Talk:Blanet
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Notability
[edit]It's worth reconsidering the notability tag by User:XOR'easter. The word is new, but the concept is discussed by reliable parties and is, frankly, interesting to lay people like myself (I got here by looking to send my friends to an interesting read.) I won't remove the tag now, but if I remember in a few weeks I'll check back and remove the tag unless there is good reason not too. Bookandcoffee (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- What matters isn't whether an idea is interesting, but whether it's been discussed in depth by multiple independent reliable sources. I can think of many things that I find quite interesting but which don't meet that standard (like my own mathematics research, sad to say). What we have here is a proposal and some PR-level pop-science fluff "reporting" on it. That doesn't add up to a great argument for notability. XOR'easter (talk) 17:28, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Merger Proposal
[edit]@XOR'easter and Bookandcoffee:
I propose to merge Blanet into the planetary-mass objects section of the Planet article. I partially agree with User:XOR'easter's argument that there are not enough independent reliable sources on the subject, and thus that Blanet is not notable enough to be worthy of its own article. However, since blanets are planetary-mass objects, and there are some secondary sources,[1][2][3] it is probably worthy of a mention in the planemo section of the Planet article.
--ComradePenguinMonster (talk) 02:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- That sounds reasonable. XOR'easter (talk) 15:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Blanet: A new class of planet that could form around black holes". Astronomy.com.
- ^ "Planets around a black hole? Calculations show possibility of bizarre worlds". phys.org.
- ^ "Could a habitable planet orbit a black hole?". Science | AAAS. 4 February 2020.
Notability
[edit]Thank you for making this article. It has clarified the nature of wikipedia in that notability and scientific indirect/direct observation are not the same concepts. TallZoltarian (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Rogue planets and blanets
[edit]Technically some rogue planets could be considered as blanets, because as they does not orbit any star, they are orbiting the galaxy directly, more specifically the Milky Way's supermassive black hole, Sagittarius A*. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 14:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- This isn’t technically false. I think a blanet around Sgr A* would be a planet that orbits between it and the stars that orbit it; a blanet more specifically refers to a planet that is more strongly gravitationally bound to a black hole than by anything else nearby. Rogue planets have the capacity to be picked up by neighboring stars because the stars and their planets can cause the rogue to become gravitationally bound to the star; I’m fairly certain a blanet can’t be any rogue planet because “blanets” orbiting Sgr A* at such a great distance aren’t gravitationally bound to it. OverzealousAutocorrect (talk) 18:42, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Should this file: File:Black hole Interstellar.png, be added?
[edit]There isn’t much images for Blanets, i was proposing we could use this image: File:Black hole Interstellar.png,
or an image from NASA or another artist depicting a blanet. Bennett1203 (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
