Talk:Mousepad/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] PLAGIARISM should not be supported by the wikipedia supervisors

Armando M. Fernandez invented, named and documented the mousepad http://www.priorartdatabase.com/IPCOM/000024222/. Kelly and Pang are pushing plagiarism of the mousepad on the internet. Their claims to the invention of the mousepad is a lie. It was after the mousepad became popular that Kelly started to plagiarize it, Pang fell for it hook, sinker and line. Pang started to Support Kelly on Kelly's lie and now Pang can't stop cause Pang seems to think he can't be wrong. All the evidence shows that Armando M. Fernandez Invented, named and documented that mousepad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.43.207.250 (talk • contribs)

Armando, it would be best to start a new section instead of inserting new comments at the front of an old talk section. But look up "plagiarism" in a dictionary first. And you might as well stop accusing Pang and Kelly, as they are not involved in Wikipedia. Dicklyon 16:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The following supervisors have shown a face in support of plagiarism:

dicklyon: placed a plagiaristic statement on wikipedia. Deletes discussions so the public only sees his erroneous side of the issue, blocks contributors who expose his erroneous statements.

Theresa Knott: Supports plagiarism, blocked the article from being corrected from erroneous statements for one whole month after dicklyon commanded her to do so.

aeropagitica: Supports plagiarism, blocks contributor from contributing to wikipedia for a full 48 hours. Calling the contributions of the contributor "vandalism" when in fact the contributor is only expressing the truth on the article and countering plagiarism support activity by these individuals. He did the blocking based on false accusations of vadalism upon being commaded to do so by Lyon.

Wafulz: Supports plagiarism on wikipidia at the snap of the finger and without any investigation. Blocks contributors indefinitely to achieve his plagiarism support goals.

Thespian: Redeeming himself from plagiarism pusher, participation #3-Finally downs on Thespian that what kelly made for Englebart was a tray as part of a keyboard/mouse console and not a mousepad. As kelly has been plagiarizing with the help of Pang, Lyon and Switchercat.


Just to clarify, in case anyone reads these rants, Pang and Kelly have had no part in editing the article, and Armando (the anon IP editor who is writing this diatribe) is confused about the meaning of the word "plagiarism". And it was I who first found, by reviewing the video, that the mousepad referred to by Pang and Kelly was what I characterized as a tray, and I verified that with Doug Engelbart, and added that info to the history section. Thespian has further clarified it with an image from the video. Armando is just upset that we don't let him claim a role much broader than what the documentation supports; admins have had to semi-protect the article several times, and block him several times, to prevent his vandalism. Dicklyon 04:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Indeed, the mention that the 'mousepad' was actually a tray was already in the article, has been for months. All I did was add a screenshot and then describe the screenshot for people who can't see images. No actual content was truly added in my most recent edits. --Thespian 06:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Thespian: Plagiarism pusher participation #2- Removes the reference to Mr. Armando M. Fernandez as the genuine person who invented, named and documented the mousepad,[1], and places the originator of the plagiarism of the mousepad at the top of the article.

Thespian: Supports plagiarism on wikipidia at the snap of the finger and without any investigation. Blocks contributors indefinitely to achieve his plagiarism support goals. Supports other Wikipedia supervisors who support and push plagiarism in Wikipedia.


—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.183.42.153 (talk) 08:03, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

This amuses me mightily. I'm such a tool. Except I don't care in the slightest about plagiarism; I know nothing about what brought you to the point of vandalising a page repeatedly, or the politics. If you'd started this rant in a talk page, where it was supposed to be, I would never have noticed it while on recent change patrol. Perhaps you should keep that in mind when you're unblocked. -Thespian 08:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
You obviously don't care about plagiarism being pushed on Wikipedia as you are one of those who pushes it.

Nishkid64: Article lock out #2 -Has graduated to become a major pusher of plagiarism of the mousepad in full support of the plagiarism pushed by Kelly, Pang and Lyon. Note how effectively these plagiarism pushers always lock the article in a state of great plagiarism giving false attribution of the invention to Kelly while blatantly ignoring the incontrovertible evidence in the Xerox disclosure, [2], fully supporting Mr. Armando M. Fernandez as the original one and only inventor of the mousepad. Plagiarism should not be supported nor pushed in Wikipedia.

