User:Chemflo3421/sandbox

I am an inorganic chemistry graduate student.

1)There is no title, but I think the topic is narrow enough to discuss in a wikipedia article. I would say other links that may be useful to include would be that of LiNbO3 (lithium niobate) since you include it as a photorefractive material. 2)The summary for the public is very easy to understand I think. It highlights the history of photorefractive materials, what makes the materials photorefractive as well as the applications and advantages to using organic photorefractive materials. 3)The background and significance given make it clear that this is a materials science problem. You talk about significance regarding the use of these materials for imaging and computing, but you might specifically talk about how these materials are used for these applications (What determines whether the materials are used for imaging versus whether they are used for computing? Does the structure/composition of the material determine how it is applied? How do the materials specifically make imaging work and computing as well?). What are the specific drawbacks to using organic materials versus inorganic materials? 4)The outlined topics make sense, and they are in a logical order. Another topic might include expanding on each organic category of photorefractive materials listed, including typical structure/composition and properties of the materials. You might also include a topic discussing the specific synthesis of some of these materials. 5)You do refer to a figure, but it is not actually shown. I am not sure that the figure you refer to will enhance your article although it would provide an application of the materials. You might consider putting in figures illustrating structure/composition of the photorefractive materials and/or a figure to help explain the photorefractive effect more clearly. 6)You only reference one review published since 2008. However, there are other fairly recent papers referenced. Did you find any other major reviews done since 2008? 7)The language is used effectively for the most part. In the History section, it might be better to introduce photoconductivity before the Pockels effect since the former leads to the latter. That section is a little confusing. Also, in the very first paragraph on your page you mention electrons and "holes". I'm assuming the holes are positive-charge carriers, but you might more clearly define that. It might be good to also elaborate on the terms noncentrosymmetric media and diffractin efficiency.
 * Peer Review**