Talk:Comet nucleus

message: This just duplicates or overlaps the information at Comet. I don't see any point in keeping this as a separate article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.242.119 (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of the information on this page does not appear to be covered by the Comet page. -- Kheider (talk) 04:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see what advantage there is to keeping this a separate article. It could become a section in the Comet page. Dan Watts (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A comet's nucleus is the real object (an icy asteroid).  A traditional comet has many other aspects to it (myths and history) that really have nothing to do with the core object (nucleus).  Centaurs are basically the same thing as a comet nucleus and many will become active comets in the future.  Centaurs help fill the gap between a comet nucleus and a dwarf planet.  Due to the cultural history of comets I think the articles should remain separate.  Some day we will prove that a past or future comet will have (had) a nucleus in the 250 km range. -- Kheider (talk) 17:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get your point I'm afraid. A "comet nucleus" is by definition the nucleus of a thing called a "comet" (however "comet" is defined -- and maybe that definition is subject to discussion and evolution, but that's a separate question). The "comet nucleus" article should not be a place to discuss any other type of object. All the content here should be about the nucleus of an object called a "comet", and therefore should IMO sit in the "comet" article -- unless that section becomes too long (which currently I don't think it is), in which case all the nucleus detail from "Comet" should be merged here. In my opinion. Matt (original proposer; sorry, forgot to sign) 03:50, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: Maybe this isn't important, but under the size heading, I noticed that the article claims Comet Borrelly (8x4x4) is half the size of Halley's Comet (15x8x8). While each of the dimensions of Borrelly is, in fact, half of the length of the corresponding dimension of Halley's, that makes it one eighth the size (volume). If it's normal to define comet size by the major axis length then please let me know, I'm not going to change it yet.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.139.226 (talk) 04:41, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For most comets we only have a basic estimate of the diameter. -- Kheider (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size 

message: I think a merge is the best way forward. If clicking on the link doesn't give new information, it's not worth having a separate article. Albedo is mentioned under how dark they are. It was probably premature, as you say, so thanks for reining me in. Jamesx12345 07:52, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to DISAGREE about merging the two articles. Comet has little mention of centaurs and how they are often much larger than typical everyday comets. Comets also fails to mention the term "icy dirtball". It is probably best to keep the two articles. -- Kheider (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that's enough for a separate article. I'll add a mention of centaurs as the larger cousins of comets, as that is very relevant. Icy dirtball is just a variation on the dirty snowball. I could add that in. Watch this space, I'll see if I can get all the useful content into the main article. Regards. Jamesx12345 13:14, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Comet nucleus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090122074028/http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/borrelly_dark_011129.html to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/borrelly_dark_011129.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090106004009/http://planetary.org./explore/topics/asteroids_and_comets/wild2.html to http://www.planetary.org/explore/topics/asteroids_and_comets/wild2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:25, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Comet nucleus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160118052157/http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Exposed_ice_on_Rosetta_s_comet_confirmed_as_water to http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Exposed_ice_on_Rosetta_s_comet_confirmed_as_water
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110812112210/http://www.icq.eps.harvard.edu/ICQsplit.html to http://www.icq.eps.harvard.edu/ICQsplit.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:53, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What is the nature of the nucleus of a comet 136.158.1.227 (talk) 12:25, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  09291641924