Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wafer-level optics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 merge to Microlens. Sandstein 06:50, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Wafer-level optics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reason to think this term is in use other than as a marketing term by a couple obscure companies. —Chowbok ☠ 02:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge - Searching Google Books for "wafer-level optics" returns zero results, while Scholar returns 28 results excluding patents. Looking at these results, it seems much of the coverage are papers authored by researchers at a number of European optics companies published in Elsevier, SPIE, and IEEE conferences and journals. The existence of these papers suggests that this is a topic, not a term that is just a marketing buzzword, even if the authors are corporate researchers, since plenty of legitimate research is performed by companies. However, given that the papers are fairly recent, and number of papers is small and do not appear to be heavily cited, this topic probably isn't notable enough for its own article. Without further discussion, a merge should be considered. Rilak (talk) 06:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see an obvious target for a merger here. If the topic is notable, the article should be kept. FuFoFuEd (talk) 06:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I forgot to elaborate on where to merge this article. Microlens looks like the right article, It seems wafer-level optics describes a process for making some of the lenses that fall under the microlens category. Rilak (talk) 07:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, seem fine to me. FuFoFuEd (talk) 05:56, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I forgot to elaborate on where to merge this article. Microlens looks like the right article, It seems wafer-level optics describes a process for making some of the lenses that fall under the microlens category. Rilak (talk) 07:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see an obvious target for a merger here. If the topic is notable, the article should be kept. FuFoFuEd (talk) 06:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge. 95 Google Scholar hits make this topic notable. There are also 815 Google News hits. I don't think any one company claims this as a trademark,
so I see no good merge target. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:27, 26 June 2011 (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.