Talk:Io (moon)/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Ionian vs. Ioan?
Some anon changed all the adj. forms to 'Ioan', claiming this was the form in the technical lit. I've never seen this, but if there is a ref, we could add it as an alternate. kwami 14:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- Examples of Ionian (yes, I know this is irregular given the Greek, but we're not speaking Greek):
- "The calculated loss cone ranges from ~1.5° to ~2.5° over one Ionian revolution around Jupiter."
- — Electron Beams and Ion Composition Measured at Io and in Its Torus, Science 18 October 1996
- "The UV emissions from the torus will reveal the nature of the Ionian material and Jupiter's energy output."
- —STS-95 Payload: International Extreme Ultraviolet Hitchhiker (IEH-3) (NASA)
- "PIA00709: Massive Resurfacing of the Ionian Volcano Ra Patera"
- —Title of NASA photo release.
- "These lava lakes could be an Ionian version of mid-ocean ridges"
- —quote from Tracy Gregg, assistant professor of geology at State University of New York, Buffalo
- Etc. kwami 18:00, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
some people use the word ioan for people from ioia USA —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.206.77.234 (talk) 20:23, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
"Ionian" is used to refer to a resident of the historical Greek city of Iona. I think it is Ioan. Ioia, USA is a small American town without a Wikipedia article. "Wikipedia is not for something you and your friends made up." 207.210.130.120 (talk) 13:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
New Horizon Io photo
Could we get a photo or two from the New Horizon craft in this article? There were a couple in a recent issue of astronomy with an interesting view of one of the volcanic plumes. 207.210.130.120 (talk) 13:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry no one has answered your question, but there are already two in the article, one is in the "Subsequent observations" section and there is an animated gif in the "Volcanism" section. This seems to provide appropriate weight to New Horizons observations. --Volcanopele (talk) 06:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Newspaper coverage from 1979
The Milwaukee Sentinel, Pasadena, Calif.--UPI, Jupiter moon shows color, erosion signs, Mar. 6, 1979, page 2: " . . . an orange world on the moon known as Io. Peaks, pits, plains and channels looked as if they were carved by water. . . . a sphere of varying shades of orange and yellow, with broad white blotches."
- I added this as a reference to our Observation history . . . Voyager section. I think it adds richness to include contemporaneous news coverage. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
File:Io highest resolution true color.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Io highest resolution true color.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 8, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-09-08. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Tense in the lead
The problem sentence is the last sentence in the lead: "Further observations have been made by Cassini–Huygens in 2000 and New Horizons in 2007, as well as from Earth-based telescopes and the Hubble Space Telescope as technology has advanced."
Strictly speaking this sentence is not grammatically incorrect, but I highly doubt the current meaning is correct. The sentence's current meaning is that scientists made observations from Earth-based telescopes and the HST because technology has advanced (emphasis mine). I think this is clearly wrong. The intended meaning should be, scientists were able to make observations from Earth-based telescopes and the HST because technology has advanced (again, emphasis mine). If my interpretation of the sentence's intended meaning is correct, then the sentence should have '... as technology advanced' at the end as opposed to '... as technology has advanced'. At the moment the word 'as' is synonymous with 'because'; on the other hand if the word 'has' is deleted then 'as' is used as a conjunction.
I'm going to delete the word 'has' because I highly doubt the current sentence is worded right. Banedon (talk) 08:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ah, I see the confusion. You're reading "as" to mean "for the reason that", but I (and I imagine the original author of the sentence) am reading it to mean "while". Both are possible ways to interpret the meaning of "as" in the context-- the perfect tense doesn't force the latter interpretation, nor does its absence force the former. So the solution to the multiple possible interpretations isn't to mix the tenses. It should either be "observations were made . . . as technology advanced" or "observations have been made . . . as technology has advanced" -- the tenses must agree.
- Come to think of it, the whole "as technology advanced" phrase isn't worth the trouble. It's confusing (how can Hubble's technology advance?) and pretty redundant. I'll take it out for now-- feel free to put it back if you disagree. A2soup (talk) 08:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- I agree it could be worded better, but remember that Hubble's technology has advance due to the Shuttle servicing missions. They didn't just fix problems, but pulled out old instruments and replaced them with newer versions or different instruments altogether. Each upgrade has definitely improved its on-board technology. — Huntster (t @ c) 14:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
This was one of the first moons discovered ... why is that not mentioned in the opening para
Every time this is mentioned in the lede, someone edits it out. It is extremely significant, that after our moon, it (with Europa) was the first to be found ! --EvenGreenerFish (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
- See Talk:Europa (moon)#This was one of the first moons discovered ... why is that not mentioned in the opening para ? --Double sharp (talk) 12:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Image suggestion
Have just come across this image. Is there a place for it here? Perhaps replacing File:PIA01129_Interior_of_Io.jpg in the Structure interior section. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 01:39, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- Done, replaced old cutaway with this much nicer version. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:27, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Jupiter as seen from Io's surface
The article on the moon Amalthea states that from its surface, Jupiter would take up 46.5° of the sky. How big (angular width) would Jupiter appear from Io? — Loadmaster (talk) 19:37, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Io (moon). 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 http://www.webcitation.org/5jwBSgPuV?url=http%3A%2F%2Fzimmer.csufresno.edu%2F%7Efringwal%2Fw08a.jup.txt to http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/w08a.jup.txt
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/gallery/sciencePhotos/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:25, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Geoss
Shouldn't this moon be called 'Geoss', as that's where an 'Ionian' would be from? Also the name 'Geoss' fits with the denomination of the Solar System, although I can't verify it. JS091793BRIGHTFIELD (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
- JS091793BRIGHTFIELD, you'd have to better explain this reference...I don't understand where you're coming from. Regardless I think, but no, the moon should not be called anything but what it has historically been called. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Video of eruption
There's a spectacular video of an eruption here: [1]. If the rights are available, can this be uploaded? Spikebrennan 15:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It's a NASA image, so it's public. I'll have a go at swapping it for the still image of Tvashtar. Serendipodous 17:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Why does the caption for this image say "spewing material 330 km into space" in apparent contradiction with the first paragraph of the volcanism section which states: "material (like ash) are blown up to 200 km (120 mi) into space." So which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.98.190.153 (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Radius of orbit.
