Talk:Dwarf planet/Archive 4

4244:. If a particular astronomer has proposed an object as a candidate dwarf planet, then the article should state as much and not leave out any of the essential details. But until a consensus is attained at the IAU, or if there is widespread consensus in the international scientific community (which I understand is essentially the same thing), the article should not be definitively stating the object is a dwarf planet. There's no need to try to get ahead of the scientific community on this; Knowledge is already under enough negative opinion. Regards, 1510:. If a particular astronomer has proposed an object as a candidate dwarf planet, then the article should state as much and not leave out any of the essential details. But until a consensus is attained at the IAU, or if there is widespread consensus in the international scientific community (which I understand is essentially the same thing), the article should not be definitively stating the object is a dwarf planet. There's no need to try to get ahead of the scientific community on this; Knowledge is already under enough negative opinion. Regards, 31: 4485:

whether or not an object meets the criteria - which seems to me somewhat unlikely. Certainly, if the IAU has not made a ruling, we should mention that it hasn't, but beyond that, surely the only question is whether or not the source is truly reliable? Which, if I'm understanding this correctly, is beyond the scope of the RfC as stated - it certainly isn't something I feel competent to judge on myself, not being highly experienced with the astronomical literature.

1751:

3118:" It is, unfortunately, not so simple. If there was agreement on which bodies were, & were not, DPs, we wouldn't be debating it. Nor, IMO, is WP the place to be settling it. Nor are we qualified to. What verifiability, in this instance, appears to amount to is battling cites, & that seems to me a bad idea. I would rather we err in favor of caution: name bodies by what they're known to be & leave the debate alone until it's a settled issue. 384:" It is, unfortunately, not so simple. If there was agreement on which bodies were, & were not, DPs, we wouldn't be debating it. Nor, IMO, is WP the place to be settling it. Nor are we qualified to. What verifiability, in this instance, appears to amount to is battling cites, & that seems to me a bad idea. I would rather we err in favor of caution: name bodies by what they're known to be & leave the debate alone until it's a settled issue. 4218:

a filter to hide potentially useful information from readers. If the astronomy community views the IAU as the gold standard, then the best approach is to identifying these non-IAU bodies as "not yet identified as DP by IAU". That designation in the article would be an objective thing to do, and still convey good info to the readers. Thus the article could potentially include two lists: DPs that are IAU approved, and those that are not. If a

1484:

5182:, not to somebody else's preferred change. Anybody edit warring to include a particular point of view, particularly while discussion is taking place, is being disruptive and should be discouraged as necessary. In this case, the moral high ground of "that is what the sources say" is far too simplistic a justification for a change as the disagreement is about what the sources are in fact saying and how to express that. -- 2448:, not to somebody else's preferred change. Anybody edit warring to include a particular point of view, particularly while discussion is taking place, is being disruptive and should be discouraged as necessary. In this case, the moral high ground of "that is what the sources say" is far too simplistic a justification for a change as the disagreement is about what the sources are in fact saying and how to express that. -- 3557:: Rather than agonizing over whether or not a particular body can be called a dwarf planet "officially", it seems simpler and more informative to be inclusive with notation. Currently, the article has several separate tables which could stand to be merged down into one, possibly two. Different row shadings, with legends, can indicate the "official"-ness of each body's classification. 823:: Rather than agonizing over whether or not a particular body can be called a dwarf planet "officially", it seems simpler and more informative to be inclusive with notation. Currently, the article has several separate tables which could stand to be merged down into one, possibly two. Different row shadings, with legends, can indicate the "official"-ness of each body's classification. 4976:

factually stating that more information is necessary. I only see three possibilities, it either is a DP, and we have data to prove it fits the definition, or it is not a DP and we have data to prove it fails some criteria, or it is not scientifically known and more research is necessary. It should not be too hard to source a body into one of those three categories. IMO --

2242:

3630:

way of knowing the credentials of those involved, I really have to rely on the professional bodies. In this case, there is neither acceptance by that body nor confirmation, AFAICT. (I will admit ignorance of the details, so I may well be wrong on that last.) So I would oppose accepting an unconfirmed discovery (as noted above). I expect, again, to be in a minority...

896:

3537:

a respected expert (perhaps the discoverer) says it's a bird, is it only "potentially" a bird, or a "bird candidate" until it appears in a definitive catalogue of fossil birds? Or can we here on WP accept it as a bird based on verifiable statements of the expert, who may have not yet formally published its classification as a bird? —

803:

4154:

frequently called as such while nobody has called Quaoar a dwarf planet, even Brown himself. There is no evidence that this is going to change because Brown has made a political statement. Quaoar will become a dwarf planet when either IAU declares that it is or if it is routinely called a dwarf planet in peer reviewed sources.

1420:

5910:": "Round or rounds can mean: The shape of a closed curve with no sharp corners, such as an ellipse, circle, rounded rectangle, or sphere." An ellipse or an ellipsoid is therefore round, but not spherical. Brown of all people would know that Haumea (which he lists in the same category as Orcus) is not spherical! -- 3800:

there's no verification from other scientists, and it's part of his desire to loosen up the IAU's procedure. Again, why exactly are we rushing to rewrite now when we did not under similar circumstances in 2007? Why is there such a problem with describing Sedna et al as "highly likely" DP candidates? --

1066:

4503:

After reading this thread, it is clear to me definitively labeling certain celestial objects as Dwarf planets is sufficiently contentious to require a balanced presentation of opposing views. In such case, Knowledge should not endeavor to take a position one way or the other. Instead we should simply

4217:

describes a body as a "dwarf planet" then it should be in this article, even if it has not passed the IAU litmus test. The reason is that it is the encyclopedic thing to do: the article should contain a comprehensive summary of all material on the DP topic: it should not use the IAU litmus test as

4132:

As for leaving things to the IAU, I disagree fundamentally. You're turning science into a bureaucratic process rather than a scientific one. Hypothetically, the IAU becomes so sclerotic that they never address the issue again. We send a probe to Sedna and find that it's unequivocally in HE. According

4055:

Every estimate for Eris shows it to be 2300 to 3000km in diameter. (Yes, the ~3000km estimates were too high) But we know Eris is only somewhat more dense than Pluto and that rocky bodies 900km in diameter are round. Eris is obviously a well measured dwarf planet, claiming otherwise is ridiculous. --

3711:

The blog post of M. Brown is just a political statement of a scientist who discovered all these bodies and wants them all to be classified as dwarf planets. IAU likely has another opinion. There are currently no evidence that these bodies are in hydrostatic equilibrium and everything that Brown wrote

3629:

it's been independently confirmed; the discoverer could be wrong on any number of things. (And I recall the famous case of the announced discovery which had failed to take account of the system noise... For which I still applaud the scientists involved for openly admitting the error.) Since I have no

3536:

So, if we have RS's that a body qualifies, but the IAU hasn't weighed in, is the body a DP for our purposes? This seems to be a philosophic difference of whether science depends on evidence and sourcing, or on formal acceptance of that evidence. An analogy would be, if a new fossil is discovered, and

2950:

I have no problem with the IAU defining the category. And lots of scientific categories are arbitrary: just look at biological taxonomy. My question is this: once the category is defined, is an object a member of that category because it fits the definition? Or is it only a member of that category if

1769:

1483:

1398:

1321:

977:

895:

802:

216:

5745:

And what you're doing is not synthesis? You've claimed, without any evidence, that the fact that the IAU has not ruled on these objects means that they are dwarf planets. You've decided, based on the personal website of a single astronomer with an acknowledged personal interest and thus in violation

5491:

Per the above discussion, there appears to be consensus to maintain the existing IAU-based structure of the article while this RfC is under way. Accordingly, I have reverted Kwamikagami's changes that modified the list of DPs to incorporate the four other objects. The tables now present the IAU 5 as

4392:

This is relatively old paper. Some assumptions the authors used are known to be wrong. Their classification is based on photometric observations. However it is known now that Orcus is viewed pole on. Not surprisingly it has zero photometric variability. So, it is dangerous to base classification on

3688:

In that case, the analogies seem a bit off (e.g., the fossil analogy). For bodies that have been known for quite awhile, the mass, size, and orbital elements (a, e, i, Omega, nu) are generally "known", so it seems entirely fair to include them, with some sort of note or reference on which ones have

2864:

Again, that isn't the point. There is no way we can use any one source, or even a plurality of sources, to determine whether or not an object is a dwarf planet. To do so is synthesis. We are not scientists and Knowledge is not a science journal. It is not our job to make calls on scientific matters.

2757:

1658:

954:

130:

5805:

1400km) and we know the proper mass of 3 out of 4 of them because they have moons with known orbits. OR10 and Sedna have unknown sizes, albedos, and masses and are only "nearly certain". Quaoar (rocky) and Orcus are measured and their masses are known, but they are much smaller bodies. This has all

5729:

as is not an acceptable way to source our articles. We follow sources. Can you find a single source that claims that the definition of a DP depends on the IAU declaring it to be one? If we have sources that these bodies are DPs, and no-one can find sources to the contrary, then our sources say that

4174:

a DP or is not a DP depending on whether it fits the def of DP. The only question is on whether we can establish that. You sound like a legal system which takes 'innocent until proven guilty' literally: That if you murder someone, you didn't actually commit the crime unless found guilty; if you are

4148:

When people are not sure they remain silent. And contrary to your assertion any classification work is a bureaucratic process. Success of any classification depends upon its acceptances by a scientific community. This has nothing to do with truth or scientific soundness of it. Classification can be

1440:

1414:

5990:

You still continue your POV pushing? Knowledge goes by reliable sources, not all sources. The default position is that blogs are unreliable, unless proven otherwise. The burden of proof lies on an editor who wants to use a blog. You have not presented any evidence of this blog's reliability beyond

5081:

I'd also appreciate some input with regard to the content. There is clearly disagreement as to the way in which we should present the material, and the active discussion is addressing that matter. However, Kwami has repeatedly rewritten and reverted the material to present his perspective, despite

4453:

True. But HE is a point, not a scale. (At least not for our purposes.) For classification, it doesn't matter how much over the HE limit a body is. In Brown's opinion, and we have no source to the contrary, all nine bodies "must" be in HE even if rocky. I can certainly see color-coding the table in

3894:

to be in HE based on those and other more-closely observed bodies. If from that we can say that Haumea "is" in HE, then we should be able to say that Sedna "is" as well. If we can only say that Sedna "may" be, then we should only say that Haumea "may" be. Unless, of course, HE is an administrative

3784:

The diameters vary because the website is more up-to-date. As he said, he will revise the figures as new info comes in. (And no, it's not a "blog". He linked to it from a blog.) Now, he does not include error estimates online, which makes it less complete that formal publications. More up-to-date,

3210:

Again, Brown has made it clear that he recognizes the IAU list as official, and has also made it clear that he published his list to shake things up with respect to the IAU. In addition, we have not addressed why this list should be treated any differently than his last one, in 2007(ish), at which

3195:

Wrong again. It's Britannica that's not a RS, as you'd know if you read our policy. Websites can be used if they're by a respected authority who is considered a RS when he's published. They aren't preferred, but are used when the material isn't published. And yes, Brown uses his blogs for opinion,

2347:

1719:

1160:

1050:

476:

461:

5975:

Keider, "nearly certain" is also how he describes Makemake and Haumea. You may believe that they are significantly different, but that OR: we go by our sources. You may imagine that Brown did not intend this as a serious proposal, but again that is OR: we go by our sources. Our sources either say

4268:

Agreed about not misrepresenting our sources and no OR, that's basic. To that end I had proposed saying something like "xxx is a TNO ... . Given current certainties, it must be a dwarf planet (even if predominantly rocky),{refs Brown+Tancredi&Favre} though it has not been included in the list

4169:

That is of course completely false. When people don't know, they commonly say 'we don't know'. You comments illustrate a profound ignorance of science: "Quaoar will become a dwarf planet when either IAU declares that it is or if it is routinely called a dwarf planet in peer reviewed sources." No,

4153:

only if there is a consensus in the scientific community that they are dwarf planets. IAU is simply an organization that speaks on behave of the scientific community and its position reflects the existing consensus. If you look into published journal articles, the five official dwarf planets are

4128:

be DPs. But we could easily have a source that says we can't be sure. Hold on, Brown: your conclusion is not supported by the evidence. Or: a magnitude of 1 is certain, but anything above that is not, so it's a legitimate cut-off point. Do you have such a source? Until you do, we have two sources

1534:

1435:

1419:

1394:

5777:

A personal interest violates UNDUE? Seriously? How many scientists have no personal interest in what they investigate? The IAU has an interest in this too: does that mean we cannot use the IAU as a source for Eris, Haumea, and Makemake? We follow our sources. If and when the IAU addresses these,

5004:

stop changing the text on the DP and related articles while this RfC is under way. Kwami insists on repeatedly editing pages to reflect his perspective on the matter even when it has been reverted by multiple editors, and I'm finding it frustrating to have to continually restore the pre-existing

4423:

But that's also true for Eris, Haumea, and Makemake. He uses the same wording for all: "near certainty" and also "must be even if rocky". And we have other sources that only Ceres and Pluto are observed to be in HE. Our articles currently reflect the bureaucratic delay at the IAU rather than our

3496:

Q: How will an official decision be reached on whether or not to call a newly discovered object a planet, dwarf planet, or a Solar System body? A: The decision on how to classify newly discovered objects will be made by a review committee within the IAU. The review process will be an evaluation,

2270:

1689:

762:

4975:

It seems to me that any source that defines an object as likely or probably is admitting their own uncertainty. Knowledge is not here to echo the uncertainty of another, let alone validate it with a label. In such an example, our neutrality policy would only allow us to expound the uncertainty,

4941:

