Cechafin
Ah. I just found this page. I'm sort of new to editing wikipedia entries. The reason I felt some mention should be included is that a book is coming out and there are court documents. Amron has some history of successful invention so his claim seems to have some relevance. There are court documents http://www.thoughtdevelopmentinc.com/plan.pdf. I don't claim to know what the final resolution will be but am curious and it seemed to have enough merit to be at least worth a mention. If there is evidence otherwise I am interested. If not, I don't think Wikipedia should be a place to enforce some party line. Such claims should be properly qualified and I think I did that.
When you say "not an independent source" maybe I am not understanding what you are saying.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cechafin (talk • contribs) 01:50, 8 October 2012
- Hello. This is your own talk page - if you want to leave a message for another editor, just click through to their talk page and edit it. I believe User:Deor was referring to self-published sources. --McGeddon (talk) 15:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Signing comments edit
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button 
or 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --McGeddon (talk) 08:33, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I had been trying to figure out how to make the endings of posts look right but was getting some errors. Cechafin (talk) 18:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi LeannJordan,
I commend your fortitude here but I felt like I was dealing with a fustian ideologue and it seems that no standard it going to get past this gatekeeper. He doesn't even seem to really read and think about the content before a heated dismissal. It almost seems like he is a close friend of Fry and has little else to do in life. I have only edited two pages ever. This one and one where I fixed the probability current for the Schroedinger equation. My understanding is that there is a way to appeal someone who is blocking something unfairly but not sure how to do it and I am pretty busy with a real life. Amron deserves credit for a lot of things though I don't know him personally. I'd love to learn the full real story of the Post-it someday and maybe Wikipedia isn't conceived of as a place to work out this sort of thing. The short of it is I am no expert on Wikipedia guidelines but, as you see, striving the meet the higher benchmark gets you nowhere. Cechafin (talk) 22:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Cechafin,
Thank you, I will look for what this Wikipedia editor is saying that I need here, and if I get nowhere with him then I will take this to the next Wikipedia level. I too think Amron, at the very least, should be mentioned in the Post-it note history on Wikipedia pages, and I will keep trying. I found another Wikipedia editor who agrees with you and I, he knows the rules and he is helping me with this.
LeannJordan LeannJordan (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment from LeannJordan edit
- Hi Cechafin,
I read your comments below on the AMRON Post-it notes issues, and agree with you that it needs to be posted some how, but must comply with Wikipedia guidelines. I found several reliable published sources in the press and on line (see my deleted post and citing below). Publicly available at the click of a mouse. Links to Government sites are now available for all these documents.
Would you help me get it posted in the proper Wikipedia form?
LeannJordan
Quoted text
|
|---|
|
So I have recently come into possession of copies of a letter from 3M indicating a settlement and other court documents with the dates of evidence and marketing materials. There is also an affidavit from a Jeffrey Brown that this was done in 1974 when a company was set up for Amron called "Press On Memos Ltd." I am starting to take his claims very seriously. How would one write or include such information in an edit of the page? These are original sources. Could they be uploaded somewhere. I suspect there are ways to find such legal documents through links to government sites but haven't figured out how yet. (No OCR on these documents). Maybe this would be worth a new page entirely. Please advise.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cechafin (talk • contribs) 03:49, 10 October 2012
|
I read this section over. However, my post was not to make a claim about a living person as the one you state. I was looking to post that there was some controversy that remains to be fully elucidated on the priority of invention. It seems that this keeps getting confused as my making a definite statement about the priority of invention. Prior art of similar art and claims to that effect are interesting and it seems like there should be somewhere people could be directed or be made aware of it. Maybe this is not what Wikipedia is for but I have found a lot of pages with such so I thought it was. Maybe they are all just waiting to be pared back to this stricter standard. Too bad. Even notions that have been refuted have an interesting place in the history of subject. This seems not to be the case here. Given the cult status of this product and the media and legal power of large corporations to shape public opinion, there should be some way to entice interest and draw out people with photos, products or memories that might support his contention further (assuming it is true). If his claim is false then once sufficient public exposure to this notion has been around for a while, it would cast further doubt upon it. Back to the other approach. Given his other successes, maybe an Alan Amron page would be worth creating. Mention could be made there. Cechafin (talk) 18:00, 10 October 2012 (UTC) LeannJordan (talk) 19:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)