Talk:(55636) 2002 TX300

message: Would be a good name.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.2.28.84 (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Tabo

message: formerly { { technical } } OsamaBinLogin (talk) 18:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  too technical 

message: The size given in the text is different from the size given in the sidebar. Furthurmore, the 857 km figure comes from assuming an albedo of 0.09. Assuming albedos does not really give good results, so I think that the 857 should be replaced with a size range. JamesFox 22:26, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictory Size References! 

message: That the top header declaration is that the article's name is Downsize, is it intentional (and a template has since been changed) or some other weird cause? Could someone with expertise explain? MURGH disc. 22:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well thanks for fixing it, even if it didn't merit a reply. Altering  to  Made all the difference. MURGH disc. 07:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intentional template or error?

message: There is nothing here about it's possiblity to be promoted to a dwarf planet. Arkkeeper (talk) 19:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion 

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.asteroidoccultation.com/2009_10/1009_55636_18018_Summary.txt
** In (55636) 2002 TX300 on 2011-05-20 21:18:12, 404 Not Found
** In (55636) 2002 TX300 on 2011-05-31 04:15:28, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: The statement about small light-curve-amplitude variations doesn't say that is a dwarf planet, but that this suggests it could be a spheroiddwarf planet. Since we don't know when icy bodies become spherical, only that this is expected to happen somewhere between 200–400 km, how is this statement dubious, even taking the stellar-occultation result of 286 km? --JorisvS (talk) 16:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the amplitude of rotational lightcurve does tell us much this body. It all depends on the rotational pole position, which is unknown. Ruslik_Zero 17:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read my first sentence first. --JorisvS (talk) 17:27, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Body of any size can be spherical, simply by chance. Ruslik_Zero 18:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You're still not adressing what I'm saying. --JorisvS (talk) 18:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: and can be considered a dwarf planet if it is 450km in diameter or larger. As Ruslik points out, it is not that large. -- Kheider (talk) 12:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Tancredi (2010) accepts it as a DP, but Brown postdates that and only lists it as "possible", that is, only a DP if it's bigger than estimated or if there is some other reason it would be round despite being below what we think is the minimal size for an icy body. Tancredi was working with an estimated diameter of 800km, whereas by the time Brown posted, it was est. 374km. The occultation that measurement was based on postdates Tancredi, which was submitted in 2009. I would say that this is therefore no longer a serious candidate, and would recommend updating the lead to reflect that. — kwami (talk) 06:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be a dp, but recent size estimates of ~300km obviously cast serious doubts about it's confidence. It is a weak (possible) dwarf-planet candidate as are the centaurs 10199 Chariklo, 2060 Chiron, and 54598 Bienor. (The Dwarf Planets Headquarters still shows a size estimate of 478km.) -- Kheider (talk) 08:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on (55636) 2002 TX300. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.asteroidoccultation.com/2009_10/1009_55636_18018_Summary.txt
*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) 01:42, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on (55636) 2002 TX300. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://hamilton.dm.unipi.it/astdys/index.php?pc=1.1.3.0&n=2002TX300
*Added  tag to http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/aa/pdf/2004/22/aa0507.pdf
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5kNDVsV13?url=http://www.asteroidoccultation.com/2009_10/1009_55636_18018_Summary.txt to http://www.asteroidoccultation.com/2009_10/1009_55636_18018_Summary.txt
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) 12:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: This object was discovered over 20 years ago. Shouldn't the article mention why it hasn't been named yet? Pascalulu88 (talk) 22:50, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name?