You can treat a source as a reliable when it is convenient for you and as not reliable when it is convenient. A source is either reliable or not reliable: this black and white. Anything also is POV pushing. If this source is regarded as reliable than the article should state that 1999 TC36 is a

3799:

So, the pros: it's from Mike Brown and it is more recent. The cons: there's no error estimates, it's not a formal publication, there's no endorsement from the IAU (the body which has made pronouncements on every official DP to date, and which Brown clearly believes maintains the official list),

2241:

2207:

1065:

4484:

stating that an object meets the criteria to be a dwarf planet, then it is acceptable to list it as such, with a note to the effect that this has yet to be confirmed by the IAU. The only reasonable counterargument I can see to that would be if the IAU were the only possible reliable source for

3920:

the point Kwami. There are objects that are known to be dwarf planets, and objects that are assumed to be. Among those that are assumed to be, there are those the IAU has decided to class as dwarf planets and those the IAU has not. Since there is no rational way to gauge how much assumption is

3488:

I think there's a confusion here between "what solar system bodies can be called dwarf planets" and "what solar system bodies have been categorized as dwarf planets." The first is just an informal description. The latter is a list of bodies which have been so categorized by the appropriate IAU

1750:

1186:

754:

5773:

We follow our sources. Let me try that again: we follow our sources. We have a source that these are DPs. We have nothing that counters that. I'm not recasting anything on WP: we already acknowledge that many of these bodies will probably turn out to be DPs, it's just a matter of finding the

4687:

Kheider, even if more TNO's turned out to be yet-unknown binary systems (which can be excluded for Orcus et al. because they have already been resolved by the Hubble Space Telescope into a single small disc), two objects smaller than 400 km can only add up to a total "effective diameter" (as

1953:

4341:

rush to call them outright DPs when even Mike Brown is leaving himself wiggle room with "near certainty". All four of these candidates are estimated to be smaller than the IAU dwarfs, and we still do not have true knowledge of the mass of Sedna or OR10 since they do not have known moons. --

2849:

that it's a DP. I find that proposition dubious, but if true, we would need to revise quite a few articles to reflect this. Is there any consensus that this is the case? That is, is the IAU's "gatekeeper" role definitive? Or, conversely, is there any consensus that it is the IAU's published

1607:

115:

3157:

counts! We have astrologers over at the astrology talk page all the time insisting that astrology is legitimate science. By your argument, "if astrology weren't legitimate science, we wouldn't be debating it", and therefore we must present it as if there were an actual scientific debate on

423:

4504:

state "So an so calls such and such a Dwarf planet in some reliable source. (with a reference) This is contradicted by so and so who instead states such and such is not recognized as a dwarf planet, because of some factor." We present the facts and let the reader decide, as always.

2973:

fit the definition. One astronomer may say so; a hundred astronomers may say so, but there will never be absolute agreement. A line has to be drawn somewhere. For better or worse, in astronomy that line is drawn by the IAU, and the IAU has not drawn the line for these four objects.

1770:

239:

4789:

moon (i.e. primarily composed of water ice), so Brown's sentence IS correct as far as I can see. And I don't see how the small difference between 400km and "larger than Proteus"' 420 km would make any real difference for the "political declaration" you assume Brown to have made.

2055:

5052:

I've had to tag the section with the DP tables as disputed because Kwami is repeatedly rewriting it to suit his perspective, even while the RfC is under way. I've also had to self-revert - unfortunately leaving the article with Kwami's material - as this is becoming ridiculous.

2318:

5082:

objections from several other editors. I'd like to presume that there is consensus to revert his material to follow the convention we have used for the past five years, with the implicit understanding that this does not prejudice the outcome of this discussion. Thoughts? --

2348:

5515:

You've also modified it to imply that the IAU three are known DPs when they're not. I think it's silly to break up the table when there are much more legible ways to go about this, but if we're going to break it up, we should distinguish between known and suspected DPs. —

2781:

4593:" Obviously, the size estimates will be incorrect of those that turn out to be binaries. On the other hand, according to Tancredi&Favre (link above under "arbitrary break 3"), 1999 TC36's light curve is quite flat... (maybe whence the "(measured)" in Brown's list?) -- 1859:" Obviously, the size estimates will be incorrect of those that turn out to be binaries. On the other hand, according to Tancredi&Favre (link above under "arbitrary break 3"), 1999 TC36's light curve is quite flat... (maybe whence the "(measured)" in Brown's list?) -- 4660:

No, not everything on Mike's "near certainty" list is "far larger than this 800 km". You are talking about how Knowledge defines the lower limit for listing something as a dwarf planet. This is not something that Knowledge should define. A recent estimate in 2010 shows

1926:

5404:

I was responding to 'What consensus?' and referring to Wiktionary's definition thereof. Also according to Wiktionary, Sedna is merely a 'trans-Neptunian planetoid', there is no entry for Orcus or Quaoar and the 'dwarf planet' entry just lists the uncontroversial five.

5139:

You are once again missing the point. You proposed a different way of presenting the material, one which is under active discussion here. However, you are repeatedly reinserting your material before the discussion has concluded, and despite opposition to your changes.

2670:

2405:

3780:

Your speculation that it's "just a political statement" and therefore somehow unreliable. We accept Brown as a RS. Per our sourcing policy, it's perfectly acceptable to use informal publications by such authors. Whenever I say "sources", the "reliable" part is to be

1046:

4710:

nearly-equal-sized trinaries (but with different masses), "√3 × 400 km ≈ 692 km". So I still think we should be careful making Knowledge declarations using a personal website for objects estimated to be below ~800km. (I do agree that Orcus is a well studied binary

1976:

3532:

The IAU defined a new class of object, "dwarf planet" (here "DP"), to handle Pluto when it was demoted from planetary status. They created a physical definition of what a DP is, and also started a review process to determine whether a body fits that definition.

798:

3749:. Or may be the diameter of Orcus, which is listed as 950 km in the blog, while according to the article written by Brown it is 900 km. (Taking into account the latest measurements it can be as low as 800 km.) You are wrong that we follow sources. We follow 1015:. Or may be the diameter of Orcus, which is listed as 950 km in the blog, while according to the article written by Brown it is 900 km. (Taking into account the latest measurements it can be as low as 800 km.) You are wrong that we follow sources. We follow 5112:

We follow our sources. We have sources now we didn't have five years ago. Science doesn't stand still. If you want to include your perspective, you need to provide sources that support it. I really don't understand what's so difficult about that concept. —

4715:

that is icy, and I do not see how it would not be a dwarf planet.) But I am still concerned with Knowledge making dp-declarations based on a personal website. What harm is there in letting professional astronomers reply to Mike's declarations? There is no

2378:

1981:

4856:

Why should Proteus be "probably icy"? Since Neptune formed much closer to the Sun than where it currently is, it can easily have carried Proteus along from there, where rocky objects are the norm, whereas the TNOs formed where they still are, essentially.

2122:

5575:

Per my comment to JorisvS above, here are the sources and arguments for the existence of the IAU as gatekeeper of the category of dwarf planets. Quotes in italics, except any bolding is mine. And DP = "dwarf planet". My comments follow, doubly indented.

3730:

As for it being an attempt for fame, as you imply, why wouldn't he be pushing for them to be planets, as Stern is with Pluto? But again, that's irrelevant. We have no sources that Brown exaggerates the evidence or is otherwise an unreliable source. —

996:

3645:

To be clear, is this debate about the potential inclusion of as-yet-undiscovered bodies, or about the inclusion of bodies that have been known for some time (including their physical characteristics) that just haven't yet been designated by the IAU?

911:

4454:

this article according to direct observation, IAU acceptance, or mathematical modeling, as a reader suggested above, and noting in the ledes of the DP articles whether or not the IAU has formally accepted them as such, but the basic point is still

4070:

We have sources that Ceres and Pluto are known to be round. Perhaps you have a source that Eris is known to be round, I haven't seen one. But you're saying that it's "obvious". That's OR. We follow our sources, we don't do our own research here. —

1720:

1336:

3503:

Q: Are there additional dwarf planet candidates currently being considered? A: Yes. Some of the largest asteroids may be candidates for dwarf planet status and some additional dwarf planet candidates beyond Neptune will soon be considered.

769:

5839:

Does he actually say "spherical"? His DP page (linked by kheider) only mentions "round", by which I think it's clear he means hydrostatic equilibrium. Quaoar being elongated only means that it's like Haumea, not potatoey (given the mass).

2938:

force. It's only got the power of a professional association: that is, members agree to abide by its decisions. Thus, IAU definitions aren't strictly scientific (in the way, say, Newton's laws are). It's authoritative, because astronomers

204:

3712:

in the blog are just speculations. The blog has not been peer reviwed and (not surprisingly) contains some serious errors. So, I can conclude that it is not a reliable source and can be used neither in this article nor in any other.

978:

4519:

There is just one tiny problem with that: The lenghty discussions here have so far not produced any RS with which we could properly source a "This is contradicted by ..." part. If they had, they would have already ended long ago.

4287:

Currently the articles about Orcus, Quaoar, Sedna and 2007OR10 state that "they are thought by Michael Brown to be certainly dwarf planets". I think it is the most precise and actually the best statement in present circumstances.

1785:

1553:

4925:

There is also a binary in there which clearly does not qualify. This is, of course, why we disprefer self-published material. But when the author is reputable, we do allow it as a RS if the material is not otherwise available. —

2191:

5806:

been common knowledge for several years. The "nearly certain" list should be a separate table until there is a more obvious consensus/acceptance. Mike's website listing was meant to stir the pot at the IAU, not on Knowledge. --

4893:

to be 50 % rocky (and its article states that it is believed to be a captured centaur, i.e. it originated outside of Jupiter). And Proteus' density means that it must contain at least significant amounts of rocky material.

4479:

I'm responding to the RfC, and have no previous involvement with the article. This thread does seem rather confused, so I hope I'm not posting at the wrong point within it. Anyway, it seems to me that, if we have genuinely

2159:

1745:

5256:

I've gone through the articles linked above. I can't find it, aside from a few articles refraining from calling them DPs. Since I might have overlooked something, could you point me the passages you're referring to?

2522:

4995: 4628:" that it is an icy dwarf planet. 415km is the effective system diameter. As a result of the example set by TC36, any object estimated to be less than 800km in diameter should not be auto-upgraded by Knowledge. -- 1894:" that it is an icy dwarf planet. 415km is the effective system diameter. As a result of the example set by TC36, any object estimated to be less than 800km in diameter should not be auto-upgraded by Knowledge. -- 3445:

So I take it Mike Brown is now God? His opinion is to be taken as holy writ above all others? Or will we have to gather together every single paper ever published on this topic before we come to a conclusion?

711:

6006:

Your criticisms show that you do not yet know what a dwarf planet is, to the extent that when Tbayboy pointed out your error, you accused him of "just trying to play an advocate to Brown". Perhaps you should

3497:

based on the best available data, of whether or not the physical properties of the object satisfy the definitions. It is likely that for many objects, several years may be required to gather sufficient data.

2261: 763:

3175:

Blog are not reliable sources especially when they make controversial claims. And this blog is just a personal blog of M. Brown where he expresses his personal (often provocative) opinions. As to sources

441:

4030:

dwarf planets. As for the IAU, the fact that they have chosen not to rule on this IS their position. Until they rule one way or the other, that is all we have. Anything else is just "he said/he said".

1296:

5325:

The consensus is clear: it's not Knowledge's job to categorise objects into DP/not-DP. We err on the side of caution: we do not demand our presents early. The IAU is the obvious arbitrating source.

3609:(In fact, an IUPAC commission has even explicitly asserted that evidence for their respective discoveries is not yet conclusive, which the IAU has not done for the dwarf planets in question, AFAIK.) 2591:

The consensus is clear: it's not Knowledge's job to categorise objects into DP/not-DP. We err on the side of caution: we do not demand our presents early. The IAU is the obvious arbitrating source.

875:(In fact, an IUPAC commission has even explicitly asserted that evidence for their respective discoveries is not yet conclusive, which the IAU has not done for the dwarf planets in question, AFAIK.) 4692:

400km bodies to get the same amount of reflected light as for an 800 km body, not only two!) So every TNO above 566 km would still be a (double) dwarf planet even if it turned out to be a binary.--

4269:

maintained by the IAU.{ref IAU list}". This is what the sources have told us so far, I have not seen any source voicing any doubt over such certainties. As I responded to you above, it's not about

1958:

400km bodies to get the same amount of reflected light as for an 800 km body, not only two!) So every TNO above 566 km would still be a (double) dwarf planet even if it turned out to be a binary.--

1535:

maintained by the IAU.{ref IAU list}". This is what the sources have told us so far, I have not seen any source voicing any doubt over such certainties. As I responded to you above, it's not about

2998:™, not about anything (which has not been a reason to just leave it to some organization to say how things work/are instead of engaging in science!!). It is why WP's inclusion criterion has to be 264:™, not about anything (which has not been a reason to just leave it to some organization to say how things work/are instead of engaging in science!!). It is why WP's inclusion criterion has to be 4804:

Vast majority of TNOs are not known to be icy too. So what? Why does Brown claim that because Mimas is (almost) round all TNOs larger than it should be round as well? May be they are all rocky?

2070:

Vast majority of TNOs are not known to be icy too. So what? Why does Brown claim that because Mimas is (almost) round all TNOs larger than it should be round as well? May be they are all rocky?