Is the number given, 421,700 km, actually the distance from Jupiter or is it actually the radius of the orbit? If you subtract the radius of Jupiter, this makes the moon at a distance of 352000 km from Jupiter. This seems very close to me. Are you sure the radius you have listed is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.129.13 (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
- It is correct. The number is the radius of the orbit and indeed, Io is about 350,000 km from Jupiter's cloudtops. Double sharp (talk) 07:35, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Is (click for animation) needed?
In section Orbit and rotation, a gif is shown. Generated thumbnails of GIFs are restricted depending on the size of the original GIF. The page shows animated gif for me. It seems that the restriction was updated. Are there other ways the thumbnails can be generated? For a mobile version of the page, perhaps? If the proper animated thumbnail is generated for all versions of the article page, the "(click for animation)" note could be removed. —andrybak (talk) 11:42, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Io not historic
"Io played a significant role in the development of astronomy in the 17th and 18th centuries. It was discovered in January 1610 by Galileo Galilei, along with the other Galilean satellites." says part of the opening paragraph. No, this piece is about the four Gaililean satelites, not just Io and should not be in this article at all, let alone the leading paragraph. The Io article should be about what is significant about Io, of which there is plenty.
IceDragon64 (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
Volcanos and Sulfur Dioxide
The comment: "Unlike volcanoes on Earth, Ionian volcanoes emit sulfur or possibly sulfur dioxide." is odd, because volcanoes on Earth often emit sulfur dioxide. Occasionally they even emit actual sulfur.
- I changed it to: "Similarly to volcanoes on Earth, Ionian volcanoes possibly emit sulfur and sulfur dioxide". Miraceti 17:03, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- I think the volcanos on Io emit significantly more sulfur and sulfur dioxide than those of Earth, however. In fact, I recall that it wasn't until Galileo that there was evidence that there was any silicate lava being erupted at all. If my recollection is correct, the line should be a lot more strongly worded than that. Bryan 18:15, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- This issue isn't whether Earth or Io emits more sulfur (or Sulfur dioxide) during volcanic eruptions, it is that on Earth, there is far more variety in volcanic gases than is apparent on Io. Volcanic eruptions on earth tend to spew large amounts of water vapor and carbon dioxide, gases absent on Io. not sure where this puts the statement in this article but I hope this helps. Volcanopele 19:55, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
Request for references
Hi, I am working to encourage implementation of the goals of the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Part of that is to make sure articles cite their sources. This is particularly important for featured articles, since they are a prominent part of Wikipedia. The Fact and Reference Check Project has more information. Thank you, and please leave me a message when you have added a few references to the article. - Taxman 17:43, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
EO?
On Jeopardy today there was a clue where the answer (question) was "What is IO?" but the guy said "What is EO?" and they accepted it. This made me wonder if there was another pronunciation. I looked around and found this PBS webpage that says the 4 moons are "Eo, Europa, Ganameta, and Callisto". Is Eo an alternate spelling? What's the deal? -- 1 July 2005 06:01 (UTC)
- No, but it's an alternate pronunciation. I assume that the Jeopardy answer was spoken, not written? I also notice that the PBS page is a transcript, and transcribers have to write down a lot of stuff they know nothing about; especially with proper names, they often just make a guess at the spelling. Note that 'Ganymede' is also spelled wrong. From the transcription, I'd guess that guy they were interviewing was trying to recreate the Classical Greek pronunciations. (Each of the moons in Wikipedia is listed with its Greek source, if you want to check it out, although a few are missing stress markings.) The Galilean moons would be pronounced [iː.ˈɔː] for Io (Îô), which with an English accent would come out as EE-oh; [ew.ˈrɔː.pɛː] for Europa (Eurôpê); [ga.ny.ˈmɛː.dɛːs] for Ganymede (Ganymêdês); and [kal.li.ˈstɔː] for Callisto (Kallistô). —kwami 2005 July 1 07:11 (UTC)
- P.S. A couple months ago, the various moon names were a hodgepodge of pseudo-Greek and naturalized English pronunciations, with no indication of what was what. They should now all have naturalized pronunciations, but for those who wish to pronounce Titan as tee-TAHN, the Greek (or Latin) is there as well.
- Oops, I take back part of my comment. The 'Classical' pronunciations are sometimes an attempt to recapture the Latin version of the names, not the original Greek. (They were borrowed by the Romans from the Greeks, and we got 'em from the Romans.) In these cases the stress would be the same as in English: Io would be EE-oh rather than ee-OH, and Titan would be TEE-tahn. kwami