explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:3095: Archaea

2025-05-29T07:37:34Z

162.158.233.117:

great, next time I get a disease caused by archea, I'll know who to blame [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.123|172.70.111.123]] 23:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
:After ruling out ''absolutely'' everything else (primarly that being sunshine, moon light and good times), I'm gonna suggest that it's "the boogie". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.115|162.158.216.115]] 23:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
''"Archaea has" in the caption is unfortunate, as it denotes that a lineage (a branch of a phylogenetic tree) has become pathogenic. Pathogens are living cells, not lines on a page. "Archaeans have" would have been better.'' I'm not 100% sure on the way Archaea is used grammatically in English, but isn't Archaea the plural of Archaeon, so it should be ''Archaea have''? Is the word Archaeans normally used?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.117|162.158.233.117]] 07:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3089: Modern

2025-05-14T20:31:41Z

162.158.233.117: Recency Bias and Nomenclature

Hate to be that guy, but wow, it’s empty [[User:Broseph|Broseph]] ([[User talk:Broseph|talk]]) 19:04, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

This strip reminded me of the comments in [[3063]]. Historians / historiographers typically define (early) "modernity" to begin around 1500. {{w|early modernity}} [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.126|172.71.182.126]] 19:12, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

A similar problem exists, where a recent version of the Bible is known as the New Revised Standard Version. It will be a bit awkward when it is not new, revised, or standard. [[User:BobcatInABox|BobcatInABox]] ([[User talk:BobcatInABox|talk]]) 19:38, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
:The US Military has a similar problem: naming a system "Next-Gen [X]" but then the "Next Gen" item eventually becomes the current generation, and is eventually moving towards being obsolete and you need a successor (next-next gen?).[[Special:Contributions/172.69.6.111|172.69.6.111]] 20:05, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
::I guess the phone companies got it right with the 3G, 4G, 5G naming. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:23, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Wasn't there an earlier strip describing a similar problem on Wikipedia edits, maybe tied to the {{w|recency bias}}? There's the idea that every more recent slice needs a new, relevant name. It also seems to work going backwards, where humanity's genus, tribe, subfamily, and family are "homo", "hominini", "homininae", and "hominidae" respectively. We seem to crave a name for every arbitrary slice that is relevant for a particular researcher. And now I'm thinking of Futurama's "New New York". I'm surprised there's not already a New New York somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.117|162.158.233.117]] 20:31, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3081: PhD Timeline

2025-04-28T13:26:13Z

162.158.233.117:

<noinclude>{{notice|This comic is about present-day politics and the {{w|Second presidency of Donald Trump|Trump administration}}. Additionally, the comic is about a controversial immigration-related action taken by said administration. Please {{w|WP:DFTT|don’t feed the trolls}}: don’t give recognition or respond to trolls or vandals. If you find vandalism, revert and move on. If the vandal is a registered user, {{w|WP:RBI|revert, block, and ignore}}. As with these contentious topics, please don't write in a biased and slanted manner. Always be considerate of the other side, don’t {{w|WP:CIVIL|attack people}}, and always {{w|WP:AGF|assume good faith}}. (In case you need assistance in blocking a vandal, message [[User talk:Kynde|Kynde]].)}}</noinclude>

