Debate hope to pin down what defines a planet

[Sonia]

A heated debate over what defines a planet comes to a head this month at a meeting of the International Astronomical Union.
Astronomers have found many new worlds that are hard to classify: icy bodies beyond Neptune that don't seem big enough to be planets. Others are free floating bodies as big as Jupiter, with no parent star.
An an IAU meeting in Prague this month, astronomers are hoping to define what a planet is, something that could relegate Pluto's status.
A decision is expected in September.

[glsammy]

Should be interesting to see what they decide..I can see the problem, there as so many of these icy bodies around Pluto's Orbit, some much larger than Pluto..they can't all be classified as Planets, we'd end up with hundreds of them!

[Airehead]

Well, anyone can have a go at this. I suggest:

It should have some attributes which might make it capable of sustaining life
e.g. it should be in regular orbit round a star.
it should be larger in both mass and diameter than our Moon (because the concept of a planet is to some extent a tradition, and by the same tradition our Moon is a satellite not a planet)
its orbit round the star should not be shared by other bodies which do not share a mutual orbit (this precludes the asteroids but we do not want to preclude all our planets with satellites) (incidentally, the asteroids would be better named 'planetoids'. After all, they are not like small stars.)
it should be observably spheroid.

Regardless of the above, if it houses little green men it qualifies as a planet.