Talk:3753 Cruithne

message: Paul Wiegert's page about Cruithne gives a different pronunciation  than that given here. He says it has just two syllables, with the stress on the first. Who's right? --agr 05:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there an acute accent in the Irish spelling? If not, there's no /u/ sound, as in duine  "person", and the nearest English would be . If there is, as in súil  "eye", then there's no /i/ sound, and the nearest English would be  (at least according to Wikipedia). Based on the cited sources, it might be the latter. I'm going to go ahead and put that in, on the rational that I might be right and the current listed pronunciation isn't even English, so correct me if I'm wrong. As pointed out above, what we really need is how astronomers pronounce it, but I imagine they're as clueless as we are, and each likely has his own idiosyncratic pronunciation. kwami 22:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be great if you did not change the pronunciation of the Irish when I correct it AGAIN. -- Evertype·✆ 22:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: (And sorry, it wasn't you. My mistake.) -- Evertype·✆ 22:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, afaik from my Irish friend who speaks Gaeilge, Irish still has dialects and some words are pronounced differently in different parts of the island, e.g. the "bh" in the name Aoibheann will be like English "v" some places and English "w" in others. Pascalulu88 (talk) 02:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

text: "Croothny" would seem to be an intuitive English pronunciation. Rothorpe (talk) 23:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation

message: "Cruithne was named after the first Celtic racio-tribal group to inhabit the British Isles. The Cruithne (aka Priteni or Picti) emigrated from the European continent and appeared in Britainnia between about 800 and 500 B.C. ."
I believe this is incorrect. In Scottish pseudo-history, Cruithne was the name of the first king of the Picts:
Pictish Kings:
"Mythical kings of the Picts are listed in the Lebor Bretnach's account of the origins of the Cruithnians. The list begins with Cruithne son of Cing (see Cruithne), and his sons Fib, Fidach, Foltlaig, Fortrend, Caitt, Ce and Circinn."
It is my understanding that the discoverer of Cruithne, Duncan Waldron, is of Scottish descent. It is also customary to name asteroids after individuals, not racial groupings.
Eroica 12:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are probably correct, but  the main reference source (Schmadel's Dictionary of Minor Planet Names is uncertain whether the tribe or the king was intended. I have qualified the sentence in the article. Thanks for the suggestion. The Singing Badger 18:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of Cruithne's name 

message: This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it.  Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed.  I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy.  In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright.  If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally.  Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 06:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links 

message: This rock has been stated on some websites as being a UFO, and UFO Casebook, Re.:Alien Races state that the reptile aliens are using a asteroid as a ship to get to Earth. 65.163.112.107 06:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now, how may this be placed ? Several websites do mention that this rock, others are UFOs in disguise awaiting the right time to hit this planet. What would YOU do if you saw a alien battleship/carrier in Earth orbit, yet at one that military assets can't get to it ? 65.163.112.107 06:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Placed "UFO" in article, due to this matter. 65.163.115.203 (talk) 10:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seen those rumors myself on the indicated website indicated here. Is that shit for real ? If so, I'll eat hot sauce, so that a lizard will get ulcers. 65.163.115.203 (talk) 10:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Are any of these web sites remotely reliable sources?--Bedivere (talk) 22:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "UFO" is involked in a pseudo-serious context. Is that an even vaguely serious question? :oP 24.250.195.181 (talk) 22:11, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: UFO Rumors

message: I had added to the statement of Cruithe being sometimes called a moon the word "misleadingly" (I admit, I had spelled it wrong twice, but I'm no native speaker, sorry). It was twice removed, with the reason that it's a) misspelled, b) a loaded word and c) unnecessary. I agree on a, of course, but not on b and c — I mean, it's clear that 3753 Cruithe is not a moon by definition, but that it's called "Earth's second moon" by various sources. To avoid that people who don't know as much about astronomy take up that term "second moon" or even believe that Cruithe is a moon of Earth, I added the word "misleadingly", to show that the statement is actually not quite correct and even unscientific. This statement should be marked as pseudoscience; maybe someone can find an adverb that's more appropriate? — N-true 18:31, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing of "misleadingly"... 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3753_Cruithne#Similar_minor_planets
I think it should read "Similar NEO's", or something like that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuck starchaser (talk • contribs) 18:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since this section discusses the moons of Saturn, and the last paragraph is about co-orbital asteroids, I think it is probably better to refer to them as "minor planets" since Jupiter trojans are not NEOs... -- Kheider (talk) 19:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the section titled "Similar Minor Planets" a typo? 

