Talk:IRAS

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Planet X"[edit]

The Washington Post article on Dec 30, 1983.

This information needs to be added to IRAS.

A heavenly body possibly as large as the giant planet Jupiter and possibly so close to Earth that it would be part of this solar system has been found in the direction of the constellation Orion by an orbiting telescope aboard the U.S. Infrared Astronomical Satellite.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/washingtonpost_historical/access/127658362.html?dids=127658362:127658362&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Dec+30%2C+1983&author=By+Thomas+O%27Toole+Washington+Post+Staff+Writer&pub=The+Washington+Post++(1974-Current+file)&edition=&startpage=A1&desc=Mystery+Heavenly+Body+Discovered

I would like to provide an external link to the article different in refernce from the link above: [1] The page appears to provide the full article non-commercially. --Klingon83 (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No Tenth Planet Yet From IRAS http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/tchester/iras/no_tenth_planet_yet.html -- Kheider (talk) 17:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Area?[edit]

The telescope collecting area is given as ~1 m², which appears to be inconsistent with the aperture of 0.57 m diameter. I propose to change this (as soon as I get a chance to do a bit more checking) unless someone knows the explanation. Wwheaton (talk) 03:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finally fixed this; correct is 0.2 m², per ref supplied. Wwheaton (talk) 22:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Space hazard[edit]

in the first para there's a 'citation needed'. "cn|reason=constituting a space hazard is subjective|date=September 2020" Hundreds if not thousands of satellites haven't been deorbited because they were launched before orbital debris regulations came into force. Do all of them warrant a "space hazard" sentence in the first paragraph? I've removed the last sentence of the first paragraph. --Zounds011 (talk) 11:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]