Talk:Heinrich Göbel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Germany (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
B checklist
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography (Rated C-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Discussion prior of 2010[edit]

Why I reverted the edit on Dec 12, 03:

It has been disputed for many years who "invented" the first light-bulb. There was much parallel development and no clear winner. It would be POV to state clearly that any one individual "invented the first light bulb".

The claim that the Edison/Beacon lawsuits established Goebel as the rightful inventor is false. http://www.heinrich-goebel-realschule.de/Daten_engl.htm and elsewhere says:

Two more defendant companies present the total of over 100 pieces of evidence as well as old Goebel incandescent lamps. In front of experts, called by the court, Goebel reconstructs the tools he used at that time and also his lamps of 1859. There are inconsistent judgements for and against Edison. Edison is only successful in two processes with appeal. This does not mean that the real truth had come forth. The opposing parties do not continue wit--Hgn-p (talk) 12:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)h these processes because of the high costs and also because the Edison copyright would expire in the following year, 1894.

Anjouli 13:28, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the link is no longer valid. There is now another text at the site which puts a different light on things: There were legaliteies which went both for and against Edison but Goebels blub was deemed to be original and was given priority, a belated satisfaction for the old researcher. (from http://www.heinrich-goebel-realschule.de/e_prozess.htm) -- Any more sources about this? Kruemelmo 10:45, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)


From http://www.heinrich-goebel-realschule.de/

On the 14th September 1929, in connection with the electro-technical society in Hanover, Heinrich Goebel's home town of Springe celebrated by putting a plaque up on his birth house.

A bright light burns day and night to symbolise its inventor, Goebel, who was first to introduce the world to electric lamp.

In 1954, in connection with a light studying group from Wiesbaden, the town celebrated the hundredth anniversary of the invention. At the foot of the Deister the Goebel Bastei was founded.

A lamp symbol was donated by lamp industry for the occasion. At the base of the obelisk is a plaque with the inscription.

IN HONOURS OF THE INVENTOR OF ELECTRICAL LAMP

HEINRICH GOEBEL BORN. 20 APRIL 1818 IN SPRINGE DIED 16 DECEMBER 1893 NEW YORK

ESTABLISHED TO 26.06.1954 BY THE CITY BRANCH ON THE OCCASION OF THE CENTENARY OF THE INVENTION

So who is the Inventor?.. Correct your mistake!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.56.133.206 (talkcontribs) 11:59, 4 November 2005

I can make out German only with Babel Fish, but the interesting, and more extensive article in the de.wikipedia seems very well balanced.--12.72.150.30 01:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
The final court judgnments in the 1890s were that the Göbel claim was yet another fraud wherein newly constructed bulbs were claimed to be very old. Edison 02:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Plaques put up by nationalists do not count for much in establishing priority of invention. Edison (talk) 04:09, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


Point of view[edit]

I have the impression that the article in World Wide School on which the lemma is based, is very much point of view. It does not talk about who made the first lightbulb but who owned the patent for making the first practical lightbulb. If statements like "I took personal charge of running down this man and his pretensions in the section of the city where he lived and among his old neighbors. They were a typical East Side lot--ignorant, generally stupid, incapable of long memory, but ready to oblige a neighbor and to turn an easy dollar by putting a cross-mark at the bottom of a forthcoming friendly affidavit" are used to make a point I can only disqualify this information as slander, and the source as insincere. Adding all information from various sources, even that from World Wide School, it is probable that Goebel is the inventor of the lightbulb, allthough he did not own patents and his invention was to undeveloped to put it in practical use.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.84.4.3 (talkcontribs) 08:51, 7 July 2006

Article replaced 2011[edit]

The article was replaced between January 28, 2011 and February 14, 2011. The old one was a stub. The content is a shortened version of the article in the de.wikipedia. ( I am one of two main editors of that article.) In the de.wikipedia there are more details about the claims of Henry Goebel concerning his alleged work in the field of constructing electric lamps between 1854 and 1880 in New York, more details about technical reasons and other reasons supporting the thesis of a fraudulent defense and more details about the development of the legend. If you want to have more details or more references or if there is any other criticism, please give your comment here.

I kindly ask you to take care of language improvements.--Hgn-p (talk) 12:54, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

dead links[edit]

Sources 9 and 11 lead to a 403 access forbidden page.

Sources 21 through 23 fail to retrieve the patents.

Source 4 is only visible to subscribers.

I would suggest removing them, with the possible exception of Number 4.

Henry oct/01/2017

  • Thank you. The links are replaced, except Number 4. --Hgn-p (talk) 22:42, 27 November 2017 (UTC)