Talk:Karl Müller (inventor)

Translation

This is the English translation of the German Wikipedia article: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Müller_(Erfinder) KMFoundation (talk) 13:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose that this article be redirected to rocker bottom shoe for the following reasons:

1. Claims that Müller invented the rocker bottom shoe concept are at best unverifiable (no patents have been cited to verify) and at worst unfounded (the rocker bottom shoe article cites references as early as 1990, but Müller's company only began in the late 1990s).
2. Minus that claim of inventorship, Müller fails the criteria for inclusion.
3. The only content of the article other than the shoe business is as the founder of KM Foundation. Given that the author of this article is clearly associated with KM Foundation, and that the text is overly promotional of KM Foundation, and that KM Foundation does not appear notable enough for its own article, this content is not sufficient to retain the article.

With no useful content to retain, a simple redirect seems the best solution. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your points

1. The already posted link is reason enough to prove that Karl Müller is the inventor of these kinds of shoes. If you’re able to find an older patent, you can add it to your arguments.
2. As Karl Müller is the proven inventor of toning shoes, he is definitely a notable person. Especially in times like these, where there’s a huge media hype about this topic.
3. As Karl Müller is the founder of this Charitable Trust, it is a part of his biography and should be mentioned just as his companies. There is no advertising in this paragraph, only information that helps the reader to understand what the KM Foundation is all about. There never was an attempt to publish an own Wikipedia article, so this accusation is absolutely unsubstantiated. KMFoundation (talk) 08:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Although Müller does appear to have been granted a patent for a particular shoe design in 2002, there are references to this type of shoe in the medical literature as early as 1990 (see Schaff, PS; Cavanagh, PR (1990). "Shoes for the insensitive foot: The effect of a “rocker bottom” shoe modification on plantar pressure distribution". Foot and Ankle 11 (3)) as cited in the rocker bottom shoe article). Thus, Müller's patent is for an improvement on an existing technology at best. And Müller's trust does not appear to rise to the level of notability required by WP:ORG, as there does not appear to be any substantial coverage of this trust in any media that I was able to find. As KMFoundation (talk · contribs) has an obvious conflict of interest in this area, I suggest that this user recuse themself from this discussion, and allow independent editors to come to a consensus. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

If you had read the whole patent document, you would have known that the document has already been filed in July 3, 1998 in the United States. (He applied for his patent in 1997 - What matters is the date of application) There might have been ideas of inventing such a shoe, but Karl Müller was the first one to realize it. If you cannot show a document where there's in evidence a first shoe of this kind, then your statement is absolutely useless. When you already argue with the rocker bottom shoe article, you should have noticed the paragraph, where Karl Müller is obviously mentioned as the inventor of the rocker bottom shoes with the MBT.

Quotation: "Rocker sole shoes were popularised for the mass market in the late 1990s and early 00s by the Swiss company, Swiss Masai, as Masai Barefoot Technology or MBT.[7][8] According to Swiss Masai, the market concept originated with Karl Muller, an engineer.." KMFoundation (talk) 07:59, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I have requested a third opinion to help resolve this impasse. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Third opinion from a random passer-by

Hi; I came in response to your request for a third opinion. Some distinct points should be made:

1. Notability is, to an extent, separate from truth. Wikipedia has thousands of articles on rivals, hoaxes, pretenders, and ideas that later turned out to be mistaken. We have articles on both Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz. Therefore, the decision to merge/delete/keep an article about an inventor can be partly separated from the question of whether the inventor really did make a notably big innovation. If the question is "Should we have a separate article on this person?" then the answer is usually phrased in terms of notability: What coverage has Müller earned in independent sources? (Note that an official document written by Müller, such as a patent, is hardly independent). Have other people or organisations considered Müller notable enough to write a whole article on the subject? Looking at sources like this I think he passes the notability threshold, but only just.
2. If reliable sources say that there were prior inventions which are similar, the article should reflect this, and it should definitely not contradict those reliable sources.
3. We should not link to copyvio. Some of the article sources look like large newspaper clippings hosted on a third-party website. Does mbt-history.com have permission from the copyright holder?
4. The current tone of the article is promotional. That should be fixed. It should not need every word to be rewritten.
5. New people who come to wikipedia who hope to devote themselves to one article and ensure that it reflects The Truth often have a difficult time, and at worst they feel rejected and end up in a spiral of blocks and sockpuppets. None of us wants that. I would strongly recommend that KMFoundation (talk · contribs) tries making a few improvements to other articles, and tries participating in the community, to get a better feel for how wikipedia works. If you want to make real improvements across the encyclopædia, then you'll get a very warm welcome, people will be happy to help you, and your work will be appreciated. bobrayner (talk) 13:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Patent

The Patent can be found here: http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=k6YJAAAAEBAJ Inovocon (talk) 07:59, 2 March 2011 (UTC)