Talk:Charles Babbage

message: "His father's money allowed Charles to receive instruction from several schools "
What a ridiculously biased sentence. Can't you guys give up the marxist crap for a second ?   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.127.102.105 (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: wah? surely thats ANTI-Marxist if anything: "Babbage had a good education because of his father's money - therefore capitalism and nepotism are good." --86.135.178.151 (talk) 22:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It seems that there is quite a confusion regarding place and date of birth. Many resources are giving 26th December in 1791 many 26th December in 1782. Also place of birth is sometimes London and sometimes Teignmouth. However, I also found a source saying that the right date is 6th January 1792. Any clues? --Maros 23:16, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I just now added citations to give more information about Babbage's year of birth.  I deleted one reference to a web page since it gave nothing more than the Wikisource page. -- Astrochemist 14:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date and place of birth 

message: How is it that his last child was born (1829) two years past his wife's death(1827)?
Is there an error or missing data (e.g. 2nd wife, mistress, incest)? Dave Adams 15:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Most sources give the number of children as eight. It looks like the imposter is 'Timothy Grant Babbage' added by User:170.235.204.26 on the 13th Sep (diff). I've reverted the edits. If anyone has a source to the contrary, please add to this discussion and restore young master Tim to the list of offspring. -- Solipsist 18:46, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

text: The Charles Babbage, living in 1851 Chudleigh with his wife Susan and son Henry, was a Master Mason, born in Chudleigh, and so is not the subject of this article... Having said that, I can't find the real Charles Babbage in 1851. Ian Cairns 08:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Marriagehildren 

message: "Difference Engine No. 2", which was built in 1989-1991"  Are those date correct?  should't they be 1889 or something? Zaurus
:No. It was built within the last two decades from Babbage's original plans. See Difference engine. DanielCristofani 03:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Difference Engine No. 2

message: I understood Babbage built a device for calculating tables of interest payments, etc. used in banks.  Is this true or do I have my facts mixed?
:The original and primary purpose for his machines was to automatically calculate and print the huge tables of constants used in navigation and mathematics and astronomy and, yeah, banking. Because the hand-calculated ones that were then in use had many errors in them. He went so far as to devise a scheme for automatically printing a papier-mache type mold which could be used for directly casting the metal printing plates, to prevent transcription errors. But as far as I know, he never completed a full machine, only proof-of-concept working sections. Anyone know otherwise? DanielCristofani 17:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tables 

message: I've started an approach that may apply to Wikipedia's Core Biography articles: creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information.  I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc, which has become a featured list.  Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article.  Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion, I'd like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here.  Regards, Durova 18:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cultural depictions of Charles Babbage]] 

message: Has anyone got more detail about Babbages other inventions besides the calculating engines.  They are always mentioned in passing, but I've seen no detailed descriptions, no pictures, no patent references. Anyone have access to primary Babbage references? --AGoon 09:30, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for picking that point up, it was supported by the BBC article cited, but is patent nonsense. My understanding is that standard gauge wasn't invented by anyone, but was a standard width used for horse drawn railways in the mining area where Stephenson began making railway engines. Babbage's connection with the Great Western makes it even more improbable, as he'd be more likely to support Brunel's broad gauge. The others also look improbable, so I've commented them out and expanded the opthalmoscope item on the basis of the other reference. Looks like we need a reference for the cow-catcher and dynamometer car :) . . dave souza, talk 09:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inventions 

message: With this series of edits,  deleted the Named after Babbage section and moved many of the items to Babbage (disambiguation). I've not checked through the missing items, but felt that a "Commemoration" section would be appropriate so will add a brief section pointing to the other page. .. dave souza, talk 18:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Commemoration

message: I was reading through this article and found that it doesn't say when he died. Does anyone know this information? I know he died in 1871 but i dont know what day. This information needs to be put in. helping make wiki better- dagurlwonder 04:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: I felt the phrase; "In Babbage’s time numerical tables were calculated by humans called ‘computers,'" could be confusing to a modern reader who might think "why would they name the people after a device that hadn't been invented yet?'" So I explicated it ("In Babbage’s time numerical tables were calculated by humans called ‘computers,’ meaning "one who computes.""), gave an example ("Much as a conductor is "one who conducts.""), and reinforced it in the next sentence with "At Cambridge he saw the high error rate of this human-driven process," emphasis mine.
I wasn't 100% sure of the example, but I figure it can't hurt and if other people think it too much, they can revert it. - Mattcolville 22:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explained the human computers comment. 