Nishkid64:Article lock out #1-Supports plagiarism of the mousepad in Wikipedia as started by dicklyon by way of locking the article from free editing by the general public. Nishkid64's lock of the article is in a state of error and misinforming the public as setup by the supervisor controller dicklyon. dicklyon clearly stated, "why don't you register so we can block you". This in the consorted effort to support and push plagiarism in Wikipedia.

Armando (that's you, yeah?), do you want to bring your dispute to another group of Wikipedia editors, to get a second opinion? You're making some pretty serious accusations here, and the Wikipedia policy states that personal attacks aren't allowed; it's also not acceptable to add opinionated material to the body of an article. Please check out Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. If you're unwilling or unable to settle your disagreements with Dick Lyon and others, somebody might want to set up a request for comment. Frankly, this situation is getting out of hand; I think both sides of the argument agree that edit wars are not desirable. Switchercat talkcont 02:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Switchercat, don't play act the victim when you are the victimizer. You have been pushing plagiarism of the mousepad for the longest time on the mousepad article. Ever since Lyon commanded you to support him in his plagiarim statement which he, dicklyon placed on the mousepad article. That is in support of Kelly's plagiarism.

He hasn't admitted that he's Armando, but it seems likely. Perhaps a wp:rfc is in order. I'd be happy to back off if this article was being watched by some others who care about policy. Dicklyon 05:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Once I start editing something, even while recent change patrolling, I always keep it on my radar. I won't take it all on as a massive thing, but I was the one who got the semi-protect placed, and I'll be around. --Thespian 05:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks; I'll fade out now, since I've inflamed him too much. Dicklyon 14:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest keep sticking around a little; I mean, he was already flaming me for undoing his edits - I knew nothing about all this history, but they were so OBVIOUSLY vandalism, even if they aren't in his over-focussed mind. So really, what I think this page needs is a number of people who have no vested interest in the subject (how did he decide you're 'obviously a designer of optical mice, btw? :-) ) to just continually edit. If, as seems inevitable, at the end of this month he starts vandalizing it again, I'll put in a request for permanent semi-protect, as I don't see any other IP-only editors contributing to this subject, and it seems ridiculous that people are burning out over such a minor page. -Thespian 17:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A supervisor ought to talk some sense with Lyon to guide him away from his very harmful REVERTS, removals and misinforming the public about the mousepad

Among various other misinformation activities, your stalking activities of misuse and abuse of Wikipedia power. You misuse and abuse your Wikipedia power in the Wikipedia Stalking of The article on Mr. Armando M. Fernandez. Article which you removed by misusing and abusing your Wikipedia power. You just can't seem to be able to deal with the fact that Mr. Fernandez Invented, named and documented the mousepad. Not only that but also the first to invent the first mousepad ever. Not a keyboard/mouse tray, Per Mr. Engelbart and as yourself investigated; nor, a keyboard/mouse console, as per your movie reference, but the first mousepad ever as per the Xerox Publication refered to here, Mousepad. Article which you locked-up into a state of misinformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.122.30 (talk • contribs)

I have no trouble dealing with facts. I admit you may be correct. But why won't you provide the verifiable evidence? As far as I can see, your 1979 disclosure shows that you came up with a mousepad design, but does not support the idea that you named it or that it was an actual invention (it was never examined) or that you documented it in any sense worth reporting. Is there more that I'm missing? The article is already pretty generous toward your contribution, it seems to me. Dicklyon 15:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Mr. Fernandez hit a home-run on the inventing, naming and documenting the mousepad. Whereas, Mr. kelly The only challenger, his move was fowl play. What kelly made was a Keyboard/mouse tray or a Keyboard/mouse console, not a mousepad. And his contribution was a result of being hired for the purpose and not a result of invention. The Xerox publication clearly supports Mr. Fernandez in his claim of inventing, naming and documenting the mousepad. You do not see it because "there is non so blind as he who will not see". Additionally, your intentions seem to be fowl play too, similar to kelly's, as you have resorted to Wikipedia stalking Mr. Fernandez and to Wikipedia tyrant-bully control over the content of the Mousepad article by locking it up so others can't contribute to it. You made it so if a person wants to see real valuable contribution to the article, an interested person, now has to go to the HISTORY tag and look to the line before Lyon did his Edit or REVERT. Then, the general public can see what others contributed that Lyon deleted by editing or deleted by REVERTING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.120.229 (talk • contribs)
Wow. That's your story, and you're sticking to it. But where are the verifiable sources? Explain to me again how Kelly challenged you with fowl play, from a decade earlier. Armando, I recommend again that you learn how wikipedia works. It is not primarily for individuals to tell their personal stories. There are policies, guidelines, and processes. If all you ever do is argue over your personal story you'll never learn how progress gets made here. Dicklyon 15:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC).
One Word. Which in the field of protection of ideas very clearly describes Mr. Kelly's fowl play on claiming inventorship of the mousepad. That word starts with a "P". The word is plagiarism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.233.11.49 (talk • contribs)
I don't think Mr. Kelly has made any claims here not plagiarized anything. Claims like that are pretty obnoxious without clear evidence. Dicklyon 16:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
The mousepad article reference, which you keep removing to misinform the public, shows that Mr. Armando M. Fernandez invented, named and documented the mousepad. Alex Pang has blatantly supported an act of plagiarism by Kelly in his article. You, Lyon, also support Kelly's act of plagiarism by enforcing Kelly's plagiaristic activity here on Wikipedia by keeping the public misinformed on the truth about the mousepad and its real inventor, Mr. Armando M. Fernandez. You stalked the article on Mr. Fernandez, remove references, make harmful reverts, delete discussions so the public sees only your distorted side of the story.

