively, a star is a stellar body with one or more orbiting planetary objects.

Regarding Pluto, further research has shown that there are 50+ small planetary bodies close to the orbit of Pluto, which is evidence to the fact that in between Uranus, Neptune and Alpha Centauri there are many derelect small planetary bodies and that Pluto is only unique in that it happens to be the largest one and the most well-known.

Could we start with this page on 'Giant planet', by either deleting from it references to Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune or by specifying the difference between these four stellar bodies and the largest planetary bodies that we know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haerdt (talk • contribs) 21:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

 * @Haerdt I really can't take what you're saying seriously. Stars undergo nuclear fusion. The same thing goes for brown dwarves, but with deuterium and maybe lithium (for the most massive ones). Jupiter does not have enough mass to become a brown dwarf or a star, and if Jupiter can't become a star, than neither can Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune.
 * "They are, in fact, the nearest stars."
 * Isn't that the Sun? 65.34.40.139 (talk) 16:22, 15 August 2022 (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) 20:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Giant planet


text:
Timeline of aviation before the 18th century

This is a list of aviation-related events occurring before the end of the 17th century (on 31 December 1700):

Antiquity

 * c. 1700 BC
 * Greek myth of Icarus and Daedalus explores the desire to fly and the inherent dangers of it.
 * c. 850 BC
 * Legendary King Bladud attempts to fly over the city of Trinavantum, but falls to his death.
 * c. 500 BC
 * The Chinese start to use kites.
 * c. 400 BC
 * The Chinese invent an early form of the Bamboo-copter using feathers.
 * The Greek mathematician Archytas of Tarentum demonstrates an artificial pigeon on a wire. It may have been a kite.
 * c. 200 BC
 * The Chinese invent the sky lantern, the first hot air balloon: from its military use it became known as the Kongming lantern.
 * c. 100 AD
 * When Wang Mang tried to recruit a specialist scout to Xiong Nu, a man binding himself with bird feathers glides about 100 meters.

Middle Ages

 * c. 559
 * Yuan Huangtou, Ye, first manned kite glide to take off from a tower.
 * c. 875
 * According to 17th century historian Ahmad al-Maqqari, Abbas Ibn Firnas of the Emirate of Córdoba attempted flight using feathers and wings, though no mention of it independent of al-Maqqari has survived.
 * c. 1003
 * Jauhari attempts flight by some apparatus from the roof of a mosque in Nishapur, Khorasan, Iran, and falls to his death as a result.
 * c. 1010
 * Eilmer of Malmesbury builds a wooden glider and, launching from a bell tower, glides 200 metres.
 * c. 1165
 * During a lavish display of the wonders of the Byzantine Empire by Emperor Manuel I Komnenos in the Hippodrome of Constantinople, a "Turk" attempts to fly by jumping off of one of the central pillars with some form of winged construct, plummeting to his death.
 * c. 1241
 * The Mongolian army uses lighted kites in the battle of Legnica.
 * c. 1250
 * Roger Bacon writes the first known technical description of flight, describing an ornithopter design in his book Secrets of Art and Nature.

Modern Era

 * c. 1485 – c. 1513
 * Leonardo da Vinci designs an ornithopter with control surfaces. He envisions and sketches flying machines such as helicopters and parachutes, and notes studies of airflows and streamlined shapes.
 * c. 1500
 * Hieronymus Bosch shows in his triptych The temptation of St. Anthony, among other things, two fighting airships above a burning town.
 * c. 1558
 * Giambattista della Porta publishes a theory and a construction manual for a kite.
 * 1595
 * Fausto Veranzino illustrates a design for a parachute in his book Machinae novae (New machines). His "homo volans" (Flying man) design is based on the sail of a ship.
 * 1630
 * Evliya Çelebi reports that Hezarfen Ahmet Celebi glided with artificial wings from the top of Galata Tower in Istanbul and managed to fly over the Bosphorus, landing successfully on the Doğancılar square in Üsküdar.
 * 1633
 * Evliya Çelebi reports that Lagari Hasan Çelebi flew himself in a rocket artificially-powered by gunpowder.
 * 1638
 * John Wilkins, Bishop of Chester, suggests some ideas to future would-be pilots in his book The Discovery of a World in the Moon.
 * 1644
 * Italian physicist Evangelista Torricelli manages to demonstrate atmospheric pressure, and also produces a vacuum.
 * 1654
 * Physicist and mayor of Magdeburg, Otto von Guericke measures the weight of air and demonstrates his famous Magdeburger Halbkugeln (hemispheres of Magdeburg).Sixteen horses are unable to pull apart two completely airless hemispheres which stick to each other only because of the external air pressure.
 * 1670
 * Jesuit Father Francesco Lana de Terzi describes in his treatise Prodomo a vacuum-airship-project, considered the first realistic, technical plan for an airship. His design is for an aircraft with a boat-like body equipped with a sail, suspended under four globes made of thin copper; he believes the craft would rise into the sky if air was pumped out of the globes. No example is built, and de Terzi writes: God will never allow that such a machine be built…because everybody realises that no city would be safe from raids…
 * 1679
 * Italian physicist Giovanni Alfonso Borelli, the father of biomechanics, shows in his treatise On the movements of animals that the flapping of wings with the muscle power of the human arm cannot successfully produce flight.
 * 1687
 * Isaac Newton (1642–1727) publishes his Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, the basis of classical physics. In book II he presented the theoretical derivation of the essence of the drag equation.