message: I wonder what it is that attracts such an amazing amount and variety of vandalism to this article on Charles Babbage.  The vandalism seems much worse than that for the other Wikipedia scientific biographies I follow. I don't want to start a long discussion on this topic, but is there an easy answer or, better yet, a solution?  - Astrochemist 16:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken out the part of Eccentricities where he was trying to melt himself. I really do not believe it could happen, but please, if anyone has any references, then give them to us. It would truly be interesting if he was a pyro. --Bookinvestor 09:21, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not certain if this is vandalism, or a dubious claim in an incomplete statement:
    After his wife's death in the same year he spent time travelling.
63.224.126.178 (talk) 19:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musings on vandalism 

message: The section under education: "Trinity College, Cambridge in October 1810. He had read extensively in Leibniz, Lagrange, Simpson, and Lacroix and was seriously disappointed in the mathematical instruction available at Cambridge. In response, he, John Herschel, George Peacock, and several other friends formed the Analytical Society in 1812. Babbage, Hershell and Peacock were also close friends with future judge and patron of science Edward Ryan. Ultimately, Babbage and Ryan married sisters.[5]
In 1812 Babbage transferred to Peterhouse, Cambridge. He was the top mathematician at Peterhouse, but failed to graduate with honors. He instead received an honorary degree without examination in 1814." seems to haev been taken directly from www.charlesbabbage.net with no citation of this source.
Is this the case? or did www.charlesbabbage.net take this passage from wikipedia?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gitrplaya4u (talk • contribs) 00:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education 

message: I don't know if the reference to the article named "Babbage - The language of the future" really belongs here, or at least if it should be cited in another way. It's more sarcastic than satirical, and the proposed language is a parody. In the article, Babbage is described in the following way:
"As our namesake, we chose Charles Babbage, who died in poverty while trying to finish building the first computer. The new language is thus named after the first systems designer to go over budget and behind schedule."
It's kind of funny, but it's hardly a tribute to Babbage, and does certainly not belong in the same context as a reference to Ada the language. leifbk (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is that reference even in the article?  Was is placed to discredit Ada Lovelace?  As an attack on the language named after her?  Or just completely randomly?  It is a completely unrelated and jarring aside that has no place in the article.  Perhaps if someone wanted to add a useless "trivia" section of useless information it could be placed there, but it adds nothing to the article.  I am going to delete it. --Skintigh (talk) 21:59, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to "Babbage programming language" 

message: The Computer History Museum will in two weeks display the Difference Machine. Is that replica the one issued by Nathan Myhrvold?
67.180.29.122 (talk) 08:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replica at Computer History Museum 

message: Babbage published a book lamenting the "decline" of science in England in the late 1820s.(!?)Anwar (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lament 

message: The following is quoted in the article:
:: Every moment dies a man,
:: Every moment 1 1/16 is born.
I believe Babbage knew about scansion and what he proposed was
:: Every moment dies a man,
:: And one and one sixteenth is born.
There are various sources giving this version, but they are Internet quote sites. Does anyone have a reliable source? Rjm at sleepers (talk) 09:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't checked to see who added that quotation or when, but back in February I added this reference for it:   Unfortunately, my copy of Swade's book is not close at hand, so I can't check the precise wording. Can someone else? - Astrochemist (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote 

message: I want to know whether this page is displayed in this way (in Modern skin). Till yesterday my Infobox was displayed as in Mono style. But today problem is happened. Check the screenshot.
-- Sidharthan (talk) 15:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Display

message: According to this site I've been one of the more-regular contributors to Charles Babbage's Wikipedia article during the past two years.  Unfortunately, the vandals have worn me down, and so I'm taking this page off of my watchlist.  My thanks to everyone for all that I've learned about Mr. Babbage, and for accepting my additions of text, reference checking, citation format, external links, and one photo.  Good luck with this page in the future. - Astrochemist (talk) 20:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for all the work, you're absolutely right as WP is here to be fun, not drudgery. We'll try to keep the barbarians at bay! . . dave souza, talk 10:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaving Charles Babbage 

