This presents an interesting puzzling for naming conventions: if something like "WIMP" is almost always referred to as such, should it be listed under its acronym or under its full title? I have no very strong views about this case particular case, but I lean toward moving it to the full title. This particular page would be a perfect instance for that, because the acronym has two different uses; therefore, WIMP could redirect to those other two pages. --LMS
Weakly interacting massive particle is long enough that it won't be fun to link to. What do you think of perhaps putting the article at WIMP (astronomy)?
I'd say yes, I suppose. I don't know, an astronomer familiar with naming conventions should decide, I guess. --LMS
Another option would be Dark matter/WIMP, but I really intended the article to talk about WIMP (astronomy) here and link to graphical user interface as a footnote. --Damian Yerrick
Are neutralinos massive enough to be WIMPs? I'm trying to decide whether to add a hook on WIMP or on dark matter.
Hi! I think this article needs more structure and some clean up regarding terms that are normally not used or used differently in a Physics context. For instance no real world object can be cooled down to 0 Kelvin. I will start working on this in a few days. Otherwise my vote is for using WIMP (astronomy)! Awolf002 22:38, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Okay, I re-arranged the article. Start blaming me... ;-) Awolf002 12:23, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The article says it's called "weakly interacting" because its interactions with other particles are weak, in the sense of not strong. I thought it meant it interacted only through gravity and the weak nuclear force. 207.69.0.97 19:58, 15 May 2004 (UTC)