IMO the article should be moved to deoxyribonucleic acid. I find it very strange to use acronym here while at the same time we have LSD under Lysergic acid diethylamide. The word deoxyribonucleic acid explains the structure of the molecule and the people who don't know what DNA stands for will be redirected to deoxyribonucleic acid. --Eleassar my talk 11:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)99.95% of our readers will search for DNA,
so that's the title we should use - see the Wikipedia:Naming conventions which states: "Generally, article naming should prefer what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." see also Talk:DNA/Archive 6 for last time this was discussed. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
From the same page: "Avoid the use of abbreviations, including acronyms, in page naming unless the term you are naming is almost exclusively known only by its abbreviation and is widely known and used in that form.". I don't think this is the case here. --Eleassar my talk 19:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)I disagree, DNA is almost exclusively known by its abbreviation and is certainly most widely known and used in this form. Ask 100 people on the street what DNA stands for, how many do you think will be able to give you the correct answer? Tim Vickers (talk) 19:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Tim, I'm betting most people don't even know its an acronym. David D. (Talk) 19:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC) And only 0.0001% of people will know if "deoxyribo" or "deoxyribose" is correct. I know I had to check! :) Tim Vickers (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC) This surprises me very much. I was sure the majority of people know "DNA" means "deoxyribonucleic acid". I'll really do the test you have proposed. :) --Eleassar my talk 20:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Be sure to ask if it is "ribo" or "ribose"! Tim Vickers (talk) 20:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC) Ok, according to this pool two thirds of Americans know what does DNA stand for. This clearly refutes your claim that DNA is
almost exclusively known only by its initials. Can you prove otherwise? --Eleassar my talk 21:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Untrue, in a multiple choice format 2/3 of people could select the correct answer, we don't know what the alternatives were or how many alternatives were given. Most obviously, choosing something from a list isn't the same as using the term in common discourse or even being able to recall it by
oneself. That news article itself uses the term DNA throughout, even in its headline - it doesn't say "The deoxyribonucleic acid IQ of americans! Tim Vickers (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
