Talk:Johannes Kepler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleJohannes Kepler is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 15, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 6, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 20, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 8, 2004, March 8, 2005, March 8, 2006, March 8, 2011, March 8, 2013, March 8, 2015, March 8, 2018, and March 8, 2019.
Current status: Featured article

Wrong portrait of Kepler[edit]

According to arXiv:2108.02213 this picture does not show Johannes Kepler but most likely his teacher Michael Maestlin. I don't see a good replacement but it seems to me that this picture should not stay on the page! Is it possible to use one of the two more believable pictures from the arXiv article?Paepse (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Paepse: File:Portrait of Johannes Kepler.jpg or File:JKepler.jpg. --Thibaut (talk) 13:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Paepse and Thibaut: FYI: In the Dutch version this proposed correction is already applied by ChaokangTai on Aug 9 2021, by replacing said portrait with this one by Hans von Aachen. --C04DF16B (talk) 14:44, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Paepse and Thibaut and C04DF16B: for information, I have written a new paragraphe in the de-Wikipedia and fr-Wikipédia about Keplers portraiture. My feeling is : if the Kremsmunsters Kepler-portrait is wrong and became iconic after 2006, it is because Wikipedia has diffused it. So Wikipedia has to recognize this fact and to explain why this image has been taken back. If you agree, I propose you to make the seem in the en-article. A good source-document is for example aryabhata '(de)'. Regards. --Jacques Mrtzsn (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don’t see why not. Thibaut (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It seems like this decade long misrepresentation of Kepler on Wikipedia itself is worthy to be mentioned in the bio. Tom Ruen (talk) 14:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    How a fake Kepler portrait became iconic (So how did the fake Kepler portrait spread? Except for Wolf’s and Günther’s mentions, we cannot find any examples of the portrait attributed as being Kepler before 2005. That’s the year the portrait first appeared on Wikipedia, and thereafter it became ubiquitous. For example, it appears in a European Space Agency press release from 2011 (explicitly citing Wikipedia))
    File:Johannes Kepler 1610.jpg (Often mistaken for Kepler but is a 19th century copy of an unknown original, allegedly from 1610. It is more likely based on the portrait of Michael Maestlin, Kepler's teacher. )
    I see it is still linked various places, including here: [1]

pls make me a slideshow on the life of kepler it’s for science and you are very smart and nice.[edit]

I have a project in science and i need a slideshow in his early life, adulthood, late time and a story from their life 50.237.188.172 (talk) 13:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We typically don't do homework for people here. However, if you'd like to look up some free-to-use images for your slideshow, scroll way down to the bottom of the article under the "external links" section, and there is a link there in a box titled "Wikipedia's sister projects" with a link to "Media from Commons". That will be a good place to look. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Koestler's Kepler in History of Science subsection[edit]

I am surprised to see no reference to Arthur Koestler's "The Sleepwalkers" in the 'History of science' subsection of this article, but only in the 'Cultural influence and eponymy' subsection further down. Koestler made Kepler the central figure of his entire work, as the archetypal confluence of induction and reduction in the European Renaissance. For Koestler, in Kepler one sees an operator acting under the influence of both logical positivism and mystic inspiration, attributing them both with equal importance in his work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.204.235 (talk) 09:05, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]