Mr. Fernandez's claim on the mousepad is incontrovertible as shown in the published article by Xerox in 1979. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.233.11.49 (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

That's why the entire text of that published article is quoted. Sometimes you claim more than that, though, yes? Dicklyon 19:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[[3]] check this out on gaming mousepads and optical mouse jitter which he removed from the article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.108.100.219 (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

If you have a complaint about my edits, can you be more specific? Is it that I removed a link to an advertising youtube video that was randomly inserted into the mousepad article, not even as a ref or an external link? What misinformation are you suggesting that I inserted? Dicklyon 00:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, among many other Wikipedia tyrant-bully and stalking activities, the most recent is deleting the discussions and re-editing the discussions so the general public does not get the two sides of the story. They just see your side as edited and as totally biased by you so they only see your side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.122.30 (talk • contribs)

Armando, I left links to your abusive rants for anyone who is interested in what you had to say about me. But this page is supposed to be about the article, on which you remain stangely speechless for someone with such strong opinions. Dicklyon 04:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More rants

Armando's latest rant is not really related to the article content, but is tirade against me. I'm moving it to his talk page (User_talk:71.246.37.169) so that anyone who is interested can read it. It is entitled "What they don't want us to know about the mousepad and why they have locked up this article. We, the general public, really need to know this". Dicklyon 22:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rants

Armando wants everyone to be able to easily finds his rants against me, which I have removed from this page. See the originals at the [Armando M. Fernandez deletion discussion] and one of his anon talk pages User talk:69.227.189.1; if you want to see the bit where he abuses the admin who semi-protected mousepad on his account, that's in the history of this page. I'm taking them all out, since this page is for discussing the mousepad article itself, not for delusionary rants. Dicklyon 20:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The need for a mousepad was only after a roller-ball mouse gunk buildup showed a necessity for the mousepad

The mouse in 1968 of Englebart's invention and development did not need a mousepad. The two large rolling disks could roll on any surface. The problem of gunk buildup and a jittery mouse occurred only after the roller ball mouse. The mousepad was the solution to the problems of the roller- ball mouse. Thus, Kelly did not invent a mousepad. Additionally Pang's view is biased based on opinion and not on fact nor on documentation. In the case of Kelly, the claim has no foundation nor any evidence. Kelly is placing a claim on an invention which was published in 1979 by Xerox on behalf of Fernandez, an invention which applies to the roller- ball mouse and not to the Englebart mouse.

Is it possible that Kelly's pad and yours had different purposes and goals? Dicklyon 15:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Kelly's was not a mousepad it was a keyboard/mouse console with tray for the then dual disk mouse and a second tray for the same purpose for what seems to be a piano styled secondary keyboard.

[edit] Dick Lyon shows erroneous bias in his statements on the invention of the mousepad

Lyon is forcing an erroneous opinion when he assures in his statements that Kelly invented the mousepad and that Fernandez claims to have invented the mousepad. When the facts and the legal documentation shows exactly the opposite. The Xerox Invention Proposal publication clearly shows that Fernandez invented and named the mousepad while Kelly and Pang claims are without basis nor evidence whatsoever. However, Lyon chooses to ignore the facts and press on with an erroneous opinion building on the error of Kelly and Pang. Forcing an erroneous opinion without any basis, does not create truth. It just shows the erroneous character of the person who insists on forcing the erroneous opinion. Thus, Lyon should back-off his erroneous forcing of the erroneous opinion.

