Talk:James Jeans

message: :Image:JAMES jeans 1933.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:JAMES jeans 1933.png

message: many physics textbooks refer to Jeans criterion, as do many webpages. Should not this somehow be incorporated into this article in some fashion? Elmsgrover (talk) 20:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's mentioned in the article as Jeans instability. Praemonitus (talk) 23:56, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jeans criterion 

message: Clerihew Bentley, who wrote comic verse about famous people of his time, wrote this one for Jeans: "Sir James Jeans/ says exactly what he means./ He is being perfectly serious/ when he talks of the universe being mysterious". 2601:C2:201:4612:D54E:E641:9AE8:6ECC (talk) 01:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clerihew 

message: Two sources are followed by quotations, one from Jeans himself (about the world being mathematical), one from Teilhard about Jeans (and the phenomenon of Life). This feels strange to me. If these are interesting, the matter should be treated in the main text. If the amazement (?) (or not) of Jeans about Life is not worth mentioning, it should not be introduced indirectly in a quotation from a source, especially with a quotation alluding to opinions that are not given. --Dominique Meeùs (talk) 15:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations under Sources 

message: After several years (the better part of a decade it seems) I returned to find this section still mostly a dumping ground for raw quotes. I took the initiative to address these issues by reducing the number of bare quotes to one and otherwise adding in context and citations as needed. The section now proceeds in a chronological order and takes its overall sense of the progression of Jeans's views from a Physics Today review of The Mysterious Universe from 2020. I hope this edit is taken in the constructive spirit in which it was intended, but if anyone sees problems or mistakes, obviously do feel free to comment or pitch in. -Miskaton (talk) 20:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Idealism: Part 2 

message: I've not read Milne or Khan, but https://enlightenedcrowd.org/james-jeans-and-religion-a-universe-in-the-mind-of-god/ does not seem to support this, or perhaps agnosticism was but one stage in his life. Either way, it seems that a fair article would reference more of his philosophy or theology than "Agnostic Freemason." Mar5604 (talk) 13:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agnostic Freemason