Revision as of 00:18, 7 October 2009 editMonshuai (talk | contribs)987 edits →"of Bulgarian origin"/"of Bulgarian ancestry"← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:39, 29 September 2024 edit undoHarryboyles (talk | contribs)Administrators159,114 editsm moving WikiProject banner(s) inside WikiProject banner shellTag: AWB | ||
(365 intermediate revisions by 70 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|living=no|listas=Atanasoff, John Vincent|vital=yes|1= | |||
{{WPBS|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Biography|s&a-work-group=yes}} | |||
{{WPBiography | |||
{{WikiProject Military history|class=Start|b1=n|b2=n|b3=y|b4=y|b5=y|WWII=y|Biography=y|US=y|Maritime=y|SciTech=y}} | |||
|living=no | |||
{{WikiProject Physics|importance=High|bio=yes}} | |||
|class=C | |||
{{WikiProject Bulgaria|importance=High}} | |||
|priority= | |||
{{WikiProject University of Florida|importance=Low}} | |||
|s&a-work-group=yes | |||
|listas = Atanasoff, John Vincent | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Archive box|search=yes| | |||
{{physics|class=C|importance=High|bio=yes}} | |||
* ] <small>(2004–2009)</small> | |||
{{WikiProject University of Florida|class=C|importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Bulgaria|no-todolist=yes|class=C|importance=High}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
__TOC__ | |||
{{Clear}} | |||
== |
== Name == | ||
and no mentioning at all of ] ? ''first functional tape-stored-program-controlled computer (Z3) in 1941'' | |||
Atansoff's last name derives from the Bulgarian language, in it and in other Slavic langs. the name ends in "ov" for male and in "ova" for female. To the emigrants to western Europe and Americas