That question doesn't affect the classification of planets in our Solar System, but will be relevant to some others" ("Pluto no longer a Planet," World Science Homepage, 2006). Even some scientists who disliked the definition, however, felt that it was fair to demote Pluto. "According to the new definition, a full-fledged planet is an object that orbits the sun and is large enough to have become round due to the force of its own gravity. In addition, a planet has to dominate the neighborhood around its orbit," and Pluto is not simply small, and Pluto also does not dominate its neighborhood but its moon Charon, is very large in proportion to the former planet, as is about half the size of Pluto, "while all the true planets are far larger than their moons" (Inman, 2006) "In addition, bodies that dominate their neighborhoods, sweep up asteroids, comets, and other debris, clearing a path along their orbits. By contrast, Pluto's orbit is somewhat "untidy" and it lacks this distinct characteristic (Inman, 2006). In short, its orbit and relationship with its 'moon' alone was enough to call its status into question.

Perhaps the real question...

Also, the question of roundness and what is meant by clearing one's orbit and other points of contention will continue to generate lively debate within the scientific community and in schools, whatever Pluto's official status.
Works Cited

Britt, Robert Roy. "Scientists decide Pluto's no longer a planet: Planet definition approved, but dissenters plan a counteroffensive." MSNBC. 26 Aug 2006. 11 Mar 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14489259/

Britt, Robert Roy. "Controversial New Definition." Space.com. 16 Aug 2006. 11 Mar 2007. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060816_planet_definition.html

Inman, Mason. "Pluto Not a Planet, Astronomers Rule."

National Geographic News.

24 Aug 2006. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060824-pluto-planet.html

Pluto no longer a Planet." World Science Homepage. 26 Aug 2006. 11 Mar 2007.…