message: He held this post for 11 years, but left it long before he died.  It would be interesting
to know why he left such a prestigious position.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigmac31 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like useful research, perhaps you could try to find verifiable sources giving that information? . dave souza, talk 10:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Passages from the Life of a Philosopher, Pg.31: "In 1839 the demands of the Analytical Engine upon my attention had become so incessant and so exhausting, that even the few duties of the Lucasian Chair had a sensible effect in impairing my bodily strength. I therefore sent in my resignation." - Verifiable enough? :) 213.226.69.164 (talk) 13:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lucasian Professor 

message: Recently the file :File:Charles Babbage by Samuel Laurence.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 04:16, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New file [[:File:Charles Babbage by Samuel Laurence.jpg]] 

message: I removed the sentence
: It remained there until April 2009, after which it was moved to Myhrvold's personal collection.
The replica is still on display at the Computer History Museum, I think until sometime next year.  I just took some pictures of it there last week. 67.122.211.205 (talk) 06:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer history museum in California 

message: The text says 1791 while the side thing says 1792
Yuon.yeung (talk) 03:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Yuon.yeung, 25 May 2010 

message: New bullet point suggestion for the "Commemoration" section:
* The name of software retailer Babbage's was another obvious eponym.  Babbage's was founded in 1984 in Dallas, Texas, and operated until 1994 under the name, before a series of mergers swept the retail software business.  As a result of these mergers, Babbage's became GameStop, now a Fortune 500 company and the world’s largest video game and entertainment software retailer.
:* Not done for now:  Please provide a reference for your addition. -- Crazysane (T/C\D) 12:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit (Addition) Suggestion -- Anon User 9/15/10 

message: this history is crap. all it talks about is the difference engine. blah blah blah? yet it mentions in the beginning that Babbage came up with the idea of a programmable computer. difference engines are not programmable. so get rid of it. you need to talk about the analytical engine because its clearly the more important of the two in its role of modern computing and less emphasis should be made concern the difference engine because its no different then the thousand of mechanical calculators that came before it, such as the pascaline, the stepped reckoner, and napiers bones.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.190.98 (talk) 14:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: 68.118.190.98's reading seems to be as faulty as his writing. He clearly hasn't read the article fully. -- Jmc (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  less emphasis on the difference engine, its not important. 

message: Do you think it appropriate to add a link towards my locomat (http://www.loria.fr/~roegel/locomat.html) collection of reconstructions of mathematical tables? It contains full analysis and reconstruction of Babbage's table of logarithms.Roegel (talk) 19:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Link towards the LOCOMAT collection

message: Added point about source of funds for his work. Oxford73 (talk) 13:54, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Funding

message: I'd suggest transwiki-ing the quotations list to wikiquote. Any objections? Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 01:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: Babbage-Simmel - http://babsim.com/about/our-story/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.68.88.51 (talk) 18:49, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things Named After Babbage 

message: I'm undertaking a major edit to clean up and expand this article for the Core Contest.
The referencing style seems very problematic, with Harvardish bits that seem to me not to be helpful. Would anyone mind if I simplified and standardised the referencing? Charles Matthews (talk) 06:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major edit 

message: This is an awesome portrait.  He's totally got that Johnny Cash thing going on.  Total badass.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.253.178.60 (talk) 08:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait 

message: Please add the following reference
Charles Babbage (1815) Lectures on Astronomy in Blog Format
http://babbageastronomy.blogspot.co.uk/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjdroberts (talk • contribs) 11:14, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babbage Lectures On Astronomy (at Royal Institution) 1815 

message: As part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Royal Society a special photo session in the Royal Society Library in London has resulted in Commons:Category:Royal Society Library, with over 50 photos of their treasures, mostly 17th century manuscripts, including several of Herschel's correspondence with Babbage, Charles Blagden's diaries, the 1st edn of Sylva, one of the early minute books, Boyle's notebooks etc, the manuscript fair copy of Newton's Principia etc. Please add these as appropriate. Thanks! Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Royal Society. I assume that you are editing for reward   , but don't let that stop your helpful edits. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, as Wikipedian in Residence - see User:Wiki at Royal Society John/Conflict of Interest statement. Wiki at Royal Society John (talk) 23:24, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Splendid. I wish all paid editors were as open as you. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  New photos on Commons from the Royal Society Library 