4827:

icy (and therefore probably round). That's why he uses the "nearly certain" category only for objects large enough that they would be round even if they should be rocky, i.e. above 800 km. --

2093:

icy (and therefore probably round). That's why he uses the "nearly certain" category only for objects large enough that they would be round even if they should be rocky, i.e. above 800 km. --

3886:

it is. Of course, it's virtually certain, but "virtually certain" is not certain enough for some editors here. Our sources note that only Ceres and Pluto have been resolved well enough to

1152:

it is. Of course, it's virtually certain, but "virtually certain" is not certain enough for some editors here. Our sources note that only Ceres and Pluto have been resolved well enough to

5670:, where he asserts there is a list and that the IAU has set itself up as gatekeeper. In the comments, when asked why he thinks there's a list, he links to the Haumea press release above. 4240:

To me it is acceptable to include information about whether an object is a dwarf planet or not, as long as you do not misrepresent the opinions of the astronomers and do not engage in

3257:

POV. Not to mention divisive of the WP community, as the above discussion, IMO, clearly shows. Gentlemen, a little calm? Before we start calling for our seconds & our pistols? ;p

1506:

To me it is acceptable to include information about whether an object is a dwarf planet or not, as long as you do not misrepresent the opinions of the astronomers and do not engage in

523:

POV. Not to mention divisive of the WP community, as the above discussion, IMO, clearly shows. Gentlemen, a little calm? Before we start calling for our seconds & our pistols? ;p

5005:

versions when he does. (In case anyone was thinking of suggesting AN/I or 3RR, I'd like to add that I'd prefer to find a way to resolve this locally before going to those forums.) --

2271:

versions when he does. (In case anyone was thinking of suggesting AN/I or 3RR, I'd like to add that I'd prefer to find a way to resolve this locally before going to those forums.) --

3529:

I've asked for WP:astronomy to weigh in, but we're not getting much input. We have a fundamental disagreement, and could use input from editors familiar with WP sourcing policy.

795:

I've asked for WP:astronomy to weigh in, but we're not getting much input. We have a fundamental disagreement, and could use input from editors familiar with WP sourcing policy.

3507:

Don't forget that the IAU is not an arbitrary body imposing things on astronomers, but is the organization of professional astronomers given this responsibility by their peers.

773:

Don't forget that the IAU is not an arbitrary body imposing things on astronomers, but is the organization of professional astronomers given this responsibility by their peers.

5383:

Rothorpe, I don't understand what you mean by "see Wiktionary". According to Wiktionary, these four are dwarf planets. And of course it's not our job to do this. That's why

2649:

Rothorpe, I don't understand what you mean by "see Wiktionary". According to Wiktionary, these four are dwarf planets. And of course it's not our job to do this. That's why

5390:

Kheider, we should of course note that the IAU has not recognized these four. But by their own definition, that's not required for them to be DPs. We follow our sources. —

2656:

Kheider, we should of course note that the IAU has not recognized these four. But by their own definition, that's not required for them to be DPs. We follow our sources. —

3864:

to be more massive than Pluto and has the same diameter. If you have a problem with the IAU selection process I suggest you contact them and ask them to take action. --

1130:

to be more massive than Pluto and has the same diameter. If you have a problem with the IAU selection process I suggest you contact them and ask them to take action. --

5178:

I support reversion in such a case and would revert if necessary even I more-or-less agreed with the addition. The reversion should be, as far as practicable, to the

3161:

If you can show debate in the sources, we will need to reflect that. However, if there is no debate in the sources, then it is OR to put our debate in the article. —

2444:

I support reversion in such a case and would revert if necessary even I more-or-less agreed with the addition. The reversion should be, as far as practicable, to the

427:

If you can show debate in the sources, we will need to reflect that. However, if there is no debate in the sources, then it is OR to put our debate in the article. —

4189:

Since you are now resorting to personal attacks in order to continue you dishonest POV pushing, I am not going to participate further in any discussions with you.

4008:

leave it to the IAU, if the IAU were a source, but they aren't. They haven't addressed the issue at all. If and when they do, then we will use them as a source. —

1455:

Since you are now resorting to personal attacks in order to continue you dishonest POV pushing, I am not going to participate further in any discussions with you.

1274:

leave it to the IAU, if the IAU were a source, but they aren't. They haven't addressed the issue at all. If and when they do, then we will use them as a source. —

3745:

What speculations? That the diameter of Quaoar is listed as 980 km, when in fact it is 890 km? (probably typo) The latter value was published by Brown himself in

1011:

What speculations? That the diameter of Quaoar is listed as 980 km, when in fact it is 890 km? (probably typo) The latter value was published by Brown himself in

5509: 5022: 4175:

never caught, then you never committed the crime. There is such thing as reality, and we use sources to establish what our understanding of that reality is. —

3241:

settled, here. Which appears to be what's happening. IMO, the only viable option is to state something on the lines of, "This is debated by astronomers" &

2775: 2288: 1441:

never caught, then you never committed the crime. There is such thing as reality, and we use sources to establish what our understanding of that reality is. —

507:

settled, here. Which appears to be what's happening. IMO, the only viable option is to state something on the lines of, "This is debated by astronomers" &

3898:

Also, Eris does not have the smaller diameter. The diameters are equal to within the precision of the measurement. As for being more massive, that means it's

1164:

Also, Eris does not have the smaller diameter. The diameters are equal to within the precision of the measurement. As for being more massive, that means it's

5492:

dwarf planets and the other four as "nearly certain". Kwami, per previous requests, please allow the discussions to continue until the matter is resolved. --

4770:

is not round. I would say that this political declaration is rather sloppy work from the scientific point of view. At least I was disappointed when read it.

2758:

dwarf planets and the other four as "nearly certain". Kwami, per previous requests, please allow the discussions to continue until the matter is resolved. --

2036:

is not round. I would say that this political declaration is rather sloppy work from the scientific point of view. At least I was disappointed when read it.

5535:

List the DPs and prospective DPs in a table with a column 'Recognised by IAU'. There is no need for us to make any decisions, we can just state the facts.

2801:

List the DPs and prospective DPs in a table with a column 'Recognised by IAU'. There is no need for us to make any decisions, we can just state the facts.

4026:. That's it. What you ask for in response is impossible to find, as no scientific paper worth its salt would unequivocally say that these four objects are 1292:. That's it. What you ask for in response is impossible to find, as no scientific paper worth its salt would unequivocally say that these four objects are 4303:

Then I must ask the question: Have you taken a look at Tancredi&Favre? Links to the article are scattered in various locations around here already. --

1569:

Then I must ask the question: Have you taken a look at Tancredi&Favre? Links to the article are scattered in various locations around here already. --

2845:

is not a "scientific" concept, but an "administrative" one. That is, a body is not a DP because it fits physical/dynamical criteria, but because the IAU

111:

is not a "scientific" concept, but an "administrative" one. That is, a body is not a DP because it fits physical/dynamical criteria, but because the IAU

3475: 3997:"Since there is no rational way to gauge how much assumption is assumption enough" – my god, Serendipodous, of course there is! We follow our sources. 1263:"Since there is no rational way to gauge how much assumption is assumption enough" – my god, Serendipodous, of course there is! We follow our sources. 3625:

Then, again, still, I would disagree with WP policy. Discoveries are one thing; facts are another. I take a scientific discovery to be true (factual)

3620: 891:

Then, again, still, I would disagree with WP policy. Discoveries are one thing; facts are another. I take a scientific discovery to be true (factual)

741: 5562: 5032:, we might want to ask the editor to take a cool-down break and let the discussion come to a balanced consensus before making more reverts. Regards, 4393:

photometry only. Quaoar was not known to be an iron rich rocky object and they did not make any estimates of the critical size for such composition.

4046: 3936: 3640: 3438: 3272:

So far, all of you have failed miserably in showing the supposed debate in the sources. If you had, we wouldn't be having most of the debate here! --

2989: 2964: 2921: 2901: 2298:, we might want to ask the editor to take a cool-down break and let the discussion come to a balanced consensus before making more reverts. Regards, 1659:

photometry only. Quaoar was not known to be an iron rich rocky object and they did not make any estimates of the critical size for such composition.

538:

So far, all of you have failed miserably in showing the supposed debate in the sources. If you had, we wouldn't be having most of the debate here! --

230: 3461: 3016:. The only thing verifiable to put alongside the claim that these are DPs is that "these objects do not appear on the list maintained by the IAU".-- 886: 282:. The only thing verifiable to put alongside the claim that these are DPs is that "these objects do not appear on the list maintained by the IAU".-- 5787: 5765: 3669: 3584: 2828: 1312: 1202: 906: 704: 255: 187: 167: 4903: 4880: 4866: 4851: 4836: 4814: 4799: 4729: 4701: 4535: 3407: 3170: 727: 4985: 4235: 3025: 935: 850: 5938: 5919: 5774:

evidence. Brown feels that the evidence is now good enough to conclude that four of them are DPs. That's hardly revolutionary, and hardly SYNTH.

5454: 5440: 5414: 5205: 3698: 3683: 3566: 2169: 2146: 2132: 2117: 2102: 2080: 2065: 1995: 1967: 673: 436: 5544: 5399: 5223: 4970: 4952: 4494: 4467: 4448: 4199: 4184: 4164: 4096: 4080: 4065: 4017: 3992: 3921:

assumption enough, it's best to follow the IAU, as we have done since we began this project, rather than the opinion of any single astronomer.

3911: 3873: 3837: 3794: 3763: 3740: 3722: 3655: 3205: 3190: 3109: 2251: 1501: 1187:

assumption enough, it's best to follow the IAU, as we have done since we began this project, rather than the opinion of any single astronomer.

291: 3421: 3386: 3349: 3281: 3128: 2880: 2865:

We report. That's it. The IAU is the only organisation with the authority to make the call. So we wait for them to do so, even if they don't.

2720: 2706: 2680: 2471: 964: 949: 832: 687: 615: 131:

We report. That's it. The IAU is the only organisation with the authority to make the call. So we wait for them to do so, even if they don't.

6035: 6020: 6001: 5985: 5815: 5525: 5157: 5122: 4529: 3855: 3817: 3228: 2810: 2665: 2489: 2236: 2218: 1760: 1733: 1714: 1465: 1450: 1430: 1362: 1346: 1331: 1283: 1258: 1177: 1139: 1103: 1060: 1029: 1006: 988: 921: 471: 456: 375: 5944: 5378: 5364: 5348: 5334: 4255: 3267: 2859: 1801: 652: 547: 394: 146: 5280: 5266: 5251: 5237: 4780: 4751: 4682: 4655: 4637: 4602: 4433: 4403: 4387: 4365: 4351: 4312: 4298: 4142: 3546: 3516: 3363: 3327: 2791: 2423: 2388: 1795: 1121: 1083: 494: 5991:

that it was written by Brown, an expert in the field. But this is only a necessary, not sufficient condition for the blog to be reliable.

5191: 4282: 4086:"This now means that the family of dwarf planets in the Solar System is up to five. They are now Ceres, Pluto, Haumea, Eris and Makemake." 2644: 2630: 2614: 2600: 1521: 1352:"This now means that the family of dwarf planets in the Solar System is up to five. They are now Ceres, Pluto, Haumea, Eris and Makemake." 533: 125: 5956: 5901: 5886: 5864: 5849: 5834: 4513: 3595:

Knowledge evidence in other science areas suggests to go by the "experts", not the official body: e.g. we consider the chemical elements

3073: 3051: 2546: 2532: 2517: 2503: 2046: 2017: 1948: 1921: 1903: 1868: 1699: 1669: 1653: 1631: 1617: 1578: 1564: 1408: 861:

Knowledge evidence in other science areas suggests to go by the "experts", not the official body: e.g. we consider the chemical elements

812: 782: 629: 593: 5099: 5070: 5043: 2457: 1548: 5427:? They use WP as a source too. Tell you what: I'll make an assertion in some obscure WP article that Sedna is a full planet, wait till 2693:? They use WP as a source too. Tell you what: I'll make an assertion in some obscure WP article that Sedna is a full planet, wait till 1779: 339: 317: 5615:

So they interpret it as a formal, administrative category, else there would be no need to mention the footnote and have this sentence.

4961:

of our sources. We don't pick and choose as you want to do. We bring all sources that address the issue and summarize their claims. —

2943:, but not on its own. So, it would appear rewriting may be needed... Unless I've gotten it wrong... :( 19:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2365: 2336: 2309: 2227:

of our sources. We don't pick and choose as you want to do. We bring all sources that address the issue and summarize their claims. —

209:, but not on its own. So, it would appear rewriting may be needed... Unless I've gotten it wrong... :( 19:49, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 4935: 5739: 2201: 5369:

Orcus, Quaoar, Sedna, and 2007OR10 (smaller) should not be treated as on equal footing to Eris, Haumea, and Makemake (larger). --

3466:

Who are you ranting at? My post (and indeed this whole section) is not about Brown, but about the definition of a dwarf planet. --

2635:

Orcus, Quaoar, Sedna, and 2007OR10 (smaller) should not be treated as on equal footing to Eris, Haumea, and Makemake (larger). --

732:

Who are you ranting at? My post (and indeed this whole section) is not about Brown, but about the definition of a dwarf planet. --

4583: 2836: 5720: 4642:

Wow, "auto-upgraded by Knowledge"?? We were only talking about calling those things dwarf planets which the sources we have say

4226:

comes into play, and that should be omitted from the article, or else mentioned only in passing and clearly marked as fringe. --

1908:

Wow, "auto-upgraded by Knowledge"?? We were only talking about calling those things dwarf planets which the sources we have say

1492:

comes into play, and that should be omitted from the article, or else mentioned only in passing and clearly marked as fringe. --

3524: 3062:

We are confident enough in the size estimate to know that each one of these must be a dwarf planet even if predominantly rocky.

1849: 328:

We are confident enough in the size estimate to know that each one of these must be a dwarf planet even if predominantly rocky.

5387:. Why is that so difficult for people to understand? We follow our sources. If you can provide contrary sources, please do so. 4841:

In this case Proteus is also probably icy and not round, which means that (icy) TNOs of comparable size may be not round too.

