Talk:Dia (moon)

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 Low-importance).

Comment

Is there any information as to why this moon has been skipped over repeatedly for naming? Some sources [1] no longer list it as existing. Is there any firm evidence either way, or have they just not looked for it again? --Patteroast 06:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it has not been recovered, so its orbit may have been poorly defined or the discovery was spurious.--Jyril 11:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

An MPEC has been issued today giving this object's recovery last year by Sheppard et al. see http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/mpec/K12/K12R22.html Andrew W 202.7.182.10 (talk) 08:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up. -- Kheider (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to an article in New Scientist, it seems to have disappeared. See my addition to the main article. I think this is evidence that Jupiter gains and loses small moons regularly.Eric Kvaalen (talk) 13:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary Satellite Capture (TSC) such as with 39P/Oterma and 2006 RH120 are common. -- Kheider (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orbital elems

I’ve updated the orbital data from the quoted ref. Please feel free to update them but with a ref (a published paper rather than online DB). Eurocommuter 13:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better source needed?

Given that S/2000 J11 was observed multiple nights over multiple years, sounds like a solid recovery to me. -- Kheider (talk) 19:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orbital Inclination

Is the listed orbital inclination in relation to the ecliptic, Jupiter's equator, the Invariable Plane, or the local Laplace plane? The source material doesn't seem to give a reference, and the difference between other Himalia group members' ecliptical and Jovian equatorial inclinations is so little that 28.2° could easily fit into either category.

Jacob S-589 (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dia (moon). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 00:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dia (moon). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Dia rediscovery image.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]