Talk:Mousepad/Archive 1

message: 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)
thread_title: More rants

message: 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)
thread_title: Rants

message: 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)
thread_title: The need for a mousepad was only after a roller-ball mouse gunk buildup showed a necessity for the mousepad 

message: 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)
thread_title: Dick Lyon shows erroneous bias in his statements on the invention of the mousepad

message: 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)
thread_title: Armando's story

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)

text: He's very much with us. Dicklyon 21:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title: Movie does not show any mousepad

message: 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)
replies: text: He's very much with us. Dicklyon 21:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: 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)
thread_title: What was made was a Keyboard/Mouse "tray", not a "pad"

message: 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)
thread_title: Armando's history

message: 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)
thread_title: Reverted fragment

message: 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)
thread_title: Anonymous unverifiable info

message: 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)
thread_title: Armando, you need to make yourself an account

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Page protected

message: 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)
thread_title:  Recent revert by Dicklyon 

message: 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)
replies: text: If it helps, I've never heard a mouse mat referred to as a mousepad. :) GDallimore (Talk) 09:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mouse mat"? 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Armando's mid-July 2007 statement, moved from old section

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Suggestion unprotecting