2653:. Why is that so difficult for people to understand? We follow our sources. If you can provide contrary sources, please do so. 2107:

In this case Proteus is also probably icy and not round, which means that (icy) TNOs of comparable size may be not round too.

3846:: if we say that Eris is "highly likely" to be a DP. The only bodies for which this is actually known are Pluto and Ceres. — 3354:

We have read the resolution, and the subsequent press releases, and have come to the same conclusions as Brown and Tancredi.

1112:: if we say that Eris is "highly likely" to be a DP. The only bodies for which this is actually known are Pluto and Ceres. — 620:

We have read the resolution, and the subsequent press releases, and have come to the same conclusions as Brown and Tancredi.

102: 5445:

You said (00:37): "According to Wiktionary, these four are dwarf planets". But it does not say that. So now you attack it.

4554:

Hilarious! It is a triple-component system. With a diameter of ~285km, TC36 is at best "possibly" a dp as are the centaurs

2711:

You said (00:37): "According to Wiktionary, these four are dwarf planets". But it does not say that. So now you attack it.

1820:

Hilarious! It is a triple-component system. With a diameter of ~285km, TC36 is at best "possibly" a dp as are the centaurs

790: 5757: 4038: 3928: 3829: 3453: 2981: 2913: 2892:

the point. That is exactly the point I was making. We cannot report what the journals say, but only what the IAU says. —

2872: 1304: 1194: 1095: 719: 247: 179: 158:

the point. That is exactly the point I was making. We cannot report what the journals say, but only what the IAU says. —

138: 6025:

You ignored the comment directed at you and is instead accusing me of some errors that exist only in your imagination.

4591:

All icy satellite larger than 400 km are round, so we expect these objects to be round if the size estimate is correct.

1857:

All icy satellite larger than 400 km are round, so we expect these objects to be round if the size estimate is correct.

5891:

So, where is it written that "spherical" and "round" are not synonyms? Please, do not treat others as complete fools.

5874: 4439:

But to the best of our knowledge Eris, Haumea, and Makemake are all larger than Orcus, Quaoar, Sedna and 2007OR10. --

1705:

But to the best of our knowledge Eris, Haumea, and Makemake are all larger than Orcus, Quaoar, Sedna and 2007OR10. --

5820:

That "near certainly spherical" from Brown is a political statement (not a reliable source) is amply demonstrated by

5683:"THE DIVERSE SOLAR PHASE CURVES OF DISTANT ICY BODIES II. THE CAUSE OF THE OPPOSITION SURGES AND THEIR CORRELATIONS" 3727:

That is pure speculation on your part. We follow our sources, not your theories on what may lie behind the sources.

3237:

counts!" My point exactly. It's not settled in the sources, & we shouldn't be trying to settle it, or treat it

3088:. There are observable criteria for what is a dwarf planet. An object is a DP because it satisfies these criteria, 993:

That is pure speculation on your part. We follow our sources, not your theories on what may lie behind the sources.

503:

counts!" My point exactly. It's not settled in the sources, & we shouldn't be trying to settle it, or treat it

354:. There are observable criteria for what is a dwarf planet. An object is a DP because it satisfies these criteria, 5750:, to recast Knowledge's entire trans-Neptunian domain so that it runs counter to every other resource on the web. 5553:

I would support that. In fact, that's just what I've done: different colors for different levels of acceptance. —

2819:

I would support that. In fact, that's just what I've done: different colors for different levels of acceptance. —

5570: 4669:

in diameter. Orcus could easily be less than 800km and should not be treated on Knowledge as an auto-dp based on

3674:

Plus OR10. Four more. Those are the ones we have sources for. All the rest vary from "probably" to "might be". —

1935:

in diameter. Orcus could easily be less than 800km and should not be treated on Knowledge as an auto-dp based on

940:

Plus OR10. Four more. Those are the ones we have sources for. All the rest vary from "probably" to "might be". —

5870: 5821: 5634:

The International Astronomical Union (the IAU) today announced that the object previously known as 2003 EL61

5682: 5685:, which labels the IAU DPs as DP, and refers to the others only as large TNOs. In particular, see table 1. 5502: 5271:

Okay, I'll put up a new section tonight (EST) with the sources collected. Then you can pick it apart :-)

5150: 5092: 5063: 5015: 3810: 3221: 3044: 2768: 2537:

Okay, I'll put up a new section tonight (EST) with the sources collected. Then you can pick it apart :-)

2416: 2358: 2329: 2281: 1076: 487: 310: 94: 86: 81: 69: 64: 59: 5854:

Really? I have always thought that they are synonyms. You are just trying to play an advocate of Brown.

4871:

Correction. Neptune likely formed between Jupiter and Saturn, so the moons of Neptune should be icy. --

3092:

because it is or isn't maintained on some list. And for those confused over what the IAU is: definitely

2137:

Correction. Neptune likely formed between Jupiter and Saturn, so the moons of Neptune should be icy. --

358:

because it is or isn't maintained on some list. And for those confused over what the IAU is: definitely

38: 4458:: we reflect what our sources say. And our sources say 9 objects are DPs beyond a reasonable doubt. — 1724:: we reflect what our sources say. And our sources say 9 objects are DPs beyond a reasonable doubt. — 4735: 4612: 4571: 4214: 2001: 1878: 1837: 1480: 4334: 3243:

make no assertions as to membership in categories that aren't firmly & unequivocably established

3196:

but I hope we can all distinguish opinions from statements of fact? These are statements of fact. —

1600: 509:

make no assertions as to membership in categories that aren't firmly & unequivocably established

462:

but I hope we can all distinguish opinions from statements of fact? These are statements of fact. —

5915: 5667: 4899: 4862: 4832: 4795: 4697: 3665: 3616: 3580: 3471: 3434: 2165: 2128: 2098: 2061: 1963: 931: 882: 846: 737: 700: 3890:

that they are (or at least appear to be) in HE. Eris, Haumea, Makemake, Sedna, OR10 etc. are only

1156:

that they are (or at least appear to be) in HE. Eris, Haumea, Makemake, Sedna, OR10 etc. are only

5759: 5540: 4040: 3983:

easily it attains HE. On the other hand, the strength of rock is much larger than that of ice. --

3930: 3831: 3603:

et al. to be "discovered" in spite of them not being accepted yet by the relevant official body (

3455: 3177: 2983: 2915: 2874: 2806: 1306: 1249:

easily it attains HE. On the other hand, the strength of rock is much larger than that of ice. --

1196: 1097: 869:

et al. to be "discovered" in spite of them not being accepted yet by the relevant official body (

721: 443: 249: 181: 140: 5000:

I'd appreciate some assistance - and/or feedback - with respect to others asking Kwamikagami to

2266:

I'd appreciate some assistance - and/or feedback - with respect to others asking Kwamikagami to

5431:

picks up on it, and then use that as proof that we should change the Sedna article to match. —

4370:

I read their paper ~2 years ago. But sadly the main paper is not available to the public, just

2697:

picks up on it, and then use that as proof that we should change the Sedna article to match. —

1636:

I read their paper ~2 years ago. But sadly the main paper is not available to the public, just

4378:

Knowledge should not give them the same weight as the larger 4 trans-Neptunian IAU dwarfs. --

1644:

Knowledge should not give them the same weight as the larger 4 trans-Neptunian IAU dwarfs. --

6016: 5981: 5783: 5735: 5558: 5521: 5436: 5395: 5201: 5118: 4966: 4931: 4463: 4429: 4180: 4138: 4076: 4013: 3907: 3851: 3790: 3736: 3679: 3542: 3403: 3201: 3166: 2960: 2897: 2855: 2824: 2787: 2702: 2661: 2467: 2384: 2232: 2197: 1729: 1695: 1446: 1404: 1342: 1279: 1173: 1117: 1056: 1002: 945: 808: 669: 467: 432: 226: 163: 121: 5697: 4356:

So, Kheider, from your response I can only conclude you haven't. Ruslik, what about you? --

3638: 3512: 3325: 3265: 3126: 2931: 1622:

So, Kheider, from your response I can only conclude you haven't. Ruslik, what about you? --

904: 778: 591: 531: 392: 197: 8: 5911: 4981: 4895: 4858: 4828: 4791: 4693: 4509: 4231: 3661: 3612: 3576: 3467: 3430: 3084:

To suggest that the definition is not a scientific one but an administrative one is just

3056:

Don't get bogged down just by the name Brown uses for this category. He has also added a

2247: 2161: 2124: 2094: 2057: 1959: 1775: 1497: 927: 878: 842: 733: 696: 350:

To suggest that the definition is not a scientific one but an administrative one is just

322:

Don't get bogged down just by the name Brown uses for this category. He has also added a

5603: 4739: 4666: 4371: 3317:. Unequivocally qualifying, therefore no debate in sources, therefore not contentious. 2005: 1932: 1637: 583:. Unequivocally qualifying, therefore no debate in sources, therefore not contentious. 5752: 5626: 5622: 5580: 5536: 5450: 5410: 5360: 5330: 5187: 4688:

calculated from the apparent magnitude) of √2 × 400 km ≈ 566 km, not 800 km. (You need

4085: 4033: 3923: 3824: 3694: 3651: 3562: 3448: 2976: 2908: 2867: 2802: 2716: 2676: 2626: 2596: 2453: 1954:

calculated from the apparent magnitude) of √2 × 400 km ≈ 566 km, not 800 km. (You need

1351: 1299: 1189: 1090: 960: 917: 828: 714: 242: 174: 133: 6030: 5996: 5952: 5933: 5896: 5882: 5859: 5845: 5829: 5811: 5716: 5374: 5344: 5276: 5262: 5247: 5233: 5219: 5029: 4947: 4876: 4846: 4809: 4775: 4747: 4725: 4678: 4651: 4633: 4598: 4579: 4567: 4525: 4490: 4444: 4398: 4383: 4361: 4347: 4308: 4293: 4278: 4194: 4159: 4092: 4061: 3988: 3869: 3758: 3717: 3575:

It's a good idea to merge these tables, whatever the outcome of the RfC discussion.--

3417: 3382: 3359: 3345: 3277: 3185: 3105: 3069: 3021: 2640: 2610: 2542: 2528: 2513: 2499: 2485: 2295: 2213: 2142: 2112: 2075: 2041: 2013: 1991: 1944: 1917: 1899: 1864: 1845: 1833: 1791: 1756: 1710: 1664: 1649: 1627: 1613: 1574: 1559: 1544: 1460: 1425: 1358: 1327: 1254: 1135: 1024: 983: 841:

It's a good idea to merge these tables, whatever the outcome of the RfC discussion.--

683: 648: 625: 611: 543: 451: 371: 335: 287: 47: 17: 4375: 4149:

rejected by the community by purely irrational reasons. So, you can call any object

3785:

less complete, plus his professional opinion as to how likely they are to be DPs. —

3746: 1641: 1415:

rejected by the community by purely irrational reasons. So, you can call any object

1051:

less complete, plus his professional opinion as to how likely they are to be DPs. —

1012: 6012: 5977: 5779: 5731: 5652:

This now means that the family of dwarf planets in the Solar System is up to five.

5554: 5517: 5432: 5391: 5197: 5114: 5037: 4962: 4927: 4543: 4459: 4455: 4425: 4249: 4223: 4176: 4134: 4072: 4009: 3903: 3847: 3786: 3732: 3675: 3538: 3399: 3197: 3162: 2956: 2893: 2851: 2820: 2783: 2698: 2657: 2463: 2380: 2303: 2228: 2193: 1809: 1725: 1721: 1691: 1515: 1489: 1442: 1400: 1338: 1275: 1169: 1113: 1052: 998: 941: 804: 665: 463: 428: 222: 159: 117: 5196:

Sure, if we actually had competing sources. But Ckatz hasn't produced anything. —

2462:

Sure, if we actually had competing sources. But Ckatz hasn't produced anything. —

5747: 5726: 5500: 5148: 5090: 5061: 5013: 3808: 3631: 3508: 3318: 3258: 3219: 3119: 3042: 2766: 2414: 2356: 2327: 2279: 1074: 897: 774: 584: 524: 485: 385: 308: 4885:

Are you sure that rocky bodies cannot form at that distance? E.g. Saturn's moon

2151:

Are you sure that rocky bodies cannot form at that distance? E.g. Saturn's moon

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

4977: 4767: 4559: 4505: 4227: 4001:

is that seemingly impossible for you to understand? Our sources decide, not us!

3393:

A "dwarf planet" is an object that meets the IAU's definition of a dwarf planet

2243: 2033: 1825: 1771: 1493: 1267:

is that seemingly impossible for you to understand? Our sources decide, not us!

659:

A "dwarf planet" is an object that meets the IAU's definition of a dwarf planet

5801: 5355:

Widespread, general agreement (see Wiktionary), everyone but you & Kwami.

4670: 4551: 2621:

Widespread, general agreement (see Wiktionary), everyone but you & Kwami.

1936: 1817: 5446: 5406: 5356: 5326: 5183: 4886: 3690: 3647: 3558: 3030:

But if we are to be true to Brown's list, we would have to say that they are

2999: 2712: 2672: 2622: 2592: 2449: 2152: 956: 913: 824: 296:

But if we are to be true to Brown's list, we would have to say that they are

265: 5611:

In order to contribute to the establishment of this classification procedure

4942:

likely dwarf planet based on the assertion Brown made, which will be silly.

3309:

A "dwarf planet" is an object that the IAU has declared to be a dwarf planet

3004:. I suggest you study that page carefully. The statement that these are DPs 2850:

physical/dynamical definition of a DP that defines which objects are DPs? —

2208:

likely dwarf planet based on the assertion Brown made, which will be silly.

