Talk:Sputter deposition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

External link opinions[edit]

Opinions would be appreciated on whether this link: Magnetron sputtering information An animation of the sputtering process would be an appropriate addition to the article. Thanks. -- SiobhanHansa 21:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

No: Although the information appears solid, but (1) authorship is unknown (2) any references to reputable/verifiable sources of the provided information are absent. Therefore this website fails Wikipedia:verifiability criteria. `'Míkka 23:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


Term Evaporation boat[edit]

never heard of it before. used in sealing potato chip bags. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69Y0VuOYqkU&feature=related —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.154.17.255 (talk) 08:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


Proposed merger from Sputtering[edit]

The two article cover more or less the same subject matter. They should be merged but it won't be easy due to the amount of overlap. Iepeulas (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I disagree: The article on sputtering discusses a more general physical phenomenon - e.g., also relevant for astronomy - not just the method of sputter deposition. Jeskj (talk) 12:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm impressed to say I'm also opposed to this merge. As Jeskj says, there is a clear line between the two articles, minimal overlapping in the current state of the articles, and sufficient content for both articles to exist. -Verdatum (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Historically up until the last few years the term sputter was often used when they were talking about sputter deposition. For example "sputtered films". As was noted above the process of sputtering is quite separate from the process of sputter deposition.Don Mattox (talk) 20:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

If anything "sputter deposition" should be merged into "sputtering". Sputtering is a phenomenon used for several things, only one of which is sputter depositions. For example, sputtering is used in analytical glow discharges to remove layers and probe deeper layers of a sample. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.44.187.202 (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Definitely keep them separate. 76.190.254.114 (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Disagree (though would be glad to merge myself otherwise :). Suprizingly, both articles are well developed and are properly focused, that is sputtering mostly on the process of removal, and sputter deposition on the process of deposition. Seeing a 5:1 vote, I am removing the merging tags. Materialscientist (talk) 10:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)