What an age we live in... --[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al | Converse]][https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa%27al My life choices] 15:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:[https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/25/politics/fbi-director-wisconsin-judge-arrested/index.html It only gets rougher... ] It's enough to radicalize a person. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.187|172.69.65.187]] 16:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:When even Randall starts freaking out, it usually indicates the most entertaining timeline. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.245.161|162.158.245.161]] 00:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:: I will only grant this only if we have a happy outcome for all the people already damaged by your current government. I look forward to Nazis getting punched and the Ark of the Covenant being opened [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 14:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::: Pretty sure this ''is'' a happy outcome for everyone who voted for this. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.159.201|172.68.159.201]] 21:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Events like this are scary, and they're even scarier if you have a personal or geographic connection to them like Randall does. I can understand why he would feel frustrated about his inability to do something concrete, and if this comic raises awareness for the situation then it has done a good thing. Not sure why I thought this comment was necessary; maybe it's just a way of processing the emotions that the comic made me feel. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 15:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
: Agree, those of us that are non-US look to the US to uphold human rights. Very sad. [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 14:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::A misplaced sentiment. As bitter as it is to say, it's clear the US doesn't care for human rights anymore. The CDC is plastering some bullshit about gender ideology on the page for HIV, immigrants can be dragged off for no reason, the DoD is literally erasing history from their website and only put it back after people got mad...[[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.115|172.69.70.115]] 12:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I dont want to start an argument, but I am glad Randall Munroe is making a specific, reasonable point. A lot of times I see people saying either "there is no antisemitism on campus, nobody should ever get deported, ACTUAL terrorists should get green cards", and others say "EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME SHOULD GET DEPORTED, EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST." I think both of them are extreme points obviously, and I am glad Randall is just taking the side, for now, of "this specific person did not violate their green card visa."
:''"...EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS A TERRORIST."'' That are literally the words that a Trump official was reported to have said. If you protest the actions they take against anyone they label as a terrorit, YOU will be treated as a supporter of terrorism. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Hi, expert-on-the-Öztürk-case but not-an-immigration-expert-really here. For clarity, Öztürk held an F-1 student visa but was not a lawful permanent resident (LPR) (green card holder), unlike the similar case of Mahmoud Khalil (Columbia university) who was a green card holder. And "green card visa" is not a thing, there's a "green card," which you cannot "violate" (although you could commit crimes that might have consequences for your LPR status), and you generally don't hear "violate their visa" although it's true that a visa is related to and may restrict that work you can do in the country. Regardless, no allegations have been made that Öztürk violated anything laws or rules or did anything other than lend her name to speech in a newspaper. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 22:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::Yes thank you johnhawkinson. I do not know the terminology. Ozturk did not, to my knowledge, violate any laws or rules. Thank you to the clarification.[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::as always, based randall, at least for now. [[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 16:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Did you mean "biased"? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Did you mean "biased towards due process?" [[User:CharlesT|Nyrrix]] ([[User talk:CharlesT|talk]]) 16:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::::It's probably "based", as that's a term that can either be used in support or mockery of a philosophical position (because of Poe's Law, hard to know which in most cases, including here). It's more usually used in 4chan-like responses (and I doubt Randall would be considered "based" in those other places) than hereabouts, so perhaps it needs some clarification for those not (or not enough) in that sort of crame of mind. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.94|141.101.99.94]] 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Yes I meant based. I know it is often used in a different space. I meant it in a [Satirical yet Agreeing while in a ironic mode of understanding that nothing is as it seems, but still definitely complimentary] mode. Basically, I agree with this and it is good[[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::Yes, Randall Munroe clearly only cares about this one incident because he does not at all care about politics. He's definitely not using this as an illustrative case on the countless other identical incidents happening under the Trump administration. /s /s /s /s /s. [[User:DrMeepster|'''Dr.'''Meepster]] (<[[User_talk:DrMeepster|chat]]> • <[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit}} reply]>) 16:53, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, Randall is currently calling out this one incident, and while he is obviously also disagreeing with many other incidents that have happened and will happen, he is not overgeneralising any specific criticism to every case. For instance, if he said "nobody who was deported has done anything wrong" i would disagree. He said "Ozturk did not do anything wrong" which i agree with. Sorry for the misunderstanding![[User:Tzelofachad|Tzelofachad]] ([[User talk:Tzelofachad|talk]]) 15:25, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

I really hope this is one of those comics that does NOT stand the test of time. In other words, I hope the next generation of graduate students sees this and thinks "oh, that must've been written in 2025, we don't have to worry about those kinds of things anymore." Perhaps "hope" isn't the right word, it implies I have hope. Maybe "pray fervently" is the right phrase. Sigh. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.227.72|198.41.227.72]] 16:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Sure ... "Oh, that was before third world war, we don't have to worry about those kinds of things anymore." -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:08, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:We can go back to considering how the Ph.D. became a participation trophy for the financial benefit of the awarding institution - and, in the sciences, a source of slave labor. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.146.61|172.71.146.61]] 01:51, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