575:

A "dwarf planet" is an object that the IAU has declared to be a dwarf planet

270:. I suggest you study that page carefully. The statement that these are DPs 116:

physical/dynamical definition of a DP that defines which objects are DPs? —

6026: 5992: 5948: 5929: 5892: 5878: 5855: 5841: 5825: 5807: 5712: 5698:"Nonextensive distributions of rotation periods and diameters of asteroids" 5370: 5340: 5272: 5258: 5243: 5229: 5215: 4957:

Oh, come on. Do you actually believe any of the words you write? We go off

4943: 4872: 4842: 4805: 4771: 4743: 4734:

Then why don't you base it on the light-curve data of Tancredi and Favre? (

4721: 4674: 4647: 4629: 4594: 4575: 4521: 4486: 4481: 4440: 4394: 4379: 4357: 4343: 4322: 4304: 4289: 4274: 4241: 4190: 4155: 4088: 4057: 3984: 3865: 3754: 3713: 3413: 3378: 3355: 3341: 3273: 3181: 3101: 3065: 3034:

DPs - the qualifier is important because the source deemed it necessary. --

3017: 2636: 2606: 2538: 2524: 2509: 2495: 2481: 2223:

Oh, come on. Do you actually believe any of the words you write? We go off

2209: 2138: 2108: 2071: 2037: 2009: 2000:

Then why don't you base it on the light-curve data of Tancredi and Favre? (

1987: 1940: 1913: 1895: 1860: 1841: 1787: 1752: 1747: 1706: 1660: 1645: 1623: 1609: 1588: 1570: 1555: 1540: 1507: 1456: 1421: 1354: 1323: 1250: 1131: 1020: 979: 679: 644: 621: 607: 539: 447: 367: 331: 300:

DPs - the qualifier is important because the source deemed it necessary. --

283: 5033: 4662: 4555: 4326: 4318: 4245: 3979:

In fact, for the same strength of the material, the denser an object the

3600: 3340:"whatever object we place in this category". Just read the resolution! -- 2299: 1928: 1821: 1592: 1584: 1511: 1245:

In fact, for the same strength of the material, the denser an object the

866: 606:"whatever object we place in this category". Just read the resolution! -- 5494: 5142: 5084: 5055: 5007: 3802: 3213: 3036: 2955:

that it's a member? One is scientifically decided, the other is not. —

2760: 2408: 2350: 2321: 2273: 1068: 479: 302: 221:

that it's a member? One is scientifically decided, the other is not. —

4673:

that is automatically updated (with less than peer-reviewed data). --

3489:

subcommittee. This is spelled out on the IAU web site on the Web page

1939:

that is automatically updated (with less than peer-reviewed data). --

755:

subcommittee. This is spelled out on the IAU web site on the Web page

5730:

they are DPs, and per WP sourcing policy we say that they are DPs. —

5660:

And there's the list. What's your source that says that isn't a list?

4547: 4536: 4330: 3596: 1813: 1802: 1596: 862: 4740:

the short version for those who can't access the full-length version

2006:

the short version for those who can't access the full-length version

5928:

is also a dwarf planet because it is round, without sharp corners.

5925: 5596:

There's no need for an IAU process if there's no official IAU list.

3490: 3336:

The IAU definition is HE+Not cleared neighborhood+not a satellite,

756: 602:

The IAU definition is HE+Not cleared neighborhood+not a satellite,

4133:

to you, it's still not a DP because the IAU hasn't ruled on it. —

2969:

No, because there is no way we can say for certain that an object

1399:

to you, it's still not a DP because the IAU hasn't ruled on it. —

235:

No, because there is no way we can say for certain that an object

5636:

is to be classified as the fifth dwarf planet in the Solar System

5592:

borderline objects into either dwarf planet and other categories.

4712: 3377:. The sources indicate that that's how it has been interpretted. 3064:

To me the category is more important than the name it carries. --

1978: 643:. The sources indicate that that's how it has been interpretted. 330:

To me the category is more important than the name it carries. --

4222:

source claims a body is a DP, but the mainstream does not, then

1488:

source claims a body is a DP, but the mainstream does not, then

4646:

dwarf planets (all far larger than this 800 km I might add). --

3660:

The second. It's about the status of Sedna, Quaoar, Orcus... --

1912:

dwarf planets (all far larger than this 800 km I might add). --

926:

The second. It's about the status of Sedna, Quaoar, Orcus... --

5770:

I've said nothing of the kind. Have you read anything I wrote?

3902:

likely to be in HE: rocky bodies are not as plastic as ice. —

3305:

Can we take a poll here, to at least see where we all stand?

1168:

likely to be in HE: rocky bodies are not as plastic as ice. —

571:

Can we take a poll here, to at least see where we all stand?

5907: 5706:

And another example. Aside: and both are listed as asteroids!

5700:, which again lists Pluto as DP, but not Sedna. See table 1. 3604: 3211:

time we also used the IAU list as our guide for inclusion. --

870: 477:

time we also used the IAU list as our guide for inclusion. --

4424:

knowledge of these objects. That's just not encyclopedic. —

1690:

knowledge of these objects. That's just not encyclopedic. —

4124:

Serendipodous, of course no-one is going to say that they

1390:

Serendipodous, of course no-one is going to say that they

5976:

these are DPs, or they don't address the issue at all. —

5606:

paper, where they quote the above footnote and then say:

5423:

as a source? Really? When their source is us? How about

4996:

Repeated changes to DP articles while RfC is in progress

3689:

and haven't been indicated as dwarf planets by the IAU.

2689:

as a source? Really? When their source is us? How about

2262:

Repeated changes to DP articles while RfC is in progress

955:

and haven't been indicated as dwarf planets by the IAU.

5676:

So it's not just Wikipedians interpretting it that way.

5629:. They both follow the same template; from the latter: 3060:

of what being in this category means. I'll repeat it:

326:

of what being in this category means. I'll repeat it:

5824:. It appears that Quaoar is not spherical after all. 5641:

There's no need for an ordinal if there isn't a list.

4129:

saying they're DPs, and no sources to the contrary.

1395:

saying they're DPs, and no sources to the contrary.

5800:

The 4 known trans-Neptunian dwarf planets have been

5654:

They are now Ceres, Pluto, Haumea, Eris and Makemake

3753:

sources. Unfortunately this blog is not among them.

1019:

sources. Unfortunately this blog is not among them.