message: the article states that the orbit period is less than the earth's, but that isn't a stable relationship ... over a very long period, the orbit is (unless i'm missing something) the same as the earth's. both of these seem to be accurate values for the period (depending on your time frame). shouldn't the article reflect this? when i see a difference i immediately wonder how there can be a 1:1 resonance
:All orbits vary due to perturbations. Cruithne has an orbit that is unstable over a long period of time, and on astronomical time scales is only briefly a Quasi-satellite in a 1:1 resonance with the Earth. Basically it is  little asteroid that has the same basic orbital period as the Earth. -- Kheider (talk) 15:17, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  orbit 

message: The animation showing Cruithne's orbit from the perspective of the Earth depicts the Sun as never being between Earth and Cruithne. This contradicts the animation that depicts Cruithne's orbit for real.--Jarhed (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Between 1950 and 2050, Only on 1976-Jan-27 did 3753 Cruithne come within 0.5° of an alignment with the Sun. On 2032-Jan-21 it will be 8.74° from the Sun. -- Kheider (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

text: What contradiction? Both animations show that Cruithne is sometimes further from Earth than the Sun is; neither shows Cruithne passing behind the Sun. —Tamfang (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I stand corrected, thanks.--Jarhed (talk) 06:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bean-shaped orbit 

message: Lloyd, Robin. "More Moons Around Earth?". Space.com.
This reference no longer exists, but is cited from multiple times in the article.  Very good data is available from the JPL sources, so I propose editing out any information the missing source that is not found in anouther source.  I will wait a couple weeks before changing the article, so anyone who has another source or has an argument against this edit can make a case. --Kaiomai (talk) 06:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it archived? — LlywelynII 10:30, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference no longer available

message: ...I belive Alan was klaxoned for saying "two" when it came up again. So Stephen corrected himself. Six Sided Pun Vows (talk | contribs | former account) 20:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That's no moon. But where is a problem with the article, indeed? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cruithne is not a moon, no matter what Stephen Fry claims. 

message: Given the theories on the creation of the moon being that early stage solar system had two bodies colliding with a wobble effect the expelled the mass needed to create the moon -- I find it very strange that there appears to be no discussion about whether Cruithne is a left over of that processes.   Any mass which was not pull back to either earth or moon would enter into a parallel orbit to the two which is exactly what we see -- Is there any references which discuss such hypothesis?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorenriise (talk • contribs) 03:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Because a) its orbit is too unstable for it have remaind for that long, b) any remnant body would not be ejected into such an orbit. --JorisvS (talk) 11:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left over from the creation of the Moon 

message: In case anyone is curious about the spike in page views on and around December 19-20, 2014, it's because Cruithne was mentioned on the popular website thechive.com here. Matt Deres (talk) 14:21, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spike 

message: Phys.org has just run an article calling it the second moon explicitly (though still in quotation marks in the headline) here, and this has been picked up by Huffington Post. I'm putting these here just in case there's been any revisions of official opinion. Remember Pluto was considered a planet until 2006 so it cannot be said that categories can't be changed, though I do think the official recognition of a second moon would generate some major headlines beyond HuffPo! 68.146.52.234 (talk) 16:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moon question revisted 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 3753 Cruithne. 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/20070930160349/http://www.science.edu.sg/ssc/detailed.jsp?artid=1950&type=6&root=6&parent=6&cat=66 to http://www.science.edu.sg/ssc/detailed.jsp?artid=1950&type=6&root=6&parent=6&cat=66
*Added  tag to http://utstaging.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/second_moon_991029.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013190453/http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=578 to http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=578
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:40, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified