File talk:Portrait Confused With Johannes Kepler 1610.jpg

Can anyone create a English description? --Extra999 (talk) 12:01, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Wrong attribution

According to arXiv:2108.02213 this picture does not show Johannes Kepler but most likely rather his teacher Michael Mästlin. I guess the attribution should be somehow corrected and a new picture (maybe one from the arXiv article) put up in its place.Paepse (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

The hypothesis of fake Kremsmunster portrait of Kepler is not proved. It is not acceptable. Alena Šolcová alena.solcova@fit.cvut.cz — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 46.23.62.21 (talk) 07:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

According to the cited arxiv preprint (S.N. Shore & V. Pavlı́k: How a fake Kepler portrait became iconic, Physics Today, September 2021, physics today) there is overwhelming evidence that this is not Kepler. To the contrary, only beginning with wikipedia got this portrait, whose authencity was rejected already in the 1930s by Zinner (see Arxiv), widespread in the web as a Kepler-Portrait. It must be removed in all Articles on Kepler and related topics. By the way, its a copy from the 19. century and in the Benedictine Abbey Kremsmünster--Claude J (talk) 07:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)