Talk:Venus

Presence of Phosphine on Venus

The statement "By late October 2020, re-analysis of data with a proper subtraction of background did not result in the detection of phosphine" seems to have now itself been rendered outdated by the original team who has now found a smaller amount of phosphine but still seems to have found phosphine none the less. Maybe amending this section to say the status of phosphine is still uncertain considering the multiple contradictory analyses of the atmosphere are now available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmesco17 (talk • contribs)

References

Is there something we can do about the infobox photo?

I don't like how the current infobox image shows Venus cropped at the left. Can we find some image that shows all of Venus?

Maybe something like this.

Or maybe this, which is closer to true-color. Maybe someone could remove that weird yellow spot.

But, is there one that would actually work? — epicazowski (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

unlikely, as it seems like spacecraft imagery of venus in visible or near-visible light is sparse already. not much information is being lost here anyways considering venus looks like a blank beige cueball >>scourgezoned (it/its) 13:11, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

I do think the Mariner 10 photo, even if it's not in true color, is a more aesthetically pleasing image for the article as it is. Visible light is important but I think just saying "Venus in true color, with ultraviolet data added for detail" is a good stopgap for the thing--we haven't even seen some celestial bodies in visible light as far as we know. TheWhistleGag (talk) 22:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah the Mariner 10 photo is way better, it isn't cropped weirdly like the MESSENGER photo also in the second photo I'm pretty sure the yellow spot is Venus Wrongperson58 (talk) 13:22, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

I think the Mariner 10 photo should be the Mariner photo, it's just way better Wcamp9 (talk) 10:27, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Mariner 10 image data didn't include most of the red band, and this one didn't include green filters. I'd say we go to RFC to decide if full-disk or natural color is more important in this case. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:35, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

RfC: Natural color vs. full disk

Which image should be used in the infobox? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:11, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

• 
  A: Mariner 10, 7 February 1974; full disk, UV/orange bands
• 
  B: MESSENGER, 14 January 2008; partial disk, natural color

Poll

A for sure - while the MESSENGER photo may be closer to the true appearance of Venus as seen through our human eyes, a cut-off image in an infobox just seems sloppy as the lead image for such an important article. The MESSENGER image can be used in the body of the article, and the caption of both images should give context about why each images looks the way it does, but for a lead image of a planet none of us seem likely to actually see within our lifetimes, I think the less true-to-life image is fine. They both have great educational value, one is just a bit more polished. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 11:12, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

A - a better image that's more polished even though it's less like what we see. Jishara (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

• A It's not cut off and the colors look much better in my opinion. Slava570 (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

A - Its a more appropriate photo for an infobox, there is a precedent of using combination visible/non-visible light images for astronomical objects such as for Centaurus A, however the MESSENGER photo should be included in the page somewhere, but use the older version of the image from before 2023, as it is actually true colour, and not greyscale Wrongperson58 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

• A Appears much higher quality, though of course it must be noted that it's not true color. Agree that the MESSENGER photo should be included somewhere though. —Leaf.Sheap ⇖ /.°°.\ ⇗ (They•Them) 17:41, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Without a doubt, Image A. Between the two pictures, it gives a much better sense of what it looks like. Nonnatural colors are commonplace in space photography and the purpose should be more illustrative than strictly accurate. TheYearbookTeacher (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

As I understand it, the MESSENGER image is greyscale, not natural colour. Serendi^podous 10:13, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The version of this file from 12:59, 11 November 2022 isn't greyscale. Maybe revert to that version? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:37, 22 July 2026 (UTC)