Talk:(31345) 1998 PG

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 20 September 2013 by reviewer Anne Delong (talk · contribs).

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).

Remove original research?

I'm not going to fight it, but I think the statement "From the surface of 1998 PG, the moon would have an angular diameter of 11.49°. For comparison, the Sun appears to be 0.5° from Earth" is unnecessary original research here and can be removed without adverse affect on the article. Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't OR in the sense that WP:OR prohibits. This is simply providing context using very simple and non-controversial calculations. That being said, the calculations were wrong. I've updated them.Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go along with it, in a case like this. As you said, the calculations are not controversial...after you fixed them ;-) Cheers, AstroCog (talk) 15:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Overall revision 2017

The article (31345) 1998 PG has been revised as of March 2017. I left the above mentioned calculation untouched. However, I had to remove the text and image that referred to the Table Mountain Observatory, as this seems not to be related to the object. I must admit though, that obtaining sources and consolidating the data with the existing content has been exceptionally difficult. I also demoted the article to "Start-class" (from C-class). Rfassbind – talk 11:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]