Armando, I'm just trying to make sure the article says what the published documents say. We can say what Pang published, what Herman Miller published, what your invention disclosure says, etc. But we can't include the rest of your recollections, or your interpretations beyond what the documents say. I have not included any of my own opinions or knowledge, of which I don't really have any that's relevant. How much further can I back off? Dicklyon 15:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Evidence of invention of the mousepad

The evidence shows incontrovertiably that Fernandez invented and named the mousepad. The ones who are making claims without evidence are Pang and Kelly. Thus the burden of proof is not on Fernandez as the Xerox publication of the Invention proposal clearly shows him as the inventor. Rather the burden of proof is on Pan and Kelly. neither has shown any incontrovertiable proof.

You didn't respond to my request to show us the evidence. Dicklyon 15:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence was shown to you. You did get a response. You were directed to reading in detail and looking at the pictures in the 1979 Invention Proposal publication. All the evidence is there.

I don't have a copy of it. You do, apparently. Can you share it? Dicklyon

[edit] Vandalism by shadowbot

I don't understand why shadowbot is vandalizing with the clear intent of deleting any supporting referals which show that Armando M. Fernandez named and invented the mousepad.

[edit] Gel

This article dont mention that some mouse pads (especially ergonomics one) sometimes have gel. Nor does it mention cloth, arent most mousepads made of cloth? But these are more sensitive to "wear and tear".

Some mouse mats can be used on both sides. One side has a smooth surface, and the other side has a less smooth surface.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Frap (talk • contribs)

[edit] The 3M mousepad?

Can we talk about the old 3M mousepad designed for ball mice? -- Toytoy 10:57, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Sure. I didn't like that because of it's relatively high frictional resistance though. --Ypacaraí 12:31, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)

Toytoy, actually the 3M mousepad has been an excellent mousepad which is still doing great things even with optical mouses. Perhaps you could add an entry and a picture under TYPES. We can make corrections as we go. Just try your best being precise, to the point and not too wordy. That is to help us readers and save us time.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.229.229.162 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Noble Gas!?

Can the person that added noble gas as one of the materials provide reference? Call me ignorant, but in my life time I've never seen a mousepad made out of gas. I've removed it for now. If you want to add it back in, please remember to provide the source of your information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ME$$ENGER (talk • contribs)

[edit] Armando's story

I don't doubt Armando's recollection of how he named and invented the mousepad, but we're supposed to be encyclopedic and include only WP:Verifiable information. The stuff about 1977 and naming is not verifiable, and too centered on his personal story; so I removed it; again. Dicklyon 16:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The reference shows Fernandez as the inventor and shows the usage of the name mousepad also

If you read the reference carefully, you will see that Fernandez is shown as the inventor, not the developer. IP stands for Invention Proposal, not for development proposal. Additionally, the reference is the first document anywere refering to the usage of the name mouse pad which as a name, reason leads, that the two words would be bonded at some time as mousepad.

An invention proposal is a good publication and evidence of a date of concept, but not evidence of invention since it has never been examined in relation to prior art such as Engelbart's. As to naming, I don't see it on the linked page, but even if it was called a "mouse pad" that term is completely generic, not a name. It might be interesting to see evidence for the one-word compound "mousepad"; searching scholar.google.com suggests that through 1990 the one-word term was very rare compared to the two-word version. Dicklyon 05:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to date of concept: Contrary to your belief, the published Invention Proposal(IP) does not contain date of conception. What it contains is the date of publishing. Additionally, the published information is minimal to show only the very basic embodied concept. It does not show the fullness of the whole concept. That is kept in normally highly private documentation which only the inventor and/or Xerox may have and never published.

