This article is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Do we really want to start using falseimages that suggest we known far more about any object than we do? A small asteroid/moon is a small asteroid/moon unless we have a real photo of it like we do for Phobos (moon) and Phoebe (moon). And if we are going to use false advertising we should at least limit them to 180px. -- Kheider (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, delete it. I almost didn't respond to your edit summary because I didn't imagine it would be this bad. Do we even know if the albedo is right? — kwami (talk) 18:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
As is common with small bodies, the albedo and density are assumed. -- Kheider (talk) 20:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
That's what I figured. — kwami (talk) 21:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Myself, Kwamikagami, and Icalanise seems to believe that these fake images can easily mislead the general public.
Given that these keep getting restored, I uploaded a note of 'this image is not yet available' at the name here, to override the transclusion from Commons. — kwami (talk) 16:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
In this case, does it really make any sense to assume a density similar to the primary? Quaoar, if the numbers are right, is about the densest thing in the Kuiper Belt; Weywot is suspected to be a collisional fragment (consisting mostly of ice, and therefore a low density object). Not that Weywot's density is currently a major issue in this article (and the reference really does make this assumption...) Sideways713 (talk) 21:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)