5943:Pallas is obviously a dwarf planet! Vesta is now a 2841:Under break three above, three editors opined that 107:Under break three above, three editors opined that 6011:the article before offering your opinions here? — 3484:Neither of the above (please give a brief summary) 750:Neither of the above (please give a brief summary) 5242:They're shown above. Some of them several times. 2994:Yes, we cannot be absolutely certain to know the 2906:And the IAU has not said they are dwarf planets. 2508:They're shown above. Some of them several times. 260:Yes, we cannot be absolutely certain to know the 172:And the IAU has not said they are dwarf planets. 4720:for Knowledge to try leading in this matter. -- 1986:for Knowledge to try leading in this matter. -- 5778:we'll use them too. Meanwhile we have Brown. — 5691:An example of a paper following the IAU's lead. 3253:. Otherwise, we're taking sides, & that is 519:. Otherwise, we're taking sides, & that is 4823:claim that, he only (implicitly) says they're 4374:. Never-the-less, even Mike Brown claims only 3429:— that's how the IAU resolution defined it. -- 2089:claim that, he only (implicitly) says they're 1640:. Never-the-less, even Mike Brown claims only 695:— that's how the IAU resolution defined it. -- 3153:debate it is irrelevant: Only debate in our 419:debate it is irrelevant: Only debate in our 2930:As I understand IAU's function, it's not a 196:As I understand IAU's function, it's not a 4317:I agree with Ruslik, we have been calling 4022:You haven't cited sources. You have cited 1583:I agree with Ruslik, we have been calling 1288:You haven't cited sources. You have cited 5590:IAU process will be established to assign 4736:Which are the dwarfs in the Solar System? 2002:Which are the dwarfs in the Solar System? 5581:original IAU resolution establishing DPs 3895:category and not a physical parameter. 3822:Yeah, that's pretty much what I think. 1161:category and not a physical parameter. 1088:Yeah, that's pretty much what I think. 14: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3842:I'm fine with that as long as we're 1108:I'm fine with that as long as we're 25: 23: 5869:Really. They're not synonyms. See 5214:been shown. You just ignore them. 5028:If the editing behavior is indeed 4566:dps will turnout to be unresolved 3114:"The statement that these are DPs 2480:been shown. You just ignore them. 2294:If the editing behavior is indeed 1832:dps will turnout to be unresolved 380:"The statement that these are DPs 24: 6059: 5906:It's written e.g. in Knowledge, " 3249:where a given candidate belongs, 515:where a given candidate belongs, 4785:Proteus is not (known to be) an 4766:This statement is false because 3491:http://www.iau.org/public/pluto/ 3180:also lists only 5 dwarf planet. 2934:, so its pronouncements have no 2051:Proteus is not (known to be) an 2032:This statement is false because 757:http://www.iau.org/public/pluto/ 446:also lists only 5 dwarf planet. 200:, so its pronouncements have no 29: 4333:"strong" candidates since 2006 3878:That's not the point. We don't 1599:"strong" candidates since 2006 1144:That's not the point. We don't 5379:15:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5365:15:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5349:13:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5335:13:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5281:14:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5267:13:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5252:12:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5238:12:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5228:I haven't seen them either. -- 5224:12:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5206:12:10, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5192:12:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5158:07:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5123:05:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5100:20:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC) 5071:01:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 5044:19:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 5023:18:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4971:19:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4953:10:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4936:05:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4837:19:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 4815:18:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 4800:20:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4781:12:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC) 4752:23:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4730:22:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4702:21:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4683:20:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4656:19:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4638:18:11, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4603:17:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4584:14:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4468:01:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 4449:01:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 4434:23:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4404:18:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 4388:20:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4366:19:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4352:19:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4313:18:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4299:18:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4283:16:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4256:16:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 4236:19:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 4200:19:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 4185:19:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4165:10:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4143:05:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 4097:16:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4081:13:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4066:13:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4047:14:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 4018:13:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3993:13:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3937:13:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3912:13:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3874:13:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3856:11:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3838:10:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3818:05:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3795:20:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3764:19:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3741:19:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3723:19:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3699:17:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3684:20:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3670:20:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3656:19:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3641:18:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3621:16:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3585:16:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3567:15:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3547:13:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3462:15:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3439:15:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 3422:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3408:23:50, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 3387:12:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3364:12:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3350:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3328:06:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3282:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3268:06:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3229:06:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3206:23:43, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 3191:09:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 3171:22:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 3129:22:27, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 3110:20:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 3074:09:29, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3052:06:16, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 3026:20:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2990:20:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2965:20:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2922:20:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2902:20:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2881:19:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2860:19:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 2645:15:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2631:15:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2615:13:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2601:13:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2547:14:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2533:13:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2518:12:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2504:12:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2494:I haven't seen them either. -- 2490:12:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2472:12:10, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2458:12:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2424:07:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2389:05:48, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 2366:20:37, 29 September 2011 (UTC) 2337:01:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 2310:19:46, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 2289:18:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 2237:19:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 2219:10:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 2202:05:40, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 2103:19:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 2081:18:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 2066:20:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 2047:12:54, 24 September 2011 (UTC) 2018:23:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1996:22:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1968:21:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1949:20:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1922:19:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1904:18:11, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1869:17:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1850:14:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1734:01:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 1715:01:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 1700:23:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1670:18:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC) 1654:20:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1632:19:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1618:19:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1579:18:43, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1565:18:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1549:16:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1522:16:33, 27 September 2011 (UTC) 1502:19:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 1466:19:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 1451:19:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1431:10:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1409:05:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC) 1363:16:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1347:13:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1332:13:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1313:14:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1284:13:49, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1259:13:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1203:13:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1178:13:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1140:13:05, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1122:11:46, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1104:10:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1084:05:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 1061:20:53, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 1030:19:32, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 1007:19:08, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 989:19:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 965:17:50, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 950:20:56, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 936:20:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 922:19:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 907:18:02, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 887:16:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 851:16:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 833:15:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 813:13:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 728:15:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 705:15:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 688:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 674:23:50, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 653:12:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 630:12:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 616:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 594:06:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 548:09:11, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 534:06:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 495:06:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 472:23:43, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 457:09:55, 21 September 2011 (UTC) 437:22:34, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 395:22:27, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 376:20:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 340:09:29, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 318:06:16, 22 September 2011 (UTC) 292:20:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 256:20:39, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 231:20:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 188:20:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 168:20:10, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 147:19:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 126:19:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC) 13: 1: 4570:? Some of them might even be 2837:Administrative or scientific? 1836:? Some of them might even be 103:Administrative or scientific? 5583:, in particular footnote 2: 4986:19:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 4530:09:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 4514:05:18, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 4495:19:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC) 3525:RfC: What is a dwarf planet? 3517:20:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC) 2252:19:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 1796:09:39, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 1780:05:18, 22 October 2011 (UTC) 1761:19:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC) 791:RfC: What is a dwarf planet? 783:20:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC) 7: 6036:12:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 6021:09:05, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 6002:07:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 5986:04:01, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 5957:09:38, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 5939:09:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 5920:23:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 5902:15:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 5887:15:28, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 5865:07:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC) 5850:19:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5835:18:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5816:16:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5788:14:55, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5766:11:56, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5740:03:48, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5721:00:57, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5621:The IAU press releases for 5563:00:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 5545:14:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5526:06:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5510:04:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5455:16:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5441:03:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5415:01:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 5400:00:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 4904:13:03, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 4881:00:28, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 4867:23:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 4852:17:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 3860:We are consistent. Eris is 3476:23:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 3008:, and so far anything even 2829:00:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 2811:14:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2792:06:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2776:04:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2721:16:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2707:03:44, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2681:01:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2666:00:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 2170:13:03, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 2147:00:28, 4 October 2011 (UTC) 2133:23:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 2118:17:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 1126:We are consistent. Eris is 742:23:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC) 274:, and so far anything even 10: 6064: 3245:. Which is to say, unless 511:. Which is to say, unless 5804:to be large bodies (: --> 5668:"Free the Dwarf Planets" 5666:Mike Brown's blog entry 5871:hydrostatic equilibrium 5571:Sources for gatekeeping 4211:Include even if not IAU 1477:Include even if not IAU 5210:The competing sources 4552:probable dwarf planet? 2476:The competing sources 1818:probable dwarf planet? 5385:we follow our sources 4607:1999 TC36 component A 2651:we follow our sources 1873:1999 TC36 component A 42:of past discussions. 5429:Webster's Quotations 5425:Webster's Quotations 4671:Mike Brown's website 3233:"Only debate in our 2695:Webster's Quotations 2691:Webster's Quotations 1937:Mike Brown's website 499:"Only debate in our 5339:What consensus? -- 4215:WP:Reliable source 3247:there is no debate 3149:No no no! Whether 2605:What consensus? -- 1481:WP:Reliable source 513:there is no debate 415:No no no! Whether 5507: 5155: 5097: 5068: 5020: 4624:so it is only a " 4376:"near certainty". 3815: 3635: 3610: 3322: 3262: 3226: 3123: 3049: 2773: 2421: 2363: 2334: 2286: 1890:so it is only a " 1642:"near certainty". 1081: 901: 876: 588: 528: 492: 389: 315: 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 18:Talk:Dwarf planet 6055: 6033: 5999: 5936: 5899: 5862: 5832: 5762: 5755: 5499: 5147: 5089: 5060: 5012: 4950: 4849: 4812: 4778: 4621: 4620: 4572:contact binaries 4562:. How many more 4482:reliable sources 4401: 4335:(2009 for OR10). 4296: 4197: 4162: 4043: 4036: 3933: 3926: 3834: 3827: 3807: 3761: 3720: 3636: 3633: 3608: 3458: 3451: 3323: 3320: 3263: 3260: 3218: 3188: 3124: 3121: 3041: 3032:nearly certainly 3010:just questioning 2986: 2979: 2932:sanctioning body 2918: 2911: 2877: 2870: 2765: 2413: 2355: 2326: 2278: 2216: 2115: 2078: 2044: 1887: 1886: 1838:contact binaries 1828:. How many more 1748:reliable sources 1667: 1601:(2009 for OR10). 1562: 1463: 1428: 1309: 1302: 1199: 1192: 1100: 1093: 1073: 1027: 986: 902: 899: 874: 724: 717: 589: 586: 529: 526: 484: 454: 390: 387: 307: 298:nearly certainly 276:just questioning 252: 245: 198:sanctioning body 184: 177: 143: 136: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 6063: 6062: 6058: 6057: 6056: 6054: 6053: 6052: 6031: 5997: 5934: 5897: 5860: 5830: 5760: 5753: 5725:This is called 5573: 5505: 5180:status quo ante 5153: 5095: 5066: 5018: 4998: 4948: 4847: 4810: 4776: 4619: 4615: 4614: 4610: 4541: 4399: 4294: 4195: 4160: 4041: 4034: 3931: 3924: 3882:it's in HE, we 3832: 3825: 3813: 3759: 3718: 3632: 3527: 3456: 3449: 3319: 3259: 3224: 3186: 3120: 3047: 2984: 2977: 2916: 2909: 2875: 2868: 2839: 2771: 2446:status quo ante 2419: 2361: 2332: 2284: 2264: 2214: 2113: 2076: 2042: 1885: 1881: 1880: 1876: 1807: 1665: 1560: 1461: 1426: 1307: 1300: 1197: 1190: 1148:it's in HE, we 1098: 1091: 1079: 1025: 984: 898: 793: 722: 715: 585: 525: 490: 452: 386: 313: 250: 243: 182: 175: 141: 134: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 6061: 6051: 6050: 6049: 6048: 6047: 6046: 6045: 6044: 6043: 6042: 6041: 6040: 6039: 6038: 5973: 5972: 5971: 5970: 5969: 5968: 5967: 5966: 5965: 5964: 5963: 5962: 5961: 5960: 5959: 5912:Roentgenium111 5793: 5792: 5791: 5790: 5775: 5771: 5710: 5709: 5708: 5707: 5695: 5694: 5693: 5692: 5680: 5679: 5678: 5677: 5664: 5663: 5662: 5661: 5645: 5644: 5643: 5642: 5619: 5618: 5617: 5616: 5604:Tancredi/Favre 5600: 5599: 5598: 5597: 5572: 5569: 5568: 5567: 5566: 5565: 5548: 5547: 5529: 5528: 5503: 5486: 5485: 5484: 5483: 5482: 5481: 5480: 5479: 5478: 5477: 5476: 5475: 5474: 5473: 5472: 5471: 5470: 5469: 5468: 5467: 5466: 5465: 5464: 5463: 5462: 5461: 5460: 5459: 5458: 5457: 5388: 5353: 5352: 5351: 5304: 5303: 5302: 5301: 5300: 5299: 5298: 5297: 5296: 5295: 5294: 5293: 5292: 5291: 5290: 5289: 5288: 5287: 5286: 5285: 5284: 5283: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5162: 5161: 5160: 5151: 5130: 5129: 5128: 5127: 5126: 5125: 5105: 5104: 5103: 5102: 5093: 5076: 5075: 5074: 5073: 5064: 5047: 5046: 5016: 4997: 4994: 4993: 4992: 4991: 4990: 4989: 4988: 4923: 4922: 4921: 4920: 4919: 4918: 4917: 4916: 4915: 4914: 4913: 4912: 4911: 4910: 4909: 4908: 4907: 4906: 4896:Roentgenium111 4859:Roentgenium111 4829:Roentgenium111 4792:Roentgenium111 4764: 4763: 4762: 4761: 4760: 4759: 4758: 4757: 4756: 4755: 4754: 4694:Roentgenium111 4617: 4616: 4608: 4560:10199 Chariklo 4540: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4498: 4497: 4473: 4472: 4471: 4470: 4421: 4420: 4419: 4418: 4417: 4416: 4415: 4414: 4413: 4412: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4408: 4407: 4406: 4390: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4258: 4207: 4206: 4205: 4204: 4203: 4202: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4103: 4102: 4101: 4100: 4099: 4053: 4052: 4051: 4050: 4049: 4002: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3952: 3951: 3950: 3949: 3948: 3947: 3946: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3942: 3941: 3940: 3939: 3840: 3811: 3782: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3767: 3766: 3728: 3709: 3708: 3707: 3706: 3705: 3704: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3672: 3662:Roentgenium111 3613:Roentgenium111 3592: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3577:Roentgenium111 3570: 3569: 3526: 3523: 3521: 3493:where it says 3486: 3485: 3481: 3480: 3479: 3478: 3468:Roentgenium111 3442: 3441: 3431:Roentgenium111 3424: 3410: 3395: 3394: 3390: 3389: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3368: 3367: 3366: 3331: 3330: 3311: 3310: 3303: 3302: 3301: 3300: 3299: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3222: 3159: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3045: 2945: 2944: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2838: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2814: 2813: 2795: 2794: 2769: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2743: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2730: 2729: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2724: 2723: 2654: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2417: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2359: 2342: 2341: 2340: 2339: 2330: 2313: 2312: 2282: 2263: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2189: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2162:Roentgenium111 2125:Roentgenium111 2095:Roentgenium111 2058:Roentgenium111 2030: 2029: 2028: 2027: 2026: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2022: 2021: 2020: 1960:Roentgenium111 1883: 1882: 1874: 1826:10199 Chariklo 1806: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1764: 1763: 1739: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1656: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1379: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1374: 1373: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1319: 1318: 1317: 1316: 1315: 1268: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1219: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1106: 1077: 1048: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 994: 975: 974: 973: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 967: 938: 928:Roentgenium111 879:Roentgenium111 858: 857: 856: 855: 854: 853: 843:Roentgenium111 836: 835: 792: 789: 787: 759:where it says 752: 751: 747: 746: 745: 744: 734:Roentgenium111 708: 707: 697:Roentgenium111 690: 676: 661: 660: 656: 655: 637: 636: 635: 634: 633: 632: 597: 596: 577: 576: 569: 568: 567: 566: 565: 564: 563: 562: 561: 560: 559: 558: 557: 556: 555: 554: 553: 552: 551: 550: 488: 425: 404: 403: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 348: 347: 346: 345: 344: 343: 342: 311: 211: 210: 194: 193: 192: 191: 190: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 6060: 6037: 6034: 6028: 6024: 6023: 6022: 6018: 6014: 6010: 6005: 6004: 6003: 6000: 5994: 5989: 5988: 5987: 5983: 5979: 5974: 5958: 5954: 5950: 5946: 5942: 5941: 5940: 5937: 5931: 5927: 5924:In this case 5923: 5922: 5921: 5917: 5913: 5909: 5905: 5904: 5903: 5900: 5894: 5890: 5889: 5888: 5884: 5880: 5876: 5872: 5868: 5867: 5866: 5863: 5857: 5853: 5852: 5851: 5847: 5843: 5838: 5837: 5836: 5833: 5827: 5823: 5819: 5818: 5817: 5813: 5809: 5803: 5799: 5798: 5797: 5796: 5795: 5794: 5789: 5785: 5781: 5776: 5772: 5769: 5768: 5767: 5764: 5763: 5758: 5756: 5749: 5744: 5743: 5742: 5741: 5737: 5733: 5728: 5723: 5722: 5718: 5714: 5705: 5704: 5703: 5702: 5701: 5699: 5690: 5689: 5688: 5687: 5686: 5684: 5675: 5674: 5673: 5672: 5671: 5669: 5659: 5658: 5657: 5655: 5650: 5649: 5648: 5640: 5639: 5638: 5637: 5632: 5631: 5630: 5628: 5624: 5614: 5613: 5612: 5609: 5608: 5607: 5605: 5595: 5594: 5593: 5591: 5586: 5585: 5584: 5582: 5577: 5564: 5560: 5556: 5552: 5551: 5550: 5549: 5546: 5542: 5538: 5537:Martin Hogbin 5534: 5531: 5530: 5527: 5523: 5519: 5514: 5513: 5512: 5511: 5508: 5506: 5501: 5497: 5496: 5490: 5456: 5452: 5448: 5444: 5443: 5442: 5438: 5434: 5430: 5426: 5422: 5419:You're using 5418: 5417: 5416: 5412: 5408: 5403: 5402: 5401: 5397: 5393: 5389: 5386: 5382: 5381: 5380: 5376: 5372: 5368: 5367: 5366: 5362: 5358: 5354: 5350: 5346: 5342: 5338: 5337: 5336: 5332: 5328: 5324: 5323: 5322: 5321: 5320: 5319: 5318: 5317: 5316: 5315: 5314: 5313: 5312: 5311: 5310: 5309: 5308: 5307: 5306: 5305: 5282: 5278: 5274: 5270: 5269: 5268: 5264: 5260: 5255: 5254: 5253: 5249: 5245: 5241: 5240: 5239: 5235: 5231: 5227: 5226: 5225: 5221: 5217: 5213: 5209: 5208: 5207: 5203: 5199: 5195: 5194: 5193: 5189: 5185: 5181: 5177: 5176: 5175: 5174: 5173: 5172: 5171: 5170: 5169: 5168: 5159: 5156: 5154: 5149: 5145: 5144: 5138: 5137: 5136: 5135: 5134: 5133: 5132: 5131: 5124: 5120: 5116: 5111: 5110: 5109: 5108: 5107: 5106: 5101: 5098: 5096: 5091: 5087: 5086: 5080: 5079: 5078: 5077: 5072: 5069: 5067: 5062: 5058: 5057: 5051: 5050: 5049: 5048: 5045: 5041: 5040: 5035: 5031: 5027: 5026: 5025: 5024: 5021: 5019: 5014: 5010: 5009: 5003: 4987: 4983: 4979: 4974: 4973: 4972: 4968: 4964: 4960: 4956: 4955: 4954: 4951: 4945: 4940: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4933: 4929: 4905: 4901: 4897: 4892: 4888: 4887:Phoebe (moon) 4884: 4883: 4882: 4878: 4874: 4870: 4869: 4868: 4864: 4860: 4855: 4854: 4853: 4850: 4844: 4840: 4839: 4838: 4834: 4830: 4826: 4822: 4818: 4817: 4816: 4813: 4807: 4803: 4802: 4801: 4797: 4793: 4788: 4784: 4783: 4782: 4779: 4773: 4769: 4765: 4753: 4749: 4745: 4741: 4737: 4733: 4732: 4731: 4727: 4723: 4719: 4714: 4709: 4705: 4704: 4703: 4699: 4695: 4691: 4686: 4685: 4684: 4680: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4659: 4658: 4657: 4653: 4649: 4645: 4641: 4640: 4639: 4635: 4631: 4627: 4623: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4600: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4587: 4586: 4585: 4581: 4577: 4573: 4569: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4549: 4545: 4538: 4531: 4527: 4523: 4518: 4517: 4516: 4515: 4511: 4507: 4502: 4496: 4492: 4488: 4483: 4478: 4475: 4474: 4469: 4465: 4461: 4457: 4452: 4451: 4450: 4446: 4442: 4438: 4437: 4436: 4435: 4431: 4427: 4405: 4402: 4396: 4391: 4389: 4385: 4381: 4377: 4373: 4369: 4368: 4367: 4363: 4359: 4355: 4354: 4353: 4349: 4345: 4340: 4336: 4332: 4328: 4324: 4320: 4316: 4315: 4314: 4310: 4306: 4302: 4301: 4300: 4297: 4291: 4286: 4285: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4272: 4267: 4266: 4265: 4264: 4263: 4262: 4257: 4253: 4252: 4247: 4243: 4239: 4238: 4237: 4233: 4229: 4225: 4221: 4216: 4212: 4209: 4208: 4201: 4198: 4192: 4188: 4187: 4186: 4182: 4178: 4173: 4168: 4167: 4166: 4163: 4157: 4152: 4147: 4146: 4145: 4144: 4140: 4136: 4130: 4127: 4098: 4094: 4090: 4087: 4084: 4083: 4082: 4078: 4074: 4069: 4068: 4067: 4063: 4059: 4054: 4048: 4045: 4044: 4039: 4037: 4029: 4025: 4021: 4020: 4019: 4015: 4011: 4007: 4003: 4000: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3990: 3986: 3982: 3978: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3970: 3969: 3968: 3967: 3966: 3965: 3964: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3959: 3938: 3935: 3934: 3929: 3927: 3919: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3909: 3905: 3901: 3897: 3896: 3893: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3871: 3867: 3863: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3841: 3839: 3836: 3835: 3830: 3828: 3821: 3820: 3819: 3816: 3814: 3809: 3805: 3804: 3798: 3797: 3796: 3792: 3788: 3783: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3776: 3775: 3774: 3773: 3772: 3765: 3762: 3756: 3752: 3748: 3744: 3743: 3742: 3738: 3734: 3729: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3721: 3715: 3710: 3700: 3696: 3692: 3687: 3686: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3673: 3671: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3658: 3657: 3653: 3649: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3639: 3637: 3628: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3618: 3614: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3586: 3582: 3578: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3568: 3564: 3560: 3556: 3553: 3552: 3551: 3550: 3549: 3548: 3544: 3540: 3534: 3530: 3522: 3519: 3518: 3514: 3510: 3505: 3501: 3498: 3494: 3492: 3483: 3482: 3477: 3473: 3469: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3460: 3459: 3454: 3452: 3444: 3443: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3425: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3412:Logically, -- 3411: 3409: 3405: 3401: 3397: 3396: 3392: 3391: 3388: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3373: 3372: 3365: 3361: 3357: 3353: 3352: 3351: 3347: 3343: 3339: 3335: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3329: 3326: 3324: 3316: 3313: 3312: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3283: 3279: 3275: 3271: 3270: 3269: 3266: 3264: 3256: 3252: 3248: 3244: 3240: 3236: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3227: 3225: 3220: 3216: 3215: 3209: 3208: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3194: 3193: 3192: 3189: 3183: 3179: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3156: 3152: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3130: 3127: 3125: 3117: 3116:is verifiable 3113: 3112: 3111: 3107: 3103: 3099: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3075: 3071: 3067: 3063: 3059: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3050: 3048: 3043: 3039: 3038: 3033: 3029: 3028: 3027: 3023: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3006:is verifiable 3003: 3002: 3001:verifiability 2997: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2988: 2987: 2982: 2980: 2972: 2968: 2967: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2942: 2937: 2933: 2929: 2923: 2920: 2919: 2914: 2912: 2905: 2904: 2903: 2899: 2895: 2891: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2884: 2883: 2882: 2879: 2878: 2873: 2871: 2862: 2861: 2857: 2853: 2848: 2844: 2830: 2826: 2822: 2818: 2817: 2816: 2815: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2803:Martin Hogbin 2800: 2797: 2796: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2774: 2772: 2767: 2763: 2762: 2756: 2722: 2718: 2714: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2704: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2688: 2685:You're using 2684: 2683: 2682: 2678: 2674: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2663: 2659: 2655: 2652: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2642: 2638: 2634: 2633: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2598: 2594: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2548: 2544: 2540: 2536: 2535: 2534: 2530: 2526: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2479: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2434: 2425: 2422: 2420: 2415: 2411: 2410: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2397: 