Talk:Schottky barrier

Improvements to article

This page is not clear at all, please do some more effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.124.18.246 (talk) 16:10, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The advantages section is a total mess. I cleaned it up a bit but there are still untrue statements. I agree with Grj23, this should be about physics, maybe with reference to Sze.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.188.56 (talk) 04:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I dont think the 'schottky effect' should redirect to 'schottky diode'. If you want more information on the process behind the schottky barrier, directing you to the diode page (which probably got you to the barrier page in the first place) is kind of circular. 98.222.9.77 (talk) 23:57, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

IMHO this article should be more focused on the physics of a Schottky barrier rather than the applications. An advantages section is not even really necessary, although it could be referred to briefly perhaps with a link to the diode. I agree that schottky effect should probably be to redirect this page, but this page needs a physics discussion. I'm not an expert in this effect, but could probably take a stab at some point. What do people think? Grj23 (talk) 05:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree with previous comments. The article is probably understandable by an expert in the field, but to a typical reader the page doesn't make sense. The Schottky barrier is a "potential barrier" for what? What does rectifying mean? It's different from a p-n junction, but who cares? The reader still doesn't know that the barrier really is. Etc. etc. Che kid (talk) 14:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Grj23 that this article should focus on device physics and the section on devices is somewhat out of scope. However, I disagree with the attitude of Che kid about the article. Device physics is not a simple subject and it requires time for it to make sense to a reader. A general reader should not expect to understand what the article is trying to convey. Still, it does not mean that this article is horribly written. I could probably be improved.

ICE77 (talk) 06:36, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Sentence about I/V relationship

"The current-voltage relationship is qualitatively the same as with a p-n junction, however the physical process is somewhat different."

What is this sentence trying to imply? It is referring to the I/V curve shape with breakdown, saturation and forward regions typical of standard pn junction diodes?

ICE77 (talk) 06:27, 25 July 2015 (UTC)