Talk:2012 VP113

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / Solar System Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Presidents Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Low-importance).

A fact from 2012 VP113 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 April 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Biden is believed to be an eccentric frozen pink dwarf?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2012 VP113.

Wikipedia

Sources

Useful for anyone adding to the article, this reference: http://news.yahoo.com/newfound-pink-world-lurks-solar-system-fringes-180746924.html;_ylt=AwrBEiQfHjNTij4AZa_QtDMD

Funnily, Trujillo's nickname for 2012 VP113 is 'Biden'! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.163.112 (talk) 00:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another reference: http://home.dtm.ciw.edu/users/sheppard/inner_oort_cloud/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.163.112 (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

What is an "argument of perihelion"? How does it "...indicate a similar formation mechanism for these bodies"? Abductive (reasoning) 18:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is one of three parameters that indicate the orientation of the orbit. It can be best be understood by varying these values in Celestia (or a similar program) and see the effect on the orbit. In this context it comes down to the fact that 2012 VP113's and Sedna's orbits are rather similarly oriented. --JorisvS (talk) 18:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are they going to give it a real name?

I hate it when they leave a discovery with a long. boring number for a name. This thing is a dwarf planet. Give it a cool name! 2602:306:BDA0:97A0:466D:57FF:FE90:AC45 (talk) 14:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If 2007 OR10 still doesn't have a name, I wouldn't hold my breath for this one. Serendi ^pod ous 15:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Biden is a pretty cool name, don't you think? Jonathunder (talk) 16:14, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is cool, but Biden will probably not be the official name of 2012 VP113. The International Astronomical Union does not allow objects to be named after politicians until they have been dead for at least 100 years. Apogalacticon (talk) 17:37, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Buffy (discovered in 2004) still does not have a name. License plate numbers are common. -- Kheider (talk) 11:24, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Miles

Rather than edit warring. I suggest that the use of the common (nonscientific) unit "miles" is an innocent usage and should be let stand for those who are not scientists. WP:NOTJOURNAL items 6, 7, 8 TomS TDotO (talk) 18:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't do that. It's an editorial choice we have made as per the science articles on this site. Serendi ^pod ous 19:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, particularly since the source gives 450 km as a rough estimate of diameter; "279 miles" is meaninglessly overprecise. Jonathunder (talk) 21:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname

Looking at the recent edit history, there seems to be a bit of dispute over whether the Nickname section should use "...after Joe Biden, the vice president..." or "...after Joe Biden, who at the time of discovery, was vice president...". From the edit summaries, I believe the editor in favor of the more verbose wording argues that the shorter sentence will be inaccurate when Joe Biden leaves office, while at least one of the two editors who favor the shorter sentence argues that the longer sentence implies Joe Biden has already left office. In an effort to resolve this dispute, I've used the {{show by date}} template to have the text automatically switch from "...after Joe Biden, the vice president..." to "...after Joe Biden, who at the time of discovery, was vice president..." on January 20, 2017 (the date that Joe Biden is scheduled to leave office). Is this an adequate solution? —RP88 ^(talk) 06:29, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Biden will always be the VP when VP113 was discovered, so there's no need to change the wording when he leaves office. Isn't it a little obvious that, when discussing events in 2013, those events took place in 2013? We can say that King Louis XVI was executed by the French Revolution. We don't need to say "Louis XVI, who at the time was king". — kwami (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do I personally think the "who at the time of discovery" wording is necessary? No, I do not. However, after Joe Biden has left office it certainly would not be wrong, perhaps over-obvious, but not wrong. My introduction of the {{show by date}} was just an effort to resolve the slow-motion edit dispute. I would not object if the text was switched back to the shorter sentence. —RP88 ^(talk) 07:04, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead paragraph

The current opening sentences read: "2012 VP113 is a planetoid in the outer reaches of the Solar System. It is the object with the largest known perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) in the Solar System, larger than Sedna's." Which gives the impression that the object passes inside the orbit of Mercury. I think it should read "It is the object with the smallest known perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) in the Kuiper Belt, less than Sedna's." But as this isn't my main area of expertise I'd prefer someone to review the change first. Thanks. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 23:12, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The word should be "farthest". Serendi ^pod ous 23:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's better.Perry Middlemiss (talk) 12:00, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2012 VP113. 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 {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This link is not dead. I undid the edit by the InternetArchiveBot. —RP88 ^(talk) 20:29, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Biden

We need an admin to move this back to 2012 VP113 as Biden is not an official name for this object. -- Kheider (talk) 19:38, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. No admin needed, really, but I've added this back to my watchlist. Primefac (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orbit, presumed Trans-Neptunian planet

In fact, all known Solar System bodies with semi-major axes over 150 AU and perihelia greater than Neptune's have arguments of perihelion clustered near 340 ± 55°.

This was true as of 2014, but is now outdated. In fact, as Planet_Nine#Extreme_trans-Neptunian_objects shows, it is no longer true even for the majority of distant objects. Those do show some form of clustering, but in a different region of the parameter space. For instance, the argument of perihelion shows no clustering at all. The article should be updated to reflect the new data.--Renerpho (talk) 06:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]