The point is that any verifiable info about the conception date is in that document, and you have some other document to point us at. Its pub date is a bound on the conception date. Dicklyon 17:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Response to the naming, The name mousepad or mouse pad was made to become generic as the name of the mousepad. It was not generic to the mousepad at first. As a matter of fact it was a very odd usage to both, the inventor himself when he decided to propagate the name and also to those whom were first exposed to the name. As the name mouse pad would trigger the mental ideograph of a mouse animal on a pillow for the mouse animal. It was only after thorough exposure to the physical mousepad next to a computer and a computer mouse that it would down on the observer what a mousepad was in reality. Notice clearly that the IP uses the name "Pad" as would be used in mousepad, the actual embodyment shown in the IP. However, the published IP does not exclusively use the word "mouse" instead to stay on the technical language side and not sound "amateurish," they replace mouse with "CURSER CONTROL MECHANISM." The CURSER CONTROL MECHANISM is clearly implied by the drawing figures of the pointing device that it is a "mouse". In The word "mouse" as in computer mouse was well established at that time, 1979, for the type of pointing device described in the IP. The IP does not use the name a piece of cloth as the indicated reference states "while leading to nothing when you go to the Engelbart's reference site". Additionally, the IP does not use the more recent trademarked name "mouse mat" which is illegal to use without permission from it's original trade name owner and also inappropriate for encyclopaedic purposes since it would be advertising for the owners of the trademarked name. I have a mousepad in my collection which shows that "mouse mat" is trademarked. I'll try to take a picture and post it here in the future. Thus, the names "mouse pad and mousepad" go back to genericity documentation related to the IP not made available yet to the general public by the inventor nor by Xerox other than the published IP and it was made to become generic as it did. However, the published IP is a bridge showing that more documentation may exist. There was no effort to trademark the name "mouse" as in computer mouse. In a similar manner there was no effort to trademark the name "mouse pad" nor "mousepad". Whereas in the case of the computer mouse, no knowledge has been made publicly available as to who first called the pointing device a "mouse" there is knowledge that Armando M. Fernandez is the person who named the mousepad a mousepad. Just that the present verifiable knowledge can only be got from the published IP refered to here http://www.priorartdatabase.com/IPCOM/000024222/.

Can you make available a copy of that full document, or quote what it says about the naming?
And please stop deleting the reference to Engelbart's use of a mousepad.
You've also now deleted the term "mouse mat" claiming it is a trademark; if it's a trademark, we should perhaps say whose; it's certainly not illegal to use a trademark. Amazon lists many brands of products under the "mouse mat" term, with no indication of trademark status. Dicklyon 17:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movie does not show any mousepad

Seems a "control and display console" has to try and undergo a great acrobatic act of intense contortion to get even a glimpse at being called a mousepad.

Saw the whole Engelbart's movie and did not see any mousepad.

Yeah, I looked again, too, and didn't see any. Funny thing is, someone had pointed it out, and I saw it before when I checked. I bet there's another movie kicking around. I'll see what I can find. Dicklyon 18:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
The credits do mention "Herman Miller Research Co. for the effort in designing and producing the control and display console in time for the show"; this possibly was Jack Kelley's contribution. I wonder if the mouse pad he refers to is the console surface itself; maybe the "suede" was Pang's impression from a picture, but I don't see it; looks more like a plastic surface; perhaps still qualifies as a "pad" as it's a surface designed to work the mouse on. Kelley mentioned 1969, though, so maybe there's more of "pad" later than this 1968 demo? I'll ask Engelbart... Dicklyon 18:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, I checked with Doug. He remembers that Herman Miller made the kb/mouse "tray" but not a "pad" in the modern sense. I'll revise the article. Dicklyon 04:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What was made was a Keyboard/Mouse "tray", not a "pad"

Contacting Doug? You mean the original one and only Doug Engelbart? I would say, Lyon, you deserve a lot of credit for that one; thought he was long gone but apparently he is still with us to this day. Especially the investigation finding that what was made was a Keyboard/Mouse "tray", not a "pad". Let see what Kelly and Pang have to say about this.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.108.119.215 (talk) 20:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

He's very much with us. Dicklyon 21:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I also checked with Harvey Lehtman, who worked with Doug, and he confirmed it was just a tray, no pad as we know it. Dicklyon 19:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armando's history

Armando, it is unseemly to spend all one's time in wikipedia editing just writing one's own story, espeicially when making claims beyond what are supportable in reliable references. We've already cut you a lot of slack in allowing you to reference your own blog where you are free to tell your story externally. Please find a more positive and productive way to participate in wikipedia. Read the guidelines, especially WP:V section on self-published sources. Dicklyon 19:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverted fragment

