Talk:Globotype

Not A Hoax

This article is not a hoax. The Globotype is real, the patent is real and David Mc Callum is real. I have my doubts about the poster of the proposed deletion due to "Apparent hoax" message, however. I'm hoping this was done by a malfunctioning automaton. I would hope that no individual would post a proposed deletion before checking the sources cited in the article.

1.) Froehlich/Kent Encyclopedia of Telecommunications, volume 2 pages 461 and 462

2.) The inventor published a small booklet in 1856 entitled: GLOBOTYPE TELEGRAPH: A recording instrument in which small coloured balls are released one by one and made to pass over a series of inclined planes by the force of gravity. The booklet was originally published by Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans of London.

The author stated that reproductions of the booklet were available at one time through Amazon (and may still be), if he were contacted he may be able to provide a supporting scan of the documentation that he has. I myself have a copy of the booklet, but not the Froehlich/Kent Encyclopedia.

The article is a little "tongue in cheek" in its presentation, however but the facts are none the less true and verifiable.

The only issues I see are:

"The Globotype is a color display for telecommunications."

Well, yes.., true... but a tongue in cheek stretch of the term display. It was certainly not a color CRT display that one might think of by today's use of the term, but a means of displaying coded telegraph messages by releasing "colored" balls that rolled into a "display" of the message.

"The device features very low cost and does not use consumable supplies."

Without a supporting, more in depth explanation this could mislead one to assume that it is a currently available device. A stretch again, but perhaps the author meant "featured" and "did not use".

"The device can be connected to a computer in lieu of a printer saving costs of paper ribbons and maintenance."

This is the big one that people may have issue with. The device was intended for use on a telegraphic communications system, was electo-mechanical, and operated at the speed that telegraphic code was being manually sent. That was typically measured in words per minute. It could conceivably be connected to a computer, but more as a novelty than as a serious replacement for a printer, where speeds are expected to be in pages per minute. The display of the message would still be coded (displayed in colored balls) and would require deciphering and then transcription to paper, if desired.

"The booklet is highly regarded among users of the Globotype."

I seriously doubt that there are any current users of the Globotype... although I don't have any facts on this. Perhaps "The booklet was highly regarded among users of the Globotype." would be better here.

The elegant simplicity of the device was that it offered a telegraph operator the ability to obtain a working recording of a message in real-time as sent and a semi-permanent record that he could transcribe at his leisure. The record would remain available until he "reset" all the marbles.

Conceivably, it would have allowed for unattended receipt of telegraphic messages, although that concept was never intended or implemented to my knowledge.--Dogfish 23:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

"The device can be connected to a computer in lieu of a printer saving costs of paper ribbons and maintenance."

That's why I nominated it for deletion as a hoax: in the 1850s, a "computer" was a woman with a pencil and a pad of paper. It looked to me like someone had taken an existing drawing and built up a story around it. --Carnildo 02:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Citation Needed (Amazon)

A Google Search yielded this from Google's Cache. It may not be available any longer... but isn't promoting a business frowned upon here..? I don't know what would make a more appropriate citation to the author's mention that it had been available at Amazon. I would hope that Amazon would maintain some record of products they offered long after the Google Cache is gone. What it proves is another matter, however.

The author Claude A. R. Kagan (who may well be the current authority on the Globotype, based on his first hand research) is suffering from ARMD and has very limited vision. He is new to Wikipedia, and I would hope that all can make an attempt to support him in his efforts to share some of the knowledge he has acquired in his lifetime. He may not pick up on small changes to his articles here and there like [citation needed] and it may be best to add a message at his talk page or send an email. He does have text to speech software to read his email and can with more difficulty cut and paste text into another reader.--Dogfish 03:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)