How do we edit the Categories? This should have category Politics. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Usually, once at least one other category (not created from templates like {{template|comic}}) you can edit the page and see the other cat(s) at the bottom, beyond the comic-discussion template. Or edit the Transcript section (or any Trivia one, whatever's the last one) as that'll also have the tail-end of the page. So long as you know there's a category "Foo", you should be able to work out how to add "Category:Foo".
:But don't add Foo if it doesn't exist, hoping that someone will tire of the redlink that's created. You may be wrong about it needing to exist, or miss the ''actual'' "Category:comics featuring Foo", and unless someone is feeling generous it's possible that your edit just gets reverted as not properly researched, or checked... I ''think'' there actually is a Politics category, by that name, but I'm trying to answer the general question, not yet going out there to look it up for certain (at which point, I may have just added it myself, making it useless to have explained how you could 'easily' do it... At least in this instance).
:'''TL;DR;''', though, look at the source (wiki-edit) of another comic that is about Politics and is so categorised. Go all the way to bottom, and you'll see which 'tag' you might want to put at the bottom of this one. Should be obvious. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.94|141.101.99.94]] 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::I think I've added that category now [[Special:Contributions/104.23.190.60|104.23.190.60]] 19:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm so tired of this administration :( [[User:CharlesT|Nyrrix]] ([[User talk:CharlesT|talk]]) 16:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Are you a citizen of the USA? If so, are you dead? In exile? In jail? Have your assets been seized? No to these? Then this is your administration and mine. Own it, or act. "Tired" doesn't cut it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.21|172.71.147.21]] 02:02, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::Your point being...? [[User:GammaRaul|GammaRaul]] ([[User talk:GammaRaul|talk]]) 14:49, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

The comic on mobile has the title text has a youtube video URL, and if you click on the comic on desktop version, it links to the youtube video of the arrest. This isn't reflected in the description currently. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.121|172.70.126.121]] 16:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

The video URL is '''https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyypeEEOklM''' and appears to be "'''CBS Boston [282K subscribers]'''" so probably legit?
I will try to add the URL. --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 17:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:For the sake of consistency, I copy-pasted the "note" from [[1723]] into this comic. '''I also think we should have a category and perhaps a template to make adding notes like this easier and more uniform.''' [[Special:Contributions/172.69.67.22|172.69.67.22]] 21:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
::''"I copy-pasted...."'' Thank you! --[[User:PRR|PRR]] ([[User talk:PRR|talk]]) 03:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::Well, you can create it right now if you want! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 22:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Is this the first with an out of site link? {{unsigned|Commercialegg|18:00, 25 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::No this happens often. For instance this comic {{xkcd|1723}}. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 20:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Again, let's keep the explanation as neutral as possible. Facts only. [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 18:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Dunlap's Laws. 1. Fact is solidified opinion. 2. Facts may weaken under extreme heat and pressure. 3. Truth is elastic. (Arthur Block's "Murphy's Laws", 1977.) - "Facts are elite, facts are fungible, facts are false. And once nothing is true, anything can be true." Alan Burdick, ''Trump vs Science'', New York ''Times'' Newsletter, 25 April 2025. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.22.41|172.68.22.41]] 02:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
: the problem is facts have a heavy anti trump bias. You CAN NOT state basic facts and not be against this regime [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.187|162.158.112.187]] 00:05, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:: I think it's important to emphasize that neutrality is simply a bias towards the truth rather than towards anything else. On a technical level, being unbiased precludes being neutral and being neutral precludes being unbiased, even if people mostly use the word "unbiased" in the same way as "neutral". In other words, bias isn't inherently a bad thing.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.219|172.71.102.219]] 00:48, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::"A bias towards the truth" is a bias towards what my homies and I declare to be correct - since 'absolute truth' does not exist, all 'truth' is relative, is what 'my homies and I declare to be correct'. This bias is not trivial, as you point out. Explanations on xkcd have striven to cover the "what, when, where, who, how" of the associated comic, and have striven to omit "what do we think about all this" except as is necessary to describe "what, when, where, who, how". The goal is laudable, but [''ahem''] difficult to manage when the topic is a lit match on a powder keg. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.143|108.162.245.143]] 02:34, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::: This "no absolute truth" false neutrality nonsense is a bad faith argument rooted in pop philosophy and obfuscating rhetoric intended to discredit the existence of inconvenient facts. There's a famous, if apocryphal, parable about the philosopher who tried to argue this sort of hogwash to the oncoming train that hit him. Gravity exists, the Earth is not flat, and the current administration is run by a bunch of idiotic narcissists actively harming people for personal profit. [[User:Scorpion451|Scorpion451]] ([[User talk:Scorpion451|talk]]) 04:23, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::"To be properly neutral, you have to give all sides equal time and credence!" This turns out not to be the case. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Of course, the bit I was correcting (with bad grammar, and lack of facts) got totally changed about before I tried to post it. "''For instance citizens usually {{w|Deportation of Americans from the United States|cannot be deported for any reason}} (only extradited, although the US typically refuses to comply with requests even from countries that freely extradite to it), and would instead be subject only to local legal penalties, but relatively minor allegations have resulted in visitors' extraditions.''" was what I wrote. Now, I ''think'' that was neutral enough, but it doesn't fit there now anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.113|172.70.58.113]] 22:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
:Ack, I think I'm the one who changed it before you could. My bad. Anyway, seconded. Opinion on the conflict in Gaza itself is not needed in this explanation; the edit that suggested that the student could be materially linked to Hamas by providing a link to an opinion poll of how Palestinians feel about the Oct 7 attacks is, in my opinion, very disingenuous, especially considering Ozturk is not Palestinian but Turkish, making the cited data even more blatantly irrelevant than it already would have been. [[User:Psycherprince|Psycherprince]] ([[User talk:Psycherprince|talk]]) 23:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

