Talk:Electron mobility (solid-state physics)

New article
I merged Electron mobility and Semiconductor carrier mobility into this article (but rewrote parts). For previous article history, see Semiconductor carrier mobility article history and Electron mobility article history. --Steve (talk) 17:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "Moved" (copy/pasted) back the merged version to electron mobility, as there is no reason yet to keep it restricted to solid state physics. If a clear separation emerges, with a dedicated article on electron mobility in plasmas and such (currently Electrical mobility), then revert me. I believe much material in electron mobility is more general than solids. Materialscientist (talk) 00:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your reasoning. Right now there's no material in the article (or either of the predecessor articles) on the mobility of electrons in plasmas. If someone writes a great section on the mobility of electrons in plasmas, it wouldn't belong in this article: Everything in the article right now is a single unified topic, and electrons in plasmas is a different topic almost completely unrelated to this one. (Compare with electrical mobility, where it would fit in perfectly.) Anyone who knows about this topic will agree that there is a "clear separation" between electron mobility in solid-state physics and electron mobility in other things like plasmas. It doesn't make sense to start discussing electrons in plasmas within this article, therefore it's good to have an article title ("Electron mobility (solid-state physics)") that makes it very clear to everyone that electrons in plasmas is not (and should not be) in the article. Again, the connection between electrons in plasmas and electrons in semiconductors is not any stronger than the connection between ions in plasmas and electrons in semiconductors. There's no sense in which "an electron is an electron" when it comes to mobility. --Steve (talk) 10:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * My logic is very simple, but I usually fail to explain it in my messages :-). In this case, it is nothing more than this: simplify the unwieldy title "Electron mobility (solid-state physics)" to "Electron mobility", which is what I've done. My explanation above was a cover up against a comment that the "Electron mobility" title is too general. Materialscientist (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh OK, I see.
 * In my experience, when an article title is broader than the article, some editors will sooner or later broaden the article so that it matches the title, even if doing so makes no sense and overlaps with previously-existing articles. This process is a waste of time, and it is avoided by using an "unwieldy" title. That's why I prefer them. Whatever, no big deal. --Steve (talk) 19:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)