Talk:Table of planets and dwarf planets in the Solar System
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
this is a translation of de:Planet (tabelle)
Contents |
[edit] 2003 UB313
It is doubtful that this object will be named a planet. Instead, it is far likelier that what should have been done earlier, namely removing Pluto from the list of planets will occur. In any case, until the IAU decides that we have either added or lost a planet, this table should remain unchanged because of this discovery. Caerwine 00:50, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
- So why has Pluto already been removed? As of current, it's considered a planet. - Reed Braden 18:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Also, I can't seem to find any news of this in national newspapers, NASA.gov, IAU.org, etc. Shouldn't news of this magnitude be swarming all over the press? I thought the IAU meeting to redefine a planet and add/remove planets was today... this should be bigger than people are giving it credit for. Also, Ceres and Charon are on the list of planets under consideration. There were 12 others I'd never heard of before that were original candidates, but I guess they were too far to count as Solar System planets. This is deeply confusing. Why does nobody care? - Reed Braden 18:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A new planet
I heard there was a new planet that was discovered sometime ago. Nicknamed Xema it's about 10 billion miles away from the sun...anything on that?
- It's nicknamed Xena. It has a moon, Gabrielle. These are just nicknames, however. The planet is 2003ub313. I heard there was an Internation Astronomy Union meeting today to discuss adding this to the canon of Solar sytem planets along with the "moon" of Pluto, Charon, and Ceres, another planet revolving around our system. Also, Pluto is - by definition - a planet. Why is it not in this table? Did someone remove it? Who gave them consent to remove this planet? - Reed Braden 18:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- The IAU, apparently. They passed an amended resolution today. No new planets, and Pluto is officially demoted to dwarf planet. -- Shadowlynk 18:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ceres and Xena
If Pluto remains on this table, we should add Ceres and Xena, otherwise we should remove Pluto 132.205.93.19 02:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Added Ceres to the list, also listed as a dwarf planet. I have now also added 2003UB313 to the list (some boxes are left blankas the data is not availabe), I think the update tag can be removed now, does anyone disagree?
[edit] Keep It!(?)
For pedagogical purposes, I think that the distinct planets and dwarf planets would preferrably coexist peacefully (in the same table). I also think that the table should make the distinction clear, and that the title then should be Table of planets and dwarf planets in the solar system.
Just a reflection...
Said ... tomas.kindahl@comhem.se at CET09:49:45 25 aug -06.
- I've restored the dwarf planet information. While I understand Seinfreak37's argument about the title, I still think that the information is much more useful when it is in one, easy-to-compare location - as opposed to being spread across two articles. I'm also proposing to move this article to Table of planets and dwarf planets in the solar system in a few days, if there is no objection. --Ckatzchatspy 19:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Table of Dwarf Planets
As the dwarf planets have been removed from this table, I there own article here. Should these 2 articles link to each other? User:Jebus0 8:35pm 26 August 2006 (EDT)
[edit] Sea Level?
Is it meaningful to talk about sea level for other bodies without seas? Would people object to replacing it with the term datum? --86.133.69.11 07:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with the previous suggestion. Datum is more appropriate than sea level.
[edit] Smaller font-size...?
This is a wide table; anyone else think a smaller font-size (90%) plus maybe some blankspace reduction acceptable...? Regards, David Kernow (talk) 23:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
