Well, I'd argue that astronomers should work out how to categorize objects such as planets. They should be the taxonomists when it comes to space stuff. We have taxonomists in biology who decide how to categorize living material on earth. We don't decide that by voting or board posting or making assumptions about whether kids can learn the names. The primary reason for taxonomy is to facilitate communication of a technical topic. Those entering the field then learn that taxonomy so they can better understand what experts in the field are saying and so they can communicate what they themselves figure out. My own opinion is that the change we see is a clear demonstration that exciting progress is being made in astronomy. THAT should be exciting to every budding young astronomer. How can you get someone excited about a field where all the answers are already known? Science is about answering questions, not merely learning other people's answers.
Absolutely...science is dynamic so when status-quo is challenged this means we have new information, new discoveries...
I think a body the size of Pluto that has satellites and an atmosphere should definitely be a planet.
Nope...not unless they feel like naming the other couple hundred similar objects all around it too. https://www.space.com/16144-kuiper-belt-objects.html