I've removed this fragment a few times: "Excepting, when speed, accuracy and comfort is needed. For these a mousepad is a necessity." It was added by an anonymous IP, probably Armando again. Please, if there's a point to be made, other than just an opinion, add it as a complete sentence so we can consider it. Dicklyon 19:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anonymous unverifiable info

Some anonymous editor, probably Armando, keeps putting in things like that he invented, named, documented, etc., the mouse pad, even though the cited document does not have the name mousepad nor any useful documentation. So I took it out and got "Essential encyclopedic info maliciously removed was restored"; so I took it out again. Let's stick to what's verifiable. Oh, and he has now put the same info into the article Armando M. Fernandez. Dicklyon 02:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armando, you need to make yourself an account

That way, we can block you. Your IP changes too much to bother with warning and blocking, so I just keep reverting. Dicklyon 23:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page protected

The edit warring has to stop. I've semiprotected the page for a month to give it a rest. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 09:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the intervention. I'd appreciate any advice on how better to deal with an anonymous single-minded editor like this; I got tired of warning his various IP addresses and just took to reverting, which I realize is no solution. Dicklyon 16:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Now that the page is semi-protected and can't be editted by anonymous IP user, Armando is continuing with his actual login ID User:Moisesxyz. I reverted again the details that are not verifiable. Armando, please quote sources here or in the article if the sources support your details. Dicklyon 18:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Comment: Mousepad invention history

This is a dispute about an edit war, about how to credit the inventors of mousepads. 20:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Statements by editors previously involved in dispute
  • The contributions of Armando Fernandez are copiously credited, probably beyond what is reasonable, yet he (presumably, via anon IPs) keeps wanting to add more than the source supports, and accuses me and others of "plagiarism" of his invention, whatever that means. I haven't found any useful way to deal with him besides reverting. Blocks and semi-protects expire, and he goes on. Dicklyon 20:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • I was the person who got the article semi-protected for the month of May. I became involved in this fairly innocently; I was patrolling for vandalism on recent pages, and came across a very peculiar edit.[4] It seemed so peculiar that I was certain it was actually vandalism. In return, a few hours later, I was accused of supporting plagiarism and making snap judgments (this is true, however I don't know any other editor who would not have reverted that edit). Mr. Fernandez has a clear Conflict of Interest in editing an article on his own work, and editors have been extremely careful of making sure his contributions are documented. Despite this, continues to be abusive, refuses to believe anyone else is acting in good faith, and had used Wikipedia as a soapbox. During the month of May, while the page was under semi-protection, the page was left mostly undisturbed. It is a clumsy solution, but the only one that seems to have worked. Suggestions would be welcome, but I ask that anyone who offers them be certain to read the entire talk page first to see the nature of the issue. --Thespian 07:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments
  • I have made some rudimentary improvements to the history section of the article. It is a little more encyclopedic now, but still has a way to go. Recommend that Fernandez (if it is indeed he) read the WP:COI guidelines before contributing again to this article. SheffieldSteel 22:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I already reverted your history re-ordering, since putting the ball mouse concept before Engelbart made it distinctly incorrect. I appreciate what you're trying to do, and suggest you have another go at it after reviewing the history in mouse (computing). Dicklyon 22:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it up and for your help reverting the "anonymous" vandal. Dicklyon 00:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Quickly going over the article, I think it needs far more references than it currently has. We've got lots of primary references claiming to be the first mouse pad, followed by some OR saying that this probably wasn't a pad (I'm sure it's true, but it's still OR withou a source) followed by what starts as a useful discussion of Fernandez's disclosure but which then degenerates into an unreferenced section talking about how wonderful mouse pads are (again, I'm sure it's all true, but it needs to be verified). Are they any more sources that can be drawn on? GDallimore (Talk) 14:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Errors in history section

I've been looking over this page more carefully now and believe the history section contains a few mistakes.

  • The video showing a mouse tray was from 1968.[5] Apparently, Jack Kelley designed his "mousepad" in 1969 (at the earliest).[6][7] Consequently, whatever Keeley designed, it wasn't that mouse tray. I think the article should be updated to discuss the mousetray as shown in 1968 and say that Keeley claims to have been the inventor of the mousepad in 1969. We don't know where the American Heritage site got it's information (they may have just taken Keeley's word!) I'm going to run a search for design patents on the USPTO database and will let people know if I find anything.
  • The cited source for Fernandez's mousepad looks reliable, but does not say it was the first modern mouse pad. It is certainly the first we can find, but that doesn't mean it was the first. This section needs amending to say that a "mousepad as an indepedent unit was disclosed in"... etc or something like that and I think that's about as far as we can go without introducing OR.