This article could potentially be a reasonable place to try to establish a norm of separately including opposing sides of political topics (rather than the usual edit conflicts). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.176|172.70.110.176]] 00:35, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Step 6: Try not to lose your visa when traveling or studying abroad by being a nuisance, since visas (in any country) can be denied or revoked for virtually any reason. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.168|162.158.112.168]] 01:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Pray the leopards never eat your face. {{unsigned ip|172.69.138.29|26 April 2025 (UTC)}}
::I'll bring decoy meat and try not to insult the cheetahs while visiting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.186|162.158.112.186]] 01:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Do nothing whatsoever controversial, because you don't know who will be running things within a few years? Or what liberties they may take with due process or law? Certainly one wouldn't want to run afoul of officials who are, say, flat-Earthers, Biblical literalists, or holders of unusual views regarding medical practise. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::There is no inalienable right to travel or study abroad, so doing anything "controversial" as a visitor definitely puts you at risk of "being shown the door", as Randall likes to put it. The van full of thugs was added just for drama, but underneath it's no different than being denied a visa for some social media post, which has been happening at least since Obama. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.159.201|172.68.159.201]] 21:29, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
::"...within a few years"? We have that today. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 23:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Hang on. Why does the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ]] say no references? We literally have reflist template and a bunch of pages with references. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 04:24, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:I've never seen a page with references besides this one. I guess the template could be used for other things, but we don't use references in explanations. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 09:32, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
::They have been rare, they are (usually) eventually reworded to be 'inline onward references' (i.e. just 'standard' directly hyperlinked text, of whatever kind: [], [[]], {{template|w}}, etc), and I've done that myself on occasion There may even be some cases where the additional "ref"ness available from a ref-tag is more useful (e.g. multi-instance-same-ultimate-external-resource, or metadata).
::It is very true that we highly prefer not-a-Ref links (which editors used to other wikis might not appreciate), I'm uncomfortable with the idea that the reflist template is now quite so "you should ''not'' be seeing this!" in nature. Without actually lookingnat "Pages which use the reflist template"/whatever (I presume you did this?) I'm not sure whether there are any that I would retain, but there may be one or two that I'd be in no hurry to convert to the typical/desirable links instead. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.163|172.69.43.163]] 16:39, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. He will send in black ops instead." Good that I'm a German. Such stuff can't happen in Germany. Ever! ;-) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.172.244|162.158.172.244]] 11:08, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
:Germany would never deny a visa to an outspoken nazi sympathizer? They couldn't even bring themselves to grant asylum to Snowden because some free speech is just too costly, but that's not the same as a visa, I guess. Maybe he can still get a tourist visa for a quick trip from Moscow to Berlin, but the next trip would be to extradition prison. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.112.182|162.158.112.182]] 23:42, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

As it is now, the reason given for Özturk's detention is a half-truth. She was not detained because her visa was revoked. That would only prevent her from re-entering the US, if she left it. In contrast, Özturk's visa was revoked in secret, and she did not know about this until after she had been grabbed off the street and treated like a terrorist, or like a dissident in a South American regime.
https://oiss.washu.edu/visa-status-stamps/ says: "The visa stamp is solely for entering the U.S. You will need it again only when you leave the U.S. and intend to re-enter using that visa. It’s sometimes called an “entry visa,” which is different from “status,” a concept explained below. The visa stamp can expire at any time after your entry to the U.S. without affecting your non-immigrant status. If you leave the U.S. and your visa has expired, you will need to apply for a new visa in order to re-enter the U.S." — "Non-immigrant status (also referred to as “status” or “immigration status”) is a non-physical legal condition, granted by an official of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) when you are admitted into the U.S. at a port of entry. Once you obtain non-immigrant status, you must maintain that status throughout your stay in the U.S. unless you legally change to another status."
ExplainXKCD leaves unexplained whether Özturk's immigration status changed, and on what charges she was detained, or whether she was detained without a charge. It is unclear how her visa revocation is related to her arrest, as a visa revocation would not normally lead to an arrest (or does it?). If the ExplainXkCD's failure to explain the reason for Özturk's arrest is related to the US government's failure to explain the reason, then that should be made clear.
Or simply say, "we're not explaining it because politics, go read Wikipedia and educate yourself", but then explainxkcd should not suggest that the reason is the visa revocation. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.159|162.158.95.159]] 04:25, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:I've added a brief note that ordinarily, visa revocation is not, in itself, grounds for detention. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 18:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
:Linked the Tufts Daily article she co-authored (which has been claimed to be related to her detention), but it would go better in the References section. Someone, please amend this? I'm too exhausted to do it properly right now. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.6.3|162.158.6.3]] 21:52, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

The claim of genocide in the explanation is in fact false. There is no genocide. However, as all sources here are biased, and some claim that there is a genocide, I think a better description would be something like "the Gaza war, which is sometimes considered a genocide". The article also misrepresented this - the only plausible thing was that Palestinians were a group that could theoretically be genocided. [[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 11:09, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:I'm not responding to this person, as they are undoubtedly beyond reach, but I needed to make a comment to clarify that the view that Israel is committing genocide is widely accepted among organizations like Amnesty International and international scholars on genocide. This is not a partisan take but simply an observation. To say there is factually no genocide in Gaza is selfishly inserting your opinion without looking at the diplomatic landscape. This post is aimed at people who, like me, get incredibly frustrated when they have to read comments by genocide or holocaust deniers. {{unsigned ip|162.158.233.116|12:47, 28 April 2025}}
:: Genocide has an actual definition. The war in Gaza does not meet it.[[User:Jerdle|Jerdle]] ([[User talk:Jerdle|talk]]) 13:12, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
:(I ''was'' responding to the above (no-indent) voice, but was Edit-Conflicted by the last message... Can't see what they should have signed with. // Ok, now I can, and done!) I would not have put the word "genocide" myself. Nor do I think it's, at this stage, a "war"... It's been a "I hit you 'cos you hit me" thing for so long that "conflict" is better, punctuated by the 'armed forces' of either(/all) sides mostly attacking the civilians on the opposing side with very few proper "army v. army" encounters (whatever either side says about their own intentions).
:However, it is indeed very likely correct in to use "genocide", emotive and assumption-filled as it may be, by the original coining of the term. Targetting a national and/or ethnic group in order to perform acts resulting in "the disintegration of its political and social institutions, of its culture, language, national feelings, religion, and its economic existence".
:Both Israeli and Palestinian actions have been made with the express purpose of making the opposing group "go away" in all those various ways, and right now it's the Israelis who are dismantling the Gazan nation, both violently and 'non-violently'. (And possibly the US, if you take POTUS's statements seriously of scattering all Gazans to free up the real-estate opportunities.) It isn't (necessarily) Aushwitz-level ''killing'' that group out of existence, but it qualifies to the definition of the word.
:I would avoid "genocide" ''mostly'' because it gets interpreted as the full holocaust/death trope, but it's definitely going on (and, for some, it might even ''be'' considered that level). If we use it for everything that it ''could'' be used for, it might devalue its meaning. But the aforementioned definition is happening here, and ''probably'' well within the top 10% of all applicable current uses (if we're crass enough sort by "how genocidy" things are).
:It's a pity that there aren't the nuances available and commonly understood to avoid this kind of conversation (OTOH, it'd make you wonder about the world if there was, indeed, a globally recognised "league table" of these things, and yet nobody then doing anything particularly good with this information). As I said, I wouldn't put the word there. But I certainly wouldn't remove it, either. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 13:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::: See above (sorry, didn't notice your reply when I inserted my ECed one in again, but can't easily rearrange without rewriting things). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.13|172.70.162.13]] 13:19, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I wish Randall would layoff the politics for a moment. Not because it isn't important or worth discussing, but xkcd is one of the few escapes for the hellhole that is the world and Id rather not be reminded of how everything sucks. Glad he's bringing awareness tho. Also, here's praying that the trolls don't descend -anon [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.173|172.69.70.173]] 11:55, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
::I know where you're coming from. I'd rather an ''entertaining'' comic, primarily. But on the "all it takes [...] is for good men to do nothing" basis, I'm glad he ''occasionally'' makes points like these. He's human{{Citation needed}} and we know he has Opinions. The occasional overtly political point (not even being sneaky about it, unlike some) is understandable and... I'd say "forgivable", but I personally don't see anything needing to be forgived.
:Obviously, it could grate against the sensibilities of those who are politically opposed (even if intellectually in his typical audience type), but we all have to take the rough with the smooth. I know I'm fortunate, here, that I'm not ''too'' politically dissimilar in attitude (though different country, different personal concerns). There's some other creators where I can still appreciate them while clearly not exactly on my side of the political fence (with the redeeming feature that they may come to different conclusions, but at least they do so with internal logic, not just soak up a lazy mindset). And it would be boring never to be challenged like that.
:Given the amount of commentable situations that politics has presented, a couple of political comics that ''happen'' to be inspired in quick succession isn't necessarily a sign of anything new. Same old Randall, and I can't see this completely turning off people who weren't already fully turn-offable before. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.33|172.70.85.33]] 13:14, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

