This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / Solar System This template is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy This template is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects. This template is supported by Solar System task force.

Might want to remove the word 'named' from the template, now that Varuna is gone. kwami (talk) 12:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. — Chesnok (talk • contribs) 13:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest using relative scaling to allow this template to interact better with user preferences. It is possible to do this by removing the explicit pixel size specification and (if necessary) using the upright factor instead. Icalanise (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to bring up that we should update the image to accommodate the newly announced names of P4 and P5 - Kerberos and Styx, respectively. 134340Goat (talk) 01:41, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea of the proper way to talk here. I just read the rules. I wish you would make it easier. I have limited time to point out factual inaccuracies here. No offense.

Anyway, in your diagram of TNOs Eris looks larger than Pluto. Current science strongly suggests that Pluto is at least 12 kilometers larger than Eris in diameter. Bruno Sicardy of the Paris Observatory published his findings coming to that conclusion back in 2011 in the highly-regarded publication called Nature. His findings were based on a stellar occulation of Eris in late 2010. He spoke publicly about in France and this year in Maryland. Of course, NASA's New Horizons mission to Pluto will measure the diameter of Pluto in July of 2015 and that will probably resolve this question definitively; but, in the meantime, it is not appropriate to depict Eris as larger than Pluto. This myth was originally perpetrated by Mike Brown who also claims to have "killed" Pluto. I can provide a link to the paper by Bruno Sicardy if you would like to see it. Sowff (talk) 03:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We have currently no idea which of the two is bigger, because Pluto's size is not very accurately known. What would currently be the best is to present them as being the same size. The reason why this image presents Eris as noticeably larger than Pluto is one of history: Eris used to be believed to be somewhat larger than Pluto and nobody has updated the image since the more precise information was obtained. --JorisvS (talk) 13:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about how to edit this image but today, 17 July 2015, the diameter of both is known with an error of ±20km. This should be fixed. Nick Beeson (talk) 19:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When there was no actual information about any meaningful surface features it was fine to produce artistic guesses and post them here. But two days ago the situation changed. Now we have high-resolution photos of Charon and Pluto. Leaving the artistic guesses will confuse the non-expert. They need to be replaced with smooth spheres to indicate we do not know anything about the surface features of these objects. Nick Beeson (talk) 20:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added models for (307261) 2002 MS4 and 120347 Salacia as two likely dwarf planets, with expected large diameters but lower albedo. Tom Ruen (talk) 09:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The mention of the former in the caption appears out of order compared with its appearance in the image. Also, image is starting to look quite cluttered. Dhtwiki (talk) 13:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the caption order. I agree, it could use some rearraning for a better layout, but I wanted to disrupt the existing map minimally. Tom Ruen (talk) 23:54, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent size estimates of 2007 OR10 is around 1230 ± 50 km, making it smaller than Makemake (1430 km). Here is the paper, published in March 2019: The mass and density of the dwarf planet (225088) 2007 OR10 Since 2007 OR₁₀ must be moved to the bottom left and Makemake must be moved to the top right, the circles may need to be repositioned. Nrco0e (talk) 06:33, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the imagemap and the EightTNOs file itself. The newer version of the image will take a while to load. Nrco0e (talk) 04:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]