What do people thinkof my analysis? GDallimore (Talk) 18:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I should have known better than to run an image search for Keeley and Mousepad... thanks Keeley Hazell... GDallimore (Talk) 19:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I fully disagree with you.
  • At the end of the video, Doug thanks Herman Miller Research and Kelley for creating the "operating and display consoles." The designed the tray. He may have refined it later, but he also designed that tray (and likely the keyboard interface and other parts).
  • Starting to say things like, 'of course, we don't know if it was the first, but the first patent was in 197X' is incorrect and unverifiable, and while you've phrased it differently, that's what you're suggesting. Unless you have *proof* that the mousepad could be found as an independant unit and was only disclosed in that patent, as opposed to actually invented for that patent, you will in fact be engaging in original research, and it will probably last a week before someone tags it as supposition.

--Thespian 19:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Both of you, thanks for looking into this. It's possible I misinterpreted the evidence from the video, but I doubt it. I thought I had seen a video with Kelly's mouse pad, but then never could find it again; I don't know if I'm hallucinating. But I do know that Doug and Harvey did not recall a mouse pad by Kelly, when I asked them, so maybe there really wasn't one. In any case, the evidence of Armando's invention disclosure and date was never in doubt; in fact, I quoted the entire text of it in the article. But since it was never even filed as a patent application, there was never any declaration that it was novel, much less any examination of it (Thespian seems to think there's a patent; there is none); and certainly no evidence of naming in it. He seems to think it was quite a monumental contribution to the personal computer industry, but I find no documentary support for that viewpoint. Anyway, I agree with Thespian that we can only report what's verifiable; The Pang/Kelly statements are verifiable, and should be reported, even though they can not be confirmed. The video can be mentioned and summarized, too, I think, though it gets tricky to say when an observation of it is reporting and when it is OR. Dicklyon 19:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Whoops. My bad. I knew, in the back of my head, that it wasn't (because lord knows, after stumbling in here after what I thought was just a simple Vandalism Revert of a recent change, I now know FAR MORE than I ever expected to know about the turbulent history of the mousepad), but I was writing responses on wiki when I was supposed to be leaving for work, and I messed up. Careless of me. --Thespian 21:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
edit conflict I hadn't listened to the end of the video, but there's something wrong in the sources then since Kelley says he only started working on the mouse project in 1969 whereas the video is from 1968. How to deal with conflicting sources is a difficult question? I think you've misunderstood my second point. The Xerox disclosure undeniably shows a mousepad as an independent unit, and is worth mentioning because it is the first picture of one that we have. What we can't say is (as the article currently says) that it was actually the first to be invented since we have, as you say, no proof of that. GDallimore (Talk) 19:49, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
It seems clear enough the Kelly remembers the dates wrong; the video is dated and thanks him. That happens. I think that the Xerox evidence is evidence of publication, and can reasonably be cited as first publication; usually evidence of invention needs either a patent application or a secondary source saying it was an invention; we don't have that here. Fernandez obviously thought it was novel, or would not have filed a Xerox invention disclosure; but Xerox chose to publish the disclosure instead of filing for a patent, so there's no evidence as to whether their attorneys thought it might be novel at the time. Dicklyon 20:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I've tried some edits to reflect what the sources say, as follows.
  • 1968 video shows a mouse tray
  • Kelley and American Heritage both say the first "mousepad" was designed in 1969 - American Heritage explicitly says the mousepad was designed a year after the videod presentation, so we actually have agreement between those two sources.
  • A design of mousepad was disclosed by Xerox in 1979. No idea if it was the first, but it's worth mentioned.
I've then removed all of the other discussion of the mousepad from that section as being unreferenced.GDallimore (Talk) 20:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Closing statement Although one anonymous editor still appears to be unsatisfied with the article, nobody else appears to have any issues with the current text. I have therefore removed the request for comment. I'm not saying the article can't stand improving, just that there are now no major conflicts. GDallimore (Talk) 10:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent revert by Dicklyon

That's about what I thought, but I also thought it worthwhile opening it up for consideration to see if any additional concessions to our anonymous contributor were warranted, necessary or supportable by the sources. GDallimore (Talk) 09:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Mouse mat"?

