Talk:David Edward Hughes

message: I am looking for verifiable sources on the timing and nature of innovations in microphones by David Hughes and Emile Berliner. Bell had invented the electromagnetic transmitter/receiver, and patented electrical speech transmission via "undulatory waves" which convered any subsequent technology, but the patent claims should have been disallowed as too broad. relative to what he had invented, and his phone made a great receiver but too weak of a transmitter. The Hughes original microphone was apparently crude,  a nail laid across 2 other nails connected to a battery and a Bell type phone receiver. About the same time Berliner filed a caveat for  "loose contact" between a metal diaphragm and a metal screwhead in his crude telephone transmitter, a slight refinement on the early Reis "make or break" contact phone which could convey pitch but not articulate speech. Berliner's transmitter was useless without carbon buttons or granules. Edison from his years of experience with the variable resistance of carbon under pressure, introduced a carbon button in place of the metal screwhead, apparently independent of Berliner and Hughes, which produced the first practical telephone transmitter. Then at some point Hughes changed from nails to carbon rods in loose contact. His "microphone" would pick up very weak sounds like a fly walking on it, but was very erratic and useless for normal telephony. Edison won the long patent litigation around 1892. The interesting thing is the timeline, and any evidence of whether one inventor borrowed from another. Along with this was the legion of tinkerers who had fooled with any aspect of telephony and popped up during the litigation with bogus claims of having invented the telephone. It looks like Bell, Berliner, and Edison have strong claims for, respectively, the undulatory speech currents and electromagnetic receiver, the "loose contact" principle, and the carbon button. Hughes clearly worked along the same path as Berliner and Edison, but in what exact timeline, and did his work influence theirs, was he working purely independently, did he document his work?Edison 20:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 8th May 1878 is the date for his first demonstration of his microphone, to the Royal Society, per the websie I added to the references. The first "public demonstration" was later. Now there is a date to compare to those for Berliner and Edison. I added this date to the timeline in the Telephone article. Per the timeline there, Bell patented his electromagnetic phone in Jan 1877, Berliner filed a caveat for the loose contact transmitter in April 1877, and April 1877 Edison applied for a patent for the carbon transmitter complete with induction coil to step up impedance and isolate the battery from the line circuit. So Hughes does not appear to get primacy. He had access to knowledge of the work of Bell, and probably to that of Berliner and Edison.Edison 20:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read "Before We Went Wireless by Ivor Hughes and David Ellis Evans" for as much detail and references as you could ask for. Gutta Percha (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I have removed the rather idiotic claim that his printing telegraph was a "Morse Code Modem". It didn't use morse and it clearly wasn't a modem. Please refer to the excellent book by Ivor Hughes and David Ellis Evans which describes the device in detail. Gutta Percha (talk) 22:02, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morse Code Modem 

message: Shouldn't he be listed as British-born American or British-American? He immigrated to the U.S. at the age of seven. Most sources I can find list him as American, including this Wikipedia article: SS David E. Hughes. Rsduhamel (talk) 15:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All the sources I see note David Edward Hughes' dual citizenship so we need to follow sources here. What to call him?: rough Google Books check "Anglo-American" 111 results, "British-American"  6 results, "Welsh - American" 4 results, "British born" 7 results. One of his three claims to notability, his Printing telegraph, puts him under "American" per WP:OPENPARAGRAPH, making him again "dual" per Wikipedia MOS. If there is an overall "Strunk & White" way to handle this then we can go with that. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I accept the dual description of him but Anglo-American is just plain wrong and the sources above probably use this terminology out of ignorance.  We have sources clearly indicating that he was born in Wales but my dictionary describes 'Anglo' as 'denoting English or England'.  Wales is not part of England but it is part of Britain.  We should not propagate ignorance of the constituent countries of the United Kingdom in Wikipedia. Martin Hogbin (talk) 23:33, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I won't bother to simply revert on WP:PROVIT, which you failed to do there. Actual sources (even "Welsh" ones) contradict "sources clearly indicating that he was born in Wales"  and the OED def of Anglo-American includes Britain and the US, although they may do that out of ignorance ;) Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 20:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As there does seem to be some doubt as to whether he was born on London or Wales there still could be some objection to 'Anglo' but 'British' is undoubtedly correct.  Personally I have no objection to 'Anglo' but some editors may object to this on the grounds that it downplays his Welshness.  I leave it up to you. Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:28, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Well.... being made up of all of the nationalities covered in any future argument, I refuse to change anything because I may go to war with myself ;) In other words I think your current edit of "British-American" is good. A change would be up to a future editor who can cite clear MOS on how people with such backgrounds should be referred to. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality 

message: The article body says he invented an improved version of Edison's carbon microphone. This contradicts the statement in the opening paragraph that he co-invented the microphone. Rsduhamel (talk) 15:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Non-obvious improvements to inventions are also inventions, and therefore "co-invented" is appropriate.  "The microphone" is a functional name for a series of different inventions.  Greensburger (talk) 15:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No this not right, he improved an existing invention.  Although his improvements may have involved an inventive step and been patented that does not make him a co-inventor.  Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Co-invented the microphone? 

message: The language used in much of this article is far too promotional and looks as if it has been copied directly from  book on Hughes.  I will tone ot down a bit. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far too promotional 

message: I have further cleaned up on cleanups by Chetvorno by renaming and rewording this whole section and rewording the lead because it was quite a WP:REDFLAG. Can't put these claims in Wikipedia's voice no matter how much some people want to believe them. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Well done! Martin Hogbin (talk) 16:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.  The claims that Hughes invented the first working radio communication system and the first microphone are clearly hyperbole that goes beyond the sources. I haven't been able to find anything about him inventing a diode detector. --ChetvornoTALK 17:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Invention of radio" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on David Edward Hughes. 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/20110615153304/http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~trothman/electrician.pdf to http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~trothman/electrician.pdf
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) 20:53, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on David Edward Hughes. 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/20090514072029/http://www.100welshheroes.com/en/biography/davidedwardhughes to http://www.100welshheroes.com/en/biography/davidedwardhughes
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090514072029/http://www.100welshheroes.com/en/biography/davidedwardhughes to http://www.100welshheroes.com/en/biography/davidedwardhughes
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160913132543/http://www.angloconcertina.org/files/HughesforWebsite.pdf to http://www.angloconcertina.org/files/HughesforWebsite.pdf
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) 18:21, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified