Talk:15760 Albion

message: Any reference for that claim? Because if that's true, thanks to the IAU not accepting that name. --Jyril 11:44, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
:I talked to Jane Luu once. She told me the story of choosing Smiley but having it be rejected. Dioxinfreak (talk) 06:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Cubewan, though a departure, would seem appropriate; or Cubewana, perhaps. Rothorpe (talk) 00:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, come on Dioxinfreak ... tell us the story too? The NASA page linked to that part of the article is a dead link. 51.7.49.61 (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: According to German Wikipedia, the name referred to George Smiley. Using the search string "15760 albion" "george smiley", I've found this source, which confirms this story on page 17. However, this source also points out that it was only an informal name for internal use (confirming German Wikipedia on this point) and never suggested for the official naming, since "Smiley" was already in use for the asteroid 1613 Smiley. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Smiley?

message: This article gives an unusually high albedo of 0.5-1.0, while the frech version :fr:(15760) 1992 QB1 gives 0.07. Which one is correct? Martinwilke1980 10:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  albedo 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cfa.harvard.edu/iau/iauc/05600/05611.html
** In (15760) 1992 QB1 on 2011-05-20 21:17:31, 404 Not Found
** In (15760) 1992 QB1 on 2011-05-31 04:12:44, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 04:13, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: Hello! This articles says that a few dozen are classical Kuiper belt objects. That is not correct. A paper by Gladman et al. (Nomenclature in the Outer Solar System) lists more than 270 such objects. As numbers will change in the future (as will the nomenclature and classification of specific TNOs), it is probably better to remove any specific numbers to prevent having to constantly update the article. CalRis (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong statement: a few dozen are classical Kuiper belt objects 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on (15760) 1992 QB1. 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/20111018154917/http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/dps.html to http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/dps.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) 23:10, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Wheeeeee! Finally, after only... like... a quarter century. Nice work everyone :D
Now, what's the second KBO to be discovered after Pluto ... does it have a name yet? If so, what's the next longest standing "nameless" object? We should get to work on finally bringing them out of the codename-only doldrums.
Or at least do something about 2007 OR10 and 2002 MS4 because, honestly... it's a bit laughable, two of the larger TNOs (one of which is a very strong DP candidate, and the other is at least potential) still being "Orten" and "Mizfor". Fire up the naming engines! 146.199.0.203 (talk) 19:00, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: (happens across the same page five years later) ... Well, that's one down ... now for the second? At least some progress is being made. 51.219.168.15 (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  It has a name!