I have never heard a mousepad referred to as a mouse mat, is this a regional thing (like soda vs pop) or an era thing (nifty vs cool)?

Here are about a half million references. Dicklyon 05:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
If it helps, I've never heard a mouse mat referred to as a mousepad. :) GDallimore (Talk) 09:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armando's mid-July 2007 statement, moved from old section

Dicklyon fully contradicts himself. Here he firmly states "mousepad referred to by Pang and Kelly was what I characterized as a tray". To compare, when Lyon was more neutral and less PLAGIARISM PUSHER, Dicklyon stated "" OK, I checked with Doug. He remembers that Herman Miller made the kb/mouse "tray" but not a "pad" in the modern sense."" Dicklyon, before in your very words, you stated that it was "Dough" (the original inventor of the mouse) who characterized it as a tray. You now change to you yourself as having characterized it as a tray. Dicklyon, which is it? seems that you have selected to fully side with plagiarism of the mousepad or you had a lapse in memory? Which is it?. Give it up Dicklyon, after stating that it was a tray by Dough Englebart, the movie issue is out of place in this article. Kelly cannot claim that the mousepad was in the movie at all. According to you, Englebart stated it was a keyboard/mouse tray not a mousepad. The only thing left for you to deal with is the switch in claim from mousepad in movie to the "one year later in 1969" for which there is no evidence whatsoever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.47.162.159 (talk • contribs)

You're wrong in the final statement, I'm afraid, anon. The evidence says that the tray was invented 1968 and the pad a year later in 1969. We have no pictures or firm description of the pad, but there are two separate sources which say that the mouse pad was invented in the late 60s (although only one of them is independent). Whatever your personal opinion, this information is therefore verified and stays unless and until you can find something that contradicts it. Please bring us sources, not emotional rants and please stop SHOUTING. Please also refrain from personal attacks or I will take steps to have you blocked. Thank you for listening. GDallimore (Talk) 21:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You claim the the statement is wrong but then proceed to repeat what was stated as a year later? nonesense. There is no substantiated evidenced source shown thus far other than Armando M. Fernandez invented, named and documented the mousepad as published by Xerox as a result of Invention Proposal (IP) IN 1979. To compare, Kelly's statements are made in his attempt at plagiarizing the mousepad. Pang's statements he got from Kelly who tried to spread his plagiarism by using Pang and the internet in more recent times after the mousepad became popular. Thus single sourced from plagiarizer, Kelly. The real source, well documented and substantiated, of the first invention and the first person who invented the mousepad is here: http://www.priorartdatabase.com/IPCOM/000024222


I have no idea what the the true or verifiable history is, but I have been open in declaring what I have found as I have found it, without any attempt to conceal or deceive. Armando seems unable to discern that my edits were actually in support of his invention claim, but not in support of his unverifiable further claims. I think the refs mentioned by GDallimore above are still questionable and open to some interpretation, but it's the best we've got. If I find out more, I'll come back and invite some more ranting at. Dicklyon 21:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Agreed that more verification would be much to the better. The whole history section is now looking quite brief. GDallimore (Talk) 10:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion unprotecting

I'd like to suggest that we unprotect this article. While I expect that it will then be subject to vandalism, I believe that there are enough editors to revert that vandalism. If anonymous IPs continue to vandalise, then we can take steps to have them blocked.

In general, I am against protection since it prevents people without login accounts from contributing potentially useful information. Since we need more information in this article, that is a bad siutation to be in. Any comments. GDallimore (Talk) 10:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

No. Which sounds blunt, but really, there's almost no traffic here most of the time, except when it's unprotected and it gets bombarded with IP address edits from the person we're in agreement is Armando Fernandez (he posts these things all over the web to anything that mentions the history of the mousepad, under his own name), abusing people, getting facts wrong, posting diatribes akin to what gets posted to the talk page to the article, etc. His IP is dynamic and changes more frequently than daily. I'm not in favour of protection for most articles, I think it's abhorrent, but Armando has burnt out several editors of this article. When the article is unprotected, he can make 10 edits a day. Take a look at April. The only reason you think it's manageable is because you just got here and it HAS been protected while you've been around. It really isn't. --Thespian 13:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)