2390: 2386: 2382: 2377: 2376: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2367: 2364: 2362: 2357: 2353: 2352: 2346: 2345: 2344: 2343: 2338: 2335: 2333: 2328: 2324: 2323: 2317: 2316: 2315: 2314: 2311: 2307: 2306: 2301: 2297: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2290: 2287: 2285: 2280: 2276: 2275: 2269: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2234: 2230: 2226: 2222: 2221: 2220: 2217: 2211: 2206: 2205: 2204: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2171: 2167: 2163: 2158: 2154: 2153:Phoebe (moon) 2150: 2149: 2148: 2144: 2140: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2130: 2126: 2121: 2120: 2119: 2116: 2110: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2079: 2073: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2063: 2059: 2054: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2045: 2039: 2035: 2031: 2019: 2015: 2011: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1993: 1989: 1985: 1980: 1975: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1946: 1942: 1938: 1934: 1930: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1911: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1901: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1804: 1797: 1793: 1789: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1768: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1749: 1744: 1741: 1740: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1671: 1668: 1662: 1657: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1643: 1639: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1563: 1557: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1546: 1542: 1538: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1523: 1519: 1518: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1504: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1487: 1482: 1478: 1475: 1474: 1467: 1464: 1458: 1454: 1453: 1452: 1448: 1444: 1439: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1429: 1423: 1418: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1406: 1402: 1396: 1393: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1353: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1344: 1340: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1320: 1314: 1311: 1310: 1305: 1303: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1269: 1266: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1204: 1201: 1200: 1195: 1193: 1185: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1162: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1105: 1102: 1101: 1096: 1094: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1082: 1080: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1049: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1031: 1028: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1004: 1000: 995: 992: 991: 990: 987: 981: 976: 966: 962: 958: 953: 952: 951: 947: 943: 939: 937: 933: 929: 925: 924: 923: 919: 915: 910: 909: 908: 905: 903: 894: 890: 889: 888: 884: 880: 872: 868: 864: 860: 859: 852: 848: 844: 840: 839: 838: 837: 834: 830: 826: 822: 819: 818: 817: 816: 815: 814: 810: 806: 800: 796: 788: 785: 784: 780: 776: 771: 767: 764: 760: 758: 749: 748: 743: 739: 735: 731: 730: 729: 726: 725: 720: 718: 710: 709: 706: 702: 698: 694: 691: 689: 685: 681: 678:Logically, -- 677: 675: 671: 667: 663: 662: 658: 657: 654: 650: 646: 642: 639: 638: 631: 627: 623: 619: 618: 617: 613: 609: 605: 601: 600: 599: 598: 595: 592: 590: 582: 579: 578: 574: 573: 572: 549: 545: 541: 537: 536: 535: 532: 530: 522: 518: 514: 510: 506: 502: 498: 497: 496: 493: 491: 486: 482: 481: 475: 474: 473: 469: 465: 460: 459: 458: 455: 449: 445: 440: 439: 438: 434: 430: 426: 422: 418: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 409: 408: 407: 406: 405: 396: 393: 391: 383: 382:is verifiable 379: 378: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 357: 353: 349: 341: 337: 333: 329: 325: 321: 320: 319: 316: 314: 309: 305: 304: 299: 295: 294: 293: 289: 285: 281: 277: 273: 272:is verifiable 269: 268: 267:verifiability 263: 259: 258: 257: 254: 253: 248: 246: 238: 234: 233: 232: 228: 224: 220: 215: 214: 213: 212: 208: 203: 199: 195: 189: 186: 185: 180: 178: 171: 170: 169: 165: 161: 157: 153: 152: 151: 150: 149: 148: 145: 144: 139: 137: 128: 127: 123: 119: 114: 110: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 6008: 5751: 5724: 5711: 5696: 5681: 5665: 5653: 5651: 5646: 5635: 5633: 5620: 5610: 5601: 5589: 5587: 5578: 5574: 5532: 5498: 5493: 5488: 5487: 5428: 5424: 5420: 5384: 5211: 5179: 5146: 5141: 5088: 5083: 5059: 5054: 5038: 5011: 5006: 5001: 4999: 4958: 4924: 4890: 4824: 4820: 4786: 4717: 4707: 4689: 4643: 4625: 4590: 4563: 4542: 4539:probable dp? 4500: 4499: 4476: 4422: 4338: 4270: 4250: 4219: 4210: 4171: 4151:dwarf planet 4150: 4131: 4125: 4123: 4032: 4027: 4023: 4005: 3998: 3980: 3922: 3917: 3899: 3891: 3887: 3883: 3879: 3861: 3843: 3823: 3806: 3801: 3750: 3626: 3554: 3535: 3531: 3528: 3520: 3506: 3502: 3499: 3495: 3487: 3447: 3426: 3374: 3337: 3314: 3304: 3254: 3251:leave it out 3250: 3246: 3242: 3238: 3234: 3217: 3212: 3154: 3150: 3115: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3085: 3061: 3057: 3040: 3035: 3031: 3013: 3009: 3005: 3000: 2995: 2975: 2970: 2952: 2940: 2935: 2907: 2889: 2866: 2863: 2846: 2843:dwarf planet 2842: 2840: 2798: 2764: 2759: 2754: 2753: 2694: 2690: 2686: 2650: 2477: 2445: 2412: 2407: 2354: 2349: 2325: 2320: 2304: 2277: 2272: 2267: 2265: 2224: 2190: 2156: 2090: 2086: 2052: 1983: 1973: 1955: 1909: 1891: 1856: 1829: 1808: 1805:probable dp? 1766: 1765: 1742: 1688: 1604: 1536: 1516: 1485: 1476: 1437: 1417:dwarf planet 1416: 1397: 1391: 1389: 1298: 1293: 1289: 1271: 1264: 1246: 1188: 1183: 1165: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1127: 1109: 1089: 1072: 1067: 1016: 892: 820: 801: 797: 794: 786: 772: 768: 765: 761: 753: 713: 692: 640: 603: 580: 570: 520: 517:leave it out 516: 512: 508: 504: 500: 483: 478: 420: 416: 381: 363: 359: 355: 351: 327: 323: 306: 301: 297: 279: 275: 271: 266: 261: 241: 236: 218: 206: 201: 173: 155: 132: 129: 112: 109:dwarf planet 108: 106: 75: 43: 37: 4667:850 ± 90 km 4589:"Probably: 4556:2060 Chiron 3781:understood. 3601:ununpentium 3058:description 2941:agree it is 1933:850 ± 90 km 1855:"Probably: 1822:2060 Chiron 1047:understood. 867:ununpentium 324:description 207:agree it is 36:This is an 5533:Suggestion 5421:Wiktionary 5030:WP:DISRUPT 4544:Mike Brown 4372:this brief 4337:We should 4271:candidates 3844:consistent 3634:TREKphiler 3627:only after 3509:Seldenball 3500:and later 3321:TREKphiler 3261:TREKphiler 3178:Britannica 3158:astrology. 3122:TREKphiler 2888:Then that 2799:Suggestion 2687:Wiktionary 2296:WP:DISRUPT 1810:Mike Brown 1638:this brief 1603:We should 1537:candidates 1110:consistent 900:TREKphiler 893:only after 775:Seldenball 766:and later 587:TREKphiler 527:TREKphiler 444:Britannica 424:astrology. 388:TREKphiler 154:Then that 4978:My76Strat 4548:1999 TC36 4537:1999 TC36 4506:My76Strat 4456:WP:SOURCE 4331:2007 OR10 4228:Noleander 4224:WP:Fringe 3597:ununtrium 3098:governing 2244:My76Strat 1814:1999 TC36 1803:1999 TC36 1772:My76Strat 1722:WP:SOURCE 1597:2007 OR10 1494:Noleander 1490:WP:Fringe 863:ununtrium 364:governing 95:Archive 8 87:Archive 6 82:Archive 5 76:Archive 4 70:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 5926:2 Pallas 5802:measured 5748:WP:UNDUE 5727:WP:SYNTH 5623:Makemake 5447:Rothorpe 5407:Rothorpe 5357:Rothorpe 5327:Rothorpe 5184:Mirokado 4825:probably 4708:unlikely 4626:possibly 4568:binaries 4564:probable 4024:a source 3892:inferred 3751:reliable 3255:de facto 3100:body. -- 2951:the IAU 2713:Rothorpe 2673:Rothorpe 2623:Rothorpe 2593:Rothorpe 2450:Mirokado 2091:probably 1974:unlikely 1892:possibly 1834:binaries 1830:probable 1290:a source 1158:inferred 1017:reliable 521:de facto 366:body. -- 217:the IAU 5949:Kheider 5879:Tbayboy 5842:Tbayboy 5808:Kheider 5754:Serendi 5713:Tbayboy 5371:Kheider 5341:JorisvS 5273:Tbayboy 5259:JorisvS 5244:Tbayboy 5230:JorisvS 5216:Tbayboy 4873:Kheider 4821:doesn't 4768:Proteus 4744:JorisvS 4722:Kheider 4713:plutino 4675:Kheider 4648:JorisvS 4644:must be 4630:Kheider 4595:JorisvS 4576:Kheider 4522:JorisvS 4501:Comment 4487:Anaxial 4477:Comment 4441:Kheider 4380:Kheider 4358:JorisvS 4344:Kheider 4305:JorisvS 4275:JorisvS 4213:- If a 4170:Quaoar 4089:Tbayboy 4058:Kheider 4035:Serendi 3985:JorisvS 3925:Serendi 3888:observe 3866:Kheider 3826:Serendi 3555:Comment 3450:Serendi 3427:Support 3414:JorisvS 3379:Tbayboy 3375:Support 3356:Tbayboy 3342:JorisvS 3315:Support 3274:JorisvS 3235:sources 3155:sources 3102:JorisvS 3066:JorisvS 3018:JorisvS 2978:Serendi 2953:accepts 2936:de jure 2910:Serendi 2869:Serendi 2637:Kheider 2607:JorisvS 2539:Tbayboy 2525:JorisvS 2510:Tbayboy 2496:JorisvS 2482:Tbayboy 2139:Kheider 2087:doesn't 2034:Proteus 2010:JorisvS 1988:Kheider 1979:plutino 1941:Kheider 1914:JorisvS 1910:must be 1896:Kheider 1861:JorisvS 1842:Kheider 1788:JorisvS 1767:Comment 1753:Anaxial 1743:Comment 1707:Kheider 1646:Kheider 1624:JorisvS 1610:Kheider 1571:JorisvS 1541:JorisvS 1479:- If a 1436:Quaoar 1355:Tbayboy 1324:Kheider 1301:Serendi 1251:JorisvS 1191:Serendi 1154:observe 1132:Kheider 1092:Serendi 821:Comment 716:Serendi 693:Support 680:JorisvS 645:Tbayboy 641:Support 622:Tbayboy 608:JorisvS 581:Support 540:JorisvS 501:sources 421:sources 368:JorisvS 332:JorisvS 284:JorisvS 244:Serendi 219:accepts 202:de jure 176:Serendi 135:Serendi 39:archive 6027:Ruslik 5993:Ruslik 5945:planet 5930:Ruslik 5893:Ruslik 5875:Haumea 5856:Ruslik 5826:Ruslik 5627:Haumea 5002:please 4944:Ruslik 4843:Ruslik 4806:Ruslik 4772:Ruslik 4546:calls 4395:Ruslik 4323:Quaoar 4290:Ruslik 4220:fringe 4191:Ruslik 4156:Ruslik 3884:assume 3755:Ruslik 3714:Ruslik 3182:Ruslik 2268:please 2210:Ruslik 2109:Ruslik 2072:Ruslik 2038:Ruslik 1812:calls 1661:Ruslik 1589:Quaoar 1556:Ruslik 1486:fringe 1457:Ruslik 1422:Ruslik 1150:assume 1021:Ruslik 980:Ruslik 448:Ruslik 6013:kwami 5978:kwami 5947:! -- 5908:Round 5780:kwami 5732:kwami 5555:kwami 5518:kwami 5495:Ckatz 5433:kwami 5392:kwami 5198:kwami 5143:Ckatz 5115:kwami 5085:Ckatz 5056:Ckatz 5008:Ckatz 4963:kwami 4928:kwami 4891:known 4663:Orcus 4574:! -- 4460:kwami 4426:kwami 4327:Sedna 4319:Orcus 4242:WP:OR 4177:kwami 4135:kwami 4126:can't 4073:kwami 4010:kwami 4006:would 3916:That 3904:kwami 3862:known 3848:kwami 3803:Ckatz 3787:kwami 3733:kwami 3691:siafu 3676:kwami 3648:siafu 3605:IUPAC 3559:siafu 3539:kwami 3400:kwami 3214:Ckatz 3198:kwami 3163:kwami 3086:crazy 3037:Ckatz 3014:isn't 3012:this 2996:TRUTH 2957:kwami 2894:kwami 2852:kwami 2821:kwami 2784:kwami 2761:Ckatz 2699:kwami 2658:kwami 2464:kwami 2409:Ckatz 2381:kwami 2351:Ckatz 2322:Ckatz 2274:Ckatz 2229:kwami 2194:kwami 2157:known 1929:Orcus 1840:! -- 1726:kwami 1692:kwami 1593:Sedna 1585:Orcus 1508:WP:OR 1443:kwami 1401:kwami 1392:can't 1339:kwami 1276:kwami 1272:would 1182:That 1170:kwami 1128:known 1114:kwami 1069:Ckatz 1053:kwami 999:kwami 957:siafu 942:kwami 914:siafu 871:IUPAC 825:siafu 805:kwami 666:kwami 480:Ckatz 464:kwami 429:kwami 352:crazy 303:Ckatz 280:isn't 278:this 262:TRUTH 223:kwami 160:kwami 118:kwami 16:< 6032:Zero 6017:talk 6009:read 5998:Zero 5982:talk 5953:talk 5935:Zero 5916:talk 5898:Zero 5883:talk 5873:and 5861:Zero 5846:talk 5831:Zero 5822:this 5812:talk 5784:talk 5736:talk 5717:talk 5647:and 5625:and 5602:The 5579:The 5559:talk 5541:talk 5522:talk 5489:Note 5451:talk 5437:talk 5411:talk 5396:talk 5375:talk 5361:talk 5345:talk 5331:talk 5277:talk 5263:talk 5248:talk 5234:talk 5220:talk 5212:have 5202:talk 5188:talk 5119:talk 5039:talk 4982:talk 4967:talk 4949:Zero 4932:talk 4900:talk 4877:talk 4863:talk 4848:Zero 4833:talk 4811:Zero 4796:talk 4777:Zero 4748:talk 4742:) -- 4726:talk 4718:need 4706:For 4698:talk 4690:four 4679:talk 4652:talk 4634:talk 4613:286 4599:talk 4580:talk 4558:and 4526:talk 4510:talk 4491:talk 4464:talk 4445:talk 4430:talk 4400:Zero 4384:talk 4362:talk 4348:talk 4329:and 4309:talk 4295:Zero 4279:talk 4273:. -- 4251:talk 4232:talk 4196:Zero 4181:talk 4161:Zero 4139:talk 4093:talk 4077:talk 4062:talk 4014:talk 3989:talk 3981:more 3908:talk 3900:less 3880:know 3870:talk 3852:talk 3791:talk 3760:Zero 3747:2010 3737:talk 3719:Zero 3695:talk 3680:talk 3666:talk 3652:talk 3617:talk 3581:talk 3563:talk 3543:talk 3513:talk 3472:talk 3435:talk 3418:talk 3404:talk 3383:talk 3360:talk 3346:talk 3278:talk 3202:talk 3187:Zero 3167:talk 3106:talk 3070:talk 3022:talk 2971:does 2961:talk 2898:talk 2856:talk 2847:says 2825:talk 2807:talk 2788:talk 2755:Note 2717:talk 2703:talk 2677:talk 2662:talk 2641:talk 2627:talk 2611:talk 2597:talk 2543:talk 2529:talk 2514:talk 2500:talk 2486:talk 2478:have 2468:talk 2454:talk 2385:talk 2305:talk 2248:talk 2233:talk 2215:Zero 2198:talk 2166:talk 2143:talk 2129:talk 2114:Zero 2099:talk 2077:Zero 2062:talk 2043:Zero 2014:talk 2008:) -- 1992:talk 1984:need 1972:For 1964:talk 1956:four 1945:talk 1918:talk 1900:talk 1879:286 1865:talk 1846:talk 1824:and 1792:talk 1776:talk 1757:talk 1730:talk 1711:talk 1696:talk 1666:Zero 1650:talk 1628:talk 1614:talk 1595:and 1575:talk 1561:Zero 1545:talk 1539:. -- 1517:talk 1498:talk 1462:Zero 1447:talk 1427:Zero 1405:talk 1359:talk 1343:talk 1328:talk 1280:talk 1255:talk 1247:more 1174:talk 1166:less 1146:know 1136:talk 1118:talk 1057:talk 1026:Zero 1013:2010 1003:talk 985:Zero 961:talk 946:talk 932:talk 918:talk 883:talk 847:talk 829:talk 809:talk 779:talk 738:talk 701:talk 684:talk 670:talk 649:talk 626:talk 612:talk 544:talk 468:talk 453:Zero 433:talk 372:talk 336:talk 288:talk 237:does 227:talk 164:talk 122:talk 113:says 5761:ous 5746:of 5588:An 5504:spy 5152:spy 5094:spy 5065:spy 5034:RJH 5017:spy 4959:all 4889:is 4819:He 4787:icy 4738:or 4665:is 4618:−38 4339:not 4246:RJH 4042:ous 4028:not 4004:We 3999:Why 3932:ous 3833:ous 3812:spy 3607:). 3457:ous 3338:not 3223:spy 3094:not 3090:not 3046:spy 2985:ous 2917:ous 2876:ous 2770:spy 2418:spy 2360:spy 2331:spy 2300:RJH 2283:spy 2225:all 2155:is 2085:He 2053:icy 2004:or 1931:is 1884:−38 1605:not 1512:RJH 1308:ous 1294:not 1270:We 1265:Why 1198:ous 1099:ous 1078:spy 873:). 723:ous 604:not 489:spy 360:not 356:not 312:spy 251:ous 183:ous 142:ous 6019:) 5984:) 5955:) 5918:) 5885:) 5877:. 5848:) 5814:) 5786:) 5738:) 5719:) 5561:) 5543:) 5524:) 5453:) 5439:) 5413:) 5398:) 5377:) 5363:) 5347:) 5333:) 5279:) 5265:) 5257:-- 5250:) 5236:) 5222:) 5204:) 5190:) 5140:-- 5121:) 5053:-- 5042:) 4984:) 4969:) 4934:) 4902:) 4894:-- 4879:) 4865:) 4857:-- 4835:) 4798:) 4790:-- 4750:) 4728:) 4700:) 4681:) 4654:) 4636:) 4622:km 4601:) 4582:) 4550:a 4528:) 4520:-- 4512:) 4493:) 4466:) 4447:) 4432:) 4386:) 4364:) 4350:) 4325:, 4321:, 4311:) 4281:) 4254:) 4234:) 4183:) 4172:is 4141:) 4095:) 4079:) 4064:) 4016:) 3991:) 3918:is 3910:) 3872:) 3854:) 3793:) 3739:) 3697:) 3682:) 3668:) 3654:) 3619:) 3611:-- 3599:, 3583:) 3565:) 3545:) 3515:) 3474:) 3437:) 3420:) 3406:) 3398:— 3385:) 3362:) 3348:) 3280:) 3239:as 3204:) 3169:) 3151:we 3108:) 3096:a 3072:) 3024:) 2963:) 2900:) 2890:is 2858:) 2827:) 2809:) 2790:) 2719:) 2705:) 2679:) 2664:) 2643:) 2629:) 2613:) 2599:) 2545:) 2531:) 2523:-- 2516:) 2502:) 2488:) 2470:) 2456:) 2406:-- 2387:) 2319:-- 2308:) 2250:) 2235:) 2200:) 2168:) 2160:-- 2145:) 2131:) 2123:-- 2101:) 2064:) 2056:-- 2016:) 1994:) 1966:) 1947:) 1920:) 1902:) 1888:km 1867:) 1848:) 1816:a 1794:) 1786:-- 1778:) 1759:) 1732:) 1713:) 1698:) 1652:) 1630:) 1616:) 1591:, 1587:, 1577:) 1547:) 1520:) 1500:) 1449:) 1438:is 1407:) 1361:) 1345:) 1330:) 1282:) 1257:) 1184:is 1176:) 1138:) 1120:) 1059:) 1005:) 963:) 948:) 934:) 920:) 885:) 877:-- 865:, 849:) 831:) 811:) 781:) 740:) 703:) 686:) 672:) 664:— 651:) 628:) 614:) 546:) 505:as 470:) 435:) 417:we 374:) 362:a 338:) 290:) 229:) 166:) 156:is 124:) 91:→ 6029:_ 6015:( 5995:_ 5980:( 5951:( 5932:_ 5914:( 5895:_ 5881:( 5858:_ 5844:( 5828:_ 5810:( 5782:( 5734:( 5715:( 5656:. 5557:( 5539:( 5520:( 5449:( 5435:( 5409:( 5394:( 5373:( 5359:( 5343:( 5329:( 5275:( 5261:( 5246:( 5232:( 5218:( 5200:( 5186:( 5117:( 5036:( 4980:( 4965:( 4946:_ 4930:( 4898:( 4875:( 4861:( 4845:_ 4831:( 4808:_ 4794:( 4774:_ 4746:( 4724:( 4696:( 4677:( 4650:( 4632:( 4611:= 4609:1 4597:( 4578:( 4524:( 4508:( 4489:( 4462:( 4443:( 4428:( 4397:_ 4382:( 4360:( 4346:( 4307:( 4292:_ 4277:( 4248:( 4230:( 4193:_ 4179:( 4158:_ 4137:( 4091:( 4075:( 4060:( 4012:( 3987:( 3906:( 3868:( 3850:( 3789:( 3757:_ 3735:( 3716:_ 3693:( 3678:( 3664:( 3650:( 3615:( 3579:( 3561:( 3541:( 3511:( 3470:( 3433:( 3416:( 3402:( 3381:( 3358:( 3344:( 3276:( 3200:( 3184:_ 3165:( 3104:( 3068:( 3020:( 2959:( 2896:( 2854:( 2823:( 2805:( 2786:( 2715:( 2701:( 2675:( 2660:( 2639:( 2625:( 2609:( 2595:( 2541:( 2527:( 2512:( 2498:( 2484:( 2466:( 2452:( 2383:( 2302:( 2246:( 2231:( 2212:_ 2196:( 2164:( 2141:( 2127:( 2111:_ 2097:( 2074:_ 2060:( 2040:_ 2012:( 1990:( 1962:( 1943:( 1916:( 1898:( 1877:= 1875:1 1863:( 1844:( 1790:( 1774:( 1755:( 1728:( 1709:( 1694:( 1663:_ 1648:( 1626:( 1612:( 1573:( 1558:_ 1543:( 1514:( 1496:( 1459:_ 1445:( 1424:_ 1403:( 1357:( 1341:( 1326:( 1278:( 1253:( 1172:( 1134:( 1116:( 1055:( 1023:_ 1001:( 982:_ 959:( 944:( 930:( 916:( 881:( 845:( 827:( 807:( 777:( 736:( 699:( 682:( 668:( 647:( 624:( 610:( 542:( 466:( 450:_ 431:( 370:( 334:( 286:( 225:( 162:( 120:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index