Jump to content

Talk:List of particles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jeremy Henty (talk | contribs) at 18:50, 21 February 2004 (Comment in reply to Herbee). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I have marked the article as a stub because IMHO it's far from complete. Here are some of the things that are missing.

  • The title, list of particles, suggests a linear structure, but in fact the article is structured more like a tree. Should we change the title?
  • A tree structure is best presented graphically. What is the best way to do this? Wikipedia contains no examples, as far as I can tell.
  • Should the article strive for completeness, and include every term that can possibly refer to a particle? Or should it try for maximum clarity of the taxonomy, and include only terms that fit in well?
  • What to do with problematic particles such as:
    • hypothetical particles like axion, leptoquark, monopole, tachyon, supersymmetric partners;
    • pseudoparticles like exciton, phonon, and pomeron;
    • ill-defined particles like preon and WIMP;
    • composites like quark-gluon plasma and strangelets.

Comments are welcome. —Herbee 2004-02-20

I would say that quark-gluon plasma and strangelets are states of matter, not particles. Jeremy Henty 18:50, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

  • The title, list of particles, suggests a linear structure, but in fact the article is structured more like a tree. Should we change the title?
No. This is counter-intuitive. No one would ever type "tree of particles" into the search box. Anyone who did stumble across this article would wonder what the title meant.
I agree that "tree of particles" sounds silly. That's why I didn't suggest it. I'm looking for an even better title. On the other hand, we might get used to "tree of..." articles. Wikipedia is already growing a tree of life.—Herbee
  • I think this page should list the major particles/groupings. If it has name recognition, it definetely belongs here. I wouldn't even mind completeness, depending on how long it made the page. →Raul654 00:12, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)

I see this article as one whose mission is akin to that of Scientific classification, but for particle physics instead of Biology. So "Scientific classification (particle physics)" would make sense to me as an alternative title for this article. Bevo 04:54, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_particles&oldid=2473058"