Talk:Methods of detecting exoplanets

message: "only a very few extrasolar planets have been observed directly" I don't think it is fair to say very few eoplanets have been observed directly. 11 have now been directly observed (out of a total 430 odd in total that have been detected). few maybe, but not very few. Georgeryall (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 11? Whatever the number is though, you're right: we should probably just cite that rather than using a vague phrase like "very few", as long as it's emphasized that the bulk of what we know about extrasolar planets has been gathered using indirect methods (since that addresses what seems to be a popular misconception about the state of our knowledge about them).   — Aldaron • T/C   21:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It has gotten more complicated. There are over 20 planets resolved directly and many more which are directly detected, but not resolved from the host star. --Artman40 (talk) 20:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: very few

message: :Image:GQLupi b.jpg 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 insure 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) 17:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:GQLupi b.jpg

message: I have only the vaguest idea of what this sentence means. Can anyone rephrase it in more generally comprehensible terms?24.69.167.26 (talk) 04:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I rewrote most of that paragraph. Let me know if it makes sense as it is now. James McBride (talk) 02:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The phase function of the giant planet may be constrained, which will lead to constraints on the actual particle size distribution of its atmospheric particles." 

message: While reviewing this article, I noticed that the diagram "Motion of Barycenter of solar system relative to the Sun" was a relatively poor quality gif file, the source URL was to a PhotoBucket account that is now disabled, and it was for the years 1945-1996. Therefore I created two new diagrams and uploaded them to Wikimedia for you: 1) File:Solar System Barycenter 1944-1997.png is a complete recreation of the diagram in the article with the same years and path to verify validity of my algorithms, and 2) File:Solar System Barycenter 2000-2050.png which is a more "current" diagram for the years 2000-2050. Feel free to use one or both of these public domain png files if you want to replace the older diagram. Larry McNish, Calgary Centre of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_2000-2050.png
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_1944-1997.png
68.144.133.105 (talk) 12:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solar System Barycenter diagram 

message: It might be informative if this article contained a representation of the so-called "Perryman tree" showing the planetary detection methods. See page 9 of Perryman 2000. Thanks. Regards, RJH (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Perryman tree" 

message: So... a new method for planet discovery... the method used for discovering Neptune - perturbations to the orbit of a known planet. 
76.65.129.5 (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  new method 

message: It currently says that exoplanets cannot be directly observed because they're too faint. As a simpleton, I don't fully understand this. Is it due to a limitation in current-day optics? (We simply don't have telescopes big enough?) Or is it some other reason: no matter how big the telescopes are, we just can't observe because there isn't enough light photons coming our way? --Zybez (talk) 05:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need further explanation in directly observed section 

message: Can this method be moved to "Established methods" section yet or are planets around DP Leonis and NN Serpentis to be dynamically unstable like proposed planets around HW Virginis, NSVS 1425 and HU Aquarii? --Artman40 (talk) 23:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eclipsing binary minima timing 

message: I created a table to show what planetary attributes can easily be determined by different detection methods assuming that it's the only planet in the system and the system itself is a single-star system.
Attribute           	Radial velocity	Transit               	Microlensing     	Direct imaging	Pulsar timing	Astrometry	Orbital phase reflected light variations
Orbital period      	Yes            	Yes                   	No               	Yes           	Yes          	Yes       	Yes
Semi-major axis     	Yes            	Yes                   	Loose constraints	Yes           	Yes          	Yes       	Yes
Orbital eccentricity	Yes            	With secondary eclipse	No               	Yes           	Yes          	Yes       	No
Orbital inclination 	No             	Yes                   	No               	Yes           	No           	Yes       	Loose constraints
Mass                	Minimum mass   	No                    	Loose constraints	No            	Yes          	Yes       	No
Size                	No             	Yes                   	No               	No            	No           	No        	Yes
Feel free to improve and correct it it. --Artman40 (talk) 00:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Table

message: Should this section be renamed "Orbital phase light variations", "Orbital light variations" or "Direct detection" as it does not just encompass reflected light but also emitted light by high temperature? --Artman40 (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Orbital phase reflected light variations

message: This article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPRESSO
says that "our Earth induces a radial-velocity variation of 9 cm/s on our Sun". 
This should be fitted into this article as well. Kortoso (talk) 21:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radial velocity 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050915080856/http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk:80/~rhdt/diploma/lecture_2/ to http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rhdt/diploma/lecture_2/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Are the exoplanets of closer stars easier to image than those of farther stars? I would imagine so, but is there a source that spells it out? Kortoso (talk) 17:33, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct imaging 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100630110925/http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/blogs/astronomy/2010/06/22/astronomers-verify-directly-imaged-planet.aspx to http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/blogs/astronomy/2010/06/22/astronomers-verify-directly-imaged-planet.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217133217/http://exoplanet.eu/papers/exo_science.pdf to http://exoplanet.eu/papers/exo_science.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131126160805/http://www.keckobservatory.org/article.php?id=231 to http://www.keckobservatory.org/article.php?id=231
*Added  tag to http://www.kis.uni-freiburg.de/~sveta/papers/exoplanet_hd189733b.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090604100620/http://steps.jpl.nasa.gov/links/docs/pravdoshaklan09vb10b.pdf to http://steps.jpl.nasa.gov/links/docs/pravdoshaklan09vb10b.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060927012051/http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/papers/nature03507.pdf to http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/papers/nature03507.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904010715/http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/news/firstFind.cfm to http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/news/firstFind.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified