Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that the definition said that anything over 13 Jupiter masses and burning deuterium was classified, by the definition as being a star. In my own defence, I was suffering from lack of sleep at the time I posted all those links.

And, that's the last thing I'll post about the definition of stars, since we were politely asked to knock if off.

I still disagree, though, with the definition of planets. I think it's more relevant the way an object was formed than what it orbits around. It's silly that you might have two gas giants, formed in exactly the same way, with almost exactly the same composition, with one being classed as a planet (because it orbits, say, a red dwarf) and the other not (because it orbits a brown dwarf). Would Earth suddenly stop being a planet if it were transported to an orbit around a brown dwarf? Would an object around a brown dwarf suddenly become a planet if it were captured a star?