Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holes Only OLED

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was No consensus. Perhaps a merge discussion on the article's talk page would be a good idea at this point. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Holes Only OLED

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Technical nomination only. – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 21:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Original nominator's deletion rationale:

This article is non-sense

It says that this OLED (organic light emitting diode) does not emit light.

Indeed such a "hole only device" does not emit light, and therefore cannot be called an OLED... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selang (talk • contribs) 21:06, 1 February 2010

Comment. Probably not nonsense. See this book But the article would benefit from attention by an expert. – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:09, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The article suggests to me a device that would mimic the effect of a LED on a circuit without actually emitting light. In other words, a device used for testing purposes. So it is not nonsense. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Hi, thank you for your input. The device you are describing is called "hole only device" (as described in the book). It is used to measure transport properties of the semiconductor, for example to measure the mobility of a hole transport layer by space charge limited current. An analog is the "electron only device". I insist that the term "hole only OLED" is nonsense. If you want to keep it, I suggest to change the name to "hole only device". I would be happy to contribute to the article. Selang (talk) 18:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep concept exists, multiple scholarly mention Physics of organic semiconductors, Organic light-emitting materials and devices ad libitum. Article is rather inaccessible in its present state, improvements would be greatly appreciated, Selang. Power.corrupts (talk) 13:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - two links provided do not show 'Holes Only OLED' wording together. SunCreator (talk) 02:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Holes only devices(plural) - I suspect the correct name for this concept is Holes only devices as the article itself already calls it. There are scholars hits with that wording. Saying that, the articles contents is the work of one edit. It has no sources and seems to require expert work of which it has not attracted in it's 2.5 years since the page was created. As Selang seems willing to work on it(as offered above) then I am happy to say move, otherwise delete. If it's deleted it could be created at Holes only devices anyway. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 20:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- Pcap ping 21:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.