Talk:Molecular electronics

Molecular Electronic Devices
This article seems to have died out four years ago, but I am boxed in to using the term Molecular Electronic Device elsewhere. This term and its abbreviation MED have been used quite widely. It was associated with Forrest Carter, prior to his death in the late 1980s. His efforts to develop the field were recognized at the MED conference for which I added the reference. General Abramson (?) of "Star Wars" came to the banquet and read a message "from the White House" praising Forrest's efforts to get the field going. If this article is revived, it would be nice to give Forrest what some people considered his due. Michael P. Barnett (talk) 03:03, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Conductive polymers
P.S. These CANNOT be taken out of MED discussions. I was introduced to Forrest by an NSF program officer I asked for a referral to someone interested in computing devices based on conducting polymers and he told me that I had got into the field of MEDs. Michael P. Barnett (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * General advice: First, Wikipedia is not a vehicle of the US, we serve the world not some country - so dont inflict your NSF officer's views on the readers. Second, you are encouraged to emphasize the technical material.  To do so effectively, you should de-emphasize people, institutions, countries and any other ownership things, such as giving people their "due."  You will only initiate an unproductive struggle about who did what when and who was overlooked.  If you feel compelled to give someone their due, then write a biography, which are common in Wikipedia.  Readers come to this part of Wikipedia articles for a balanced and understandable description of technology. That is our mission.--Smokefoot (talk) 03:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, hey, let's keep calm here. I agree that improvements to this article have fallen off in the last few years, no doubt due to the heated debate that has previously gone on here about its contents, which tends to discourage new contributors.
 * I've been concerned about the coverage of the bulk conductive polymers work versus the single-molecule electronics work, and I'd like to make the following recommendation. There are already substantive articles at Conductive polymer and Organic electronics for the molecular materials for electronics side of molecular electronics, and at Molecular scale electronics for that side of things.  I'd like to make this article into a summary-style overview equally split between the two, with main-article links to the articles mentioned above.  This will require some rewriting and probably transferring some of the text in this article into other articles.  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:52, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well one can encourage editors to contribute, with edits that make them feel warm inside but do not address the readership. Or one can encourage editors to contribute appropriate material. The latter is what we need.  --Smokefoot (talk) 13:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Article rebuilt
I have rebuilt this article by merging all of its text into either Molecular scale electronics or Conductive polymer, and then importing text from those articles to serve as summaries of those articles. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 05:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Apparently deleted sections of talk page were archived
Smokefoot has inexplicably deleted large sections of this talk page. Deletion of good faith material on talk pages is highly irregular. The deleted material should be restored as soon as possible. Nucleophilic (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I archived the discussions from 2007 and earlier; this is standard procedure and the archived discussions can be found at /Archive 1 which is linked in the Archives box at the top of the page. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:09, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Oops--- Sorry, I missed the move.   As I flew thru the page, it looked superficially like a delete.  There were also some other apparent deletes and restorations which got confuted in my poor feeble mind.  For such reasons,  standard practice is also to leave a clear notice of the archiving on the talk page.  Evidently,  I missed that also. Nucleophilic (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * No worries. Archiving on longer talk pages is usually done by bots nowadays, so I guess I'm used to looking for an archive page when things disappear.  The other edits were some minor refactoring I did because there were a handful of unsigned and misplaced comments, and some text that had been inadvertantly removed.  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 06:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Older discussion archived.
Older discussion is archived in /Archive 1, which is linked in the Archives box at the top of the page. Nucleophilic (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

How does Molecular electronics relate to Molecular scale electronics
We have articles for each (see Molecular scale electronics). There seems a huge overlap - which is larger ? What's the implication of having two terms ? Is there an argument for merging, or not merging ? - Rod57 (talk) 17:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The term "molecular electronics" is used for two different fields: "molecular scale electronics" refers specifically to electronic devices made of one or a few molecules, while organic electronics sometimes uses the term "molecular electronics" even though it uses bulk materials. The articles were split to reduce confusion between the two. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 20:59, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Please update with "Molecular electronics sensors on a scalable semiconductor chip: A platform for single-molecule measurement of binding kinetics and enzyme activity"
I think it would be good to add some brief info about this to the article. It's currently featured in 2022 in science like so:

A chip with molecular circuit components in single-molecule (bio)sensors is demonstrated.

There are also some news reports about it and here is a press release with relevant info/media.

Prototyperspective (talk) 15:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)