I agree the rules as they stand aren’t great – but they are the rules. The biggest issue with the whole definition is that it defines a planet as something that must orbit the Sun (not a Sun – THE Sun). So what are all the exoplanets?

I agree the rules need looking at again!

Thanks for your article, but there is just so much more to this issue, that I fear we’ll not get it set right.

You are absolutely correct – there is NO requirement for a specific size, but then why call it “dwarf”. What a horrible name! Minor planet would be so much better.

You are absolutely correct – there IS a requirement to clear one’s orbit, but then…. Jupiter? Don’t look away… Yes, I’m going to ask again. No, I don’t care that you are the biggest. Size matters not. See point #1. So, tell me again about the Trojans and how that “doesn’t count”…?

Finally, You are absolutely correct – there IS a requirement to orbit the Sun, but then what about all those thousands of exo-PLANETS? No, they SPECIFICALLY said “the Sun”. Therefore, NONE of those exoplanets count as planets! Really?

You are absolutely correct – Pluto should be on the list that it is on (it is much more like Sedna and Eris than Jupiter and Venus), but the set of rules that put it there make absolutely no sense.