Editing Definition of planet (section)

=== Semantics ===
Finally, from a purely linguistic point of view, there is the dichotomy that the IAU created between 'planet' and 'dwarf planet'. The term 'dwarf planet' arguably contains two words, a noun (planet) and an adjective (dwarf). Thus, the term could suggest that a dwarf planet is a type of planet, even though the IAU explicitly defines a dwarf planet as ''not'' so being. By this formulation therefore, 'dwarf planet' and '[[minor planet]]' are best considered [[compound noun]]s. [[Benjamin Zimmer]] of [[Language Log]] summarized the confusion: "The fact that the IAU would like us to think of dwarf planets as distinct from 'real' planets lumps the lexical item 'dwarf planet' in with such oddities as '[[Welsh rabbit]]' (not really a rabbit) and '[[Rocky Mountain oysters]]' (not really oysters)."<ref name=langlog>{{cite web | last = Zimmer | first = Benjamin | author-link = Benjamin Zimmer |title=New planetary definition a "linguistic catastrophe"!| work=[[Language Log]]| url=http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003504.html| access-date=October 4, 2006}}</ref> As [[Dava Sobel]], the historian and popular science writer who participated in the IAU's initial decision in October 2006, noted in an interview with [[National Public Radio]], "A dwarf planet is not a planet, and in astronomy, there are dwarf stars, which are stars, and dwarf galaxies, which are galaxies, so it's a term no one can love, dwarf planet."<ref>{{cite web|title=A Travel Guide to the Solar System |year=2006 |work=National Public Radio |url=http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2006/Oct/hour2_102706.html |access-date=November 18, 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061107104814/http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2006/Oct/hour2_102706.html |archive-date=November 7, 2006 }}</ref>  Mike Brown noted in an interview with the Smithsonian that "Most of the people in the dynamical camp really did not want the word 'dwarf planet', but that was forced through by the pro-Pluto camp. So you're left with this ridiculous baggage of dwarf planets not being planets."<ref name=smithsonian>{{cite web|title=Pluto's Planethood: What Now? |work=Air and Space |url=http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2006/august-september/FEATURE-PlutoDebate.php?page=1 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130101211205/http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2006/august-september/FEATURE-PlutoDebate.php?page=1 |url-status=dead |archive-date=January 1, 2013 |year=2006 |access-date=August 21, 2007 }}</ref>

Conversely, astronomer Robert Cumming of the Stockholm Observatory notes that, "The name 'minor planet' [has] been more or less synonymous with 'asteroid' for a very long time. So it seems to me pretty insane to complain about any ambiguity or risk for confusion with the introduction of 'dwarf planet'."<ref name=langlog />