message: On the first line of the "Computing pioneer" section, the article declares that the fact the machines "were not actually completed was largely because of funding problems and personality issues."
I believe it should say "funding problems and personal issues."
If I'm mistaken, then I would like a section explaining the details of his "personality issues", and citing relevant sources.
181.167.200.113 (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any need for this change. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:30, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Personality issues" is more appropriate than "personal issues". See, for example, Doron Swade The Cogwheel Brain pp. 186-188. -- Jmc (talk) 04:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It may serve to clarify if the sentence in question were reworded to read "... because of funding problems and clashes of personality, most notably with Airy, the Astronomer Royal", citing the Swade reference. If there's no objection, I'll edit accordingly. -- Jmc (talk) 07:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Partly done: Jmc already reworded to his version.  As for the additional section you requested, you'll need to provide the text and sources you want to see included. —cyberpower ChatOnline 08:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2014 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Charles Babbage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100920225632/http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/visitmuseum/galleries/computing.aspx to http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/visitmuseum/galleries/computing.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:15, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: please not a very small error in a quote;See the ref number[95],,,the text has the word `can` inserted into the test  ie the original reads" we may also be permitted to...` whereas the present text reads;`we may can also be permitted to`
86.22.144.25 (talk) 12:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Done -- Sam Sailor Talk! 16:33, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2015 

message: I felt this article was very informative about his difference engine and publications, but felt it was lacking in his other areas of expertise.
I would suggest this for more information on his writings concerning his interests in mechanical engineering:
https://books.google.com/books?id=0gZ7Bo2NnzAC  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.174.147.187 (talk) 04:41, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Hyperlink "Babbage published On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures (1832)" to http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786443208647876
 
91.185.160.194 (talk) 13:56, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: - Firstly we do not put links into articles - Secondly that link is to a copy behind a pay-wall whereas the Google books version listed in the external links is free, Arjayay (talk) 14:48, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2016 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Charles Babbage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080807172602/http://www.ballet.co.uk/old/history_js_babbages_ballet.htm to http://www.ballet.co.uk/old/history_js_babbages_ballet.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article contains the following assertion:
Where Marx picked up on Babbage and disagreed with Smith was on the motivation for division of labour by the manufacturer: as Babbage did, he wrote that it was for the sake of profitability, rather than productivity, and identified an impact on the concept of a trade.[83]
It's not clear how profit is being distinguished from productivity. The two concepts, in classical political economy, are actually interrelated such that higher productivity leads to such things as greater output, competitive advantage, cheaper goods, and more profits. In Marx, for example, by increasing the productivity of labour, the capitalist extracts greater surplus value (chapter 12) which was a way to overcome the shortening of the working day.
Marx now defines productivity: 'Hence the
conditions of production ... i.e., his mode of production, and the labour process itself,
must be revolutionized. By an increase in the productivity of labour, we mean an
alternation in the labour process of such a kind as to shorten the labour-time socially
necessary for the production of a commodity, and to endow a given quantity of labour
with the power of producing a greater quantity of use-value.' (Capital V1, Fowkes ed, p.431)
an increase in productivity lowers the value of labour power (wages) and lowers the costs of those branches of industry which produce food, clothing, shelter, etc for workers. Capitalists don't increase productivity for this purpose which was an unintended consequences of all capitalists in all industries trying to increase productivity, rather each capitalist tried to increase productivity in order to gain a competitive advantage (p. 433)
Capital...has an immanent drive, and a constant
tendency, towards increasing the productivity of labour, in order to cheapen commodities
and, by cheapening commodities, to cheapen the worker him/herself.' (p.436-7)... 'The absolute value of a commodity is, in itself, of no interest to the capitalist who produces it. All that interests him is the surplus-value present in it, which
can be realized by sale.' (p.437)
So how is productivity different from profits as the article implies? Perhaps some clarification is needed?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.32.189 (talk) 17:19, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marx on profits and productivity  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Charles Babbage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WVI/is_1999_Oct_11/ai_56912203/print
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bavidge.co.uk/Babbage%20Family%20Tree%202005%2C%20InternetTree/wc03/wc03_074.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110317031836/http://www.civfanatics.com/civrev/great_people to http://www.civfanatics.com/civrev/great_people
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have removed the reference to Recorde as a predecessor; what John Tucker claims is merely that he, and his contemporaries, used logical argumentation, which formed a foundation for logical computing...a very wide gap separates the two, and there is no claim that Recorde was special in his achievement in this regard. Clean Copytalk 10:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Recorde 

message: Mechanical calculation machines based on Babbage's design were indeed built in his lifetime.
It's not know if he actually did see one of those machines. 
But it's very likely he knew they existed - though in very small numbers.
The source for my subsequent edit comes from A brief history of computing by Gerard O'Reagan: 12.3.1  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.208.94.12 (talk) 03:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Georg and Edvard Scheutz are already in the article, so I've undone your edit. In any case, it's not appropriate in the lede. -- Jmc (talk) 07:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Since you asked, I will indeed improve it.  

