An Orbital Playing Field Around the Sun

Can we please keep the commonly accepted astronomical terminology?

A planet is a large object in orbit around a star.
A moon orbits a planet.
An asteroid is a minor planet, in orbit around a star.

Isn't that what i said? Some people here state that an asteroid orbits moons. Moons orbit moons. We can bend terminology and say planets are large bodies in direct orbit with the star. Asteroid are both small and do not have any orbital stability, which is what i said, asteroid in my planet have 4 in same circle at different points and are all smallest planet size.

That is what ceres and pluto are asteroid. They are the largest asteroid in their orbit plentiful with other asteroid.

No, it's not.

A moon can orbit a moon, but a planet can't orbit a planet. Asteroids can only orbit the sun.

A planet is an object in direct orbit around the sun, that has sufficient gravity to have rounded itself and cleared its orbit of other objects.

Ceres and Pluto are dwarf planets. They are in direct orbit around the sun, they have sufficient gravity to round themselves, but not enough to clear their orbit of other objects.

Moons are "natural satellites". I.e. anything in orbit around a planet that isn't man-made. If an asteroid gets picked up by Earth's gravity and remains in orbit, it is now a moon

Asteroids are in direct orbit around the sun, and don't have enough gravity to round themselves or clear their own orbit.

I can use Wikipedia too, I was just generally saying that people have been using terminology wrong, but some terminology is ambiguous anyway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_planet

If a center of mass of multiple orbiting bodies actually lies outside of any of those orbiting bodies, then it can't be considered a planet because it hasn't cleared it's orbit because there are two of them, but they are stable and planetary in mass. Are they asteroids? Okay then, Jupiter is an asteroid, because it's center of mass actually lies outside it's orbit with the Sun.

It is ambiguous and they have to chance classifications around for a reason. Moons are definitely a product of orbiting another solid body if that solid body is the sun. If the gravity orbited is inside of the primary body, that thing too is a moon even if it is a moon orbiting a moon. Asteroids are definitely readily useable terminology of any small space junk, nothing in dominant seclusion but in a shared orbit with many others. If it is a large mass with dominant seclusion within it's own orbit around a star, its a planet.

That is how I would classify anything in this game anyway. Big and orbiting sun, planet. Multiple small orbiting same ring around sun, asteroid. Anything orbiting anything solid, moon.

My whole objection was that you said a planet could orbit another planet, which isn't the case.

The double planet definition is flawed to begin with. Technically Jupiter is a star which is too small to achieve fusion. So it's a very small, cold star. Easier just to call it a planet and have done with it.

If nothing else, it would be handy to have an orbital shell around a star, as a place to put things.

You could park landers there.

Or even treat the place like a gas giant:

Hmm... big solar collectors in close orbit around a star. Yep, that'll generate some power.