I asked this group some time ago if anyone knew of a consensus definition for "planet" and one of you responded with what I believe was the IAU's working definition for a range of objects. Forgive me, but I don't now remember who that person was. As I recall, the definition went something like this: If an object is massive enough to be spherical and is in orbit about a star, it's a planet. If an object is massive enough to sustain the fusion of hydrogen to helium, it's a star, and so forth. Does anyone recall and can cite the source for these definitions? I've always thought that the simplest definition is the best, and I liked this definition for planets. Therefore, both Pluto and "Xena" are planets, as may also be the larger Kuiper Belt objects. All the rest of the arguing by the "professionals" about what constitutes a planet seems somewhat petty and fruitless. After all, we still have to fix those damn tiles... Kim