3063: Planet Definitions

2025-03-14T18:55:43Z

162.158.233.117: link to Classical Planet on Wikipedia

{{comic
| number = 3063
| date = March 14, 2025
| title = Planet Definitions
| image = planet_definitions_2x.png
| imagesize = 653x1435px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Under the 'has cleared its orbital neighborhood' and 'fuses hydrogen into helium' definitions, thanks to human activities Earth technically no longer qualifies as a planet but DOES count as a star.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|The explanation is too short.}}

This comic addresses the controversy of whether of Pluto is a planet and gives many other humorous definitions of what a planet could be.

Prior to 2006, there was no formal definition of a "planet" and it was generally accepted as a colloquialism there were nine planets around the Sun, Pluto included. As more sophisticated methods of mapping the Solar System were developed and Eris was discovered to be even more massive than Pluto, it became clear to astronomers that a more standardized definition was needed. In 2006 the International Astronomical Union (IAU) published their formal redefinition of a "planet" to require a planet to be gravitationally dominant within its orbit, disqualifying Pluto (and Eris) which is now considered a "dwarf planet." This has been subject to push back from countless people, including [https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.15285 some planetary scientists], but in numbers mostly nostalgic laypeople dissatisfied with Pluto being "demoted" or otherwise relegated.

This comic takes things a step further with a chart showing what does and does not qualify as a "planet" under several definitions, most of them fairly nonsensical.

