Talk:Photon induced electric field poling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics.	Physics Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics.
Help with this template Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article was nominated for deletion on 3 July 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Reversion of recent edits by User:Holoman

I've manually backed out most of this edit by Holoman (talk • contribs). Line by line commentary is as follows:

• created and patented by Michael E. Thomas in 1998 -- None of the references support this. It seems to be a phenomenon studied by many researchers around the world, as a part of the study of ferroelectric effects and of nonlinear optics.
• resonant absorption band frequency -- "Resonant" and "frequency" are redundant. Readers either know what an absorption band is, or can click the link.
• space charge fields -- Space charge refers to electric field effects in vacuum. I doublechecked this to make sure it didn't also refer to fields in dielectric materials (which I thought I'd seen occasional references to). Either way, it certainly doesn't apply to the ferroelectric domains this technique applies to.
• holographics or electric fields spintronics -- Spintronics is a completely unrelated phenomenon. None of the references mention using ferroelectric materials in a spintronic system, and any such setup would be completely different from the one discussed in this article.

I've made other substantial tweaks to the article text for clarity and to match the statements made in the reference papers.

I've also looked through all of the references, cleaned up citation style, organized them into appropriate sections, and removed the one or two that weren't relevant to the article. The version of the article I've just produced is accurate, as far as I can tell from the references. --Christopher Thomas 04:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)