message: I think that the Royal Astronomical Society (formerly Astronomical Society of London) was formed simply for the cultivation of astronomy, rather than, as suggested 'to reduce astronomical calculations to a more standard form'. And if so, did Babbage give himself this task, just out of his own interest in maths and astronomy?
See near the bottom of page 2 here, https://archive.org/details/historyofroyalas00dreyuoft/page/2 
DMichael6 (talk) 19:59, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It would certainly appear from The History of the Royal Astronomical Society that it's excessive to state that it was formed "to reduce astronomical calculations to a more standard form" and it's interesting to note that apparently at no point in its formation were its aims more explicitly stated than "the cultivation of astronomy". -- Jmc (talk) 02:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Royal Astronomical Society 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:38, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: This article says that Babbage translated Luigi Menabrea's work, but every other source I can find says the translator was Lovelace.
It also credits Babbage with writing the first program, rather than Lovelace, as generally believed.  The only source I can find for this claim is a single Babbage scholar who claims to have found earlier notes from Babbage with programs resembling those in Lovelace's better known notes. CynthiaParrish (talk) 11:48, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Very interesting issues but you need to produce reliable sources according to WP:RS. Also, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for itself. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:40, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

text: No, the source says, that Lovelace was the translator. Grimes2 (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ada Lovelace 

message: These sources are, though brief, as yet unused, and could be used to better word the lead:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
GPinkerton (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: The text that requires change is in the following paragraph:
::Completed models
::The Science Museum has constructed two Difference Engines according to Babbage's plans for the Difference Engine No 2. One is owned by the museum. The other, owned by the technology multimillionaire Nathan Myhrvold, went on exhibition at the Computer History Museum[153] in Mountain View, California on 10 May 2008.[154] The two models that have been constructed are not replicas; Myhrvold's engine is the first design by Babbage, and the Science Museum's is a later model.[citation needed]
:The change that I'm requesting is the following: remove the last clause "Myhrvold's engine is the first design by Babbage, and the Science Museum's is a later model.[citation needed]" (no text needed to replace it)
:The reason is that I think this statement may not be correct, and is therefore unlikely ever to get backed up by a citation. The evidence that it's not true is that YouTube videos of Myhrvold's engine are available e.g. at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be1EM3gQkAY which was posted on the Computer History Museum's account, describes the engine as the Babbage Difference Engine #2 (and show an engine that is clearly not the first of Babbage's designs as it looks nothing like the published drawings of No. 1), and that the statement conflicts with the Wikipedia article on Difference Engines. But unfortunately neither of these is an adequate source (can't self-refer to Wikipedia, and YouTube isn't a source). My feeling is that unless someone's got a very good reason to believe the statement is correct, it should  be removed as a possible error. A more experienced and knowledgeable editor than me might be concerned at the uncited statement that the two are not replicas; it is quite possible that Myhrvold's engine differs from the London science museum replica in other ways despite also being a replica of the No. 2 engine, but about that, I have no idea, so I am only requesting the removal of the part that I strongly suspect is incorrect. Thanks! Elemimele (talk) 08:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use  on reply) 14:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Okay, no worries. I've never attempted to edit a semi-protected page before, so I wasn't sure how to trigger a debate. This is such a minor issue that I don't think it's worth a whole Request for Comment. If any other editor has an opinion, perhaps they'll comment here? If anyone's read this far, they may care to notice that the sentence I dislike even apparently conflicts with its own preceding sentence. Basically the section on this Charles Babbage page says "the science museum has constructed two of Babbage's 2nd difference engines but they're not the same because one of them is the 1st difference engine", and it appears to conflict with the well-referenced paragraph, "Construction of two working No. 2 difference engines" in difference engine Elemimele (talk) 22:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Elemimele is dead right that there's an internal contradiction in the paragraph in question. I support his/her proposed rewording. -- Jmc (talk) 23:08, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

text: Done @ ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use  on reply) 06:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:    Thanks! Elemimele (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request (removal of uncited and incorrect statement)