Apparently Randall has seen Uranus (see 'Empiricist'). This is fairly rare, since it usually requires a telescope pointed in just the right direction. Technically [https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/skills/how-see-uranus-in-night-sky Uranus ''is'' visible to the naked eye] under the very best viewing conditions, but these conditions are rare and it again requires knowing exactly where to look.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A table with 3 columns, labelled "Definition", "# of planets", and "Solar system". The last row is a drawing of the Solar system, with elements included in the definition of the row colored in green]
:['''Traditionalist:''' Pluto is a planet | 9 | Mercury, Venus, the Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune + its satellite (probably an error, and Pluto should be colored instead]
:['''Modern:''' Pluto is not a planet | 8 | Mercury, Venus, the Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto (probably an error, Pluto should not be colored)]
:['''Expansive:''' Dwarf planets are planets | 17+ | Mercury, Venus, the Earth, Mars, Ceres Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and other dwarf planets in the Kuiper belt]
:['''Ultratraditionalist:''' Only the classical planets are planets | 5 | Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn]
:['''Condescending:''' Only giant planets are planets; the rest are big asteroids. | 4 | Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune]
:['''Simplistic:''' Anything gravitationally round is a planet | 37+ | the Sun, Mercury, Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Ceres, Jupiter and its moons, Saturn and Titan, Uranus and its moons, Neptune and its moon, Pluto and other dwarf planets in the Kuiper belt]
:['''Grounded:''' Only objects a spaceship has landed on are planets | 10 | Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars, some asteroids, and Titan]
:['''Regolithic:''' Anything covered in dirt and ice and stuff is a planet | infinity | Mercury, Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Ceres and all asteroids from the Asteroid belt, the moons of Jupiter, Pluto and other dwarf planets in the Kuiper belt and their moons]
:['''Lunar:''' You can't be a planet if you don't have a moon | 12+ | the Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and some other dwarf planets in the Kuiper belt]
:['''Solipsitic:''' Earth is the only planet | 1 | the Earth]
:['''Judgemental:''' Only the prettiest ones are planets | 6 | the Earth, Jupiter and one of its moons, Saturn and Titan, Triton, and Pluto]
:['''Empiricist:''' Only worlds that I, author of this table, have personally seen are planets | 12 | Mercury, Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars Jupiter and its moons, Saturn, and Uranus]
:['''Marine biologist:''' Only objects with oceans are planets | 6+ | the Earth, some moons of Jupiter, and two moons of Saturn]
:['''Maritime:''' Only objects with '''''surface''''' oceans are planets | 6+ | the Earth, and Titan]
:['''Universalist:''' They're all planets | infinity | the Sun, Mercury, Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Ceres and all asteroids from the Asteroid belt, Jupiter and its moons, Saturn and Titan, Uranus and its moons, Neptune and its moon, Pluto and the Kuiper belt]
:['''Existantialist:''' What is space '''''itself''''' is a planet??? | ''Duude'' | the Sun, Mercury, Venus, the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Ceres and all asteroids from the Asteroid belt, Jupiter and its moons, Saturn and Titan, Uranus and its moons, Neptune and its moon, Pluto, the Kuiper belt, and the space around it]
:['''Spiteful:''' '''''Only''''' Pluto is a planet | 1 | Pluto]

==Trivia==
The comic contains a few errors:
*The 'Traditionalist' definition has Neptune's satellite {{w|Triton (moon)|Triton}} colored instead of Pluto.
*The 'Modern' definition has Pluto colored as a 9th planet. It appears that the images for 'Traditionalist' and 'Modern' are swapped.
*The 'Judgemental' definition has 7 colored objects instead of the labelled 6.
*There are seven {{w|Classical Planet|classical planets}}, but the 'Ultratraditionalist' definition excludes two of them. An even more traditional definition would include the sun and the moon as planets.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Space]]

Talk:3063: Planet Definitions

2025-03-14T18:49:23Z

162.158.233.117: Classical Planets should include Sun and Moon

The one currently posted has Pluto highlighted in the second box and not highlighted in the first box. Too hard to tell if it's trolling or a genuine mistake. :-D

And the first one also has a moon hilighted instead I think?? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.5|162.158.126.5]] 15:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

:Was about to write the same. The coloring in the first two lines arund Pluto seem wrong (or mistankingly switched). --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.222.246|172.71.222.246]] 16:17, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

the coloring of Pluto does look inverted in the two first lines, they probably got switched by mistake--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.90.43|172.71.90.43]] 17:28, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

This, this is the hill I will die on. I was radicalised by this paper: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.15285 Moons Are Planets: "Scientific Usefulness Versus Cultural Teleology in the Taxonomy of Planetary Science"]
In short; planets are what planetary scientists study. Round things with the *good stuff*: atmospheres, oceans, volcanoes (of lava or water ice) (see diagram page 53).
Pluto, Titan, Ceres, Io and Europa are all in the sweet spot where you're not so small you're just a lump of rocks who happen to be stuck together into a lump, and not so large you're just a mostly undifferentiated mass of fusing hydrogen/helium plasma.
And it's consistent with our pre-20th Century understanding of what a planet is, whereas the IAU definition is trying to preserve 19th Century astrology. An amazing read and a strong recommend for anyone who cares about this subject. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.138|172.69.79.138]] 16:45, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Does this sort of count as pi-related for pi day? [[User:TomtheBuilder|TomtheBuilder]] ([[User talk:TomtheBuilder|talk]]) 17:04, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
:he doesn't do themed comics anymore 😔 [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 17:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

I was somewhat disappointed to get to the end of the table without seeing either an astrology or Sailor Moon joke. -- [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 18:12, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Is it possible that Uranus is marked under "Empiricist" because of the "Randall has seen Uranus" joke? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.178|172.70.42.178]] 18:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

The "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_planet Classical Planets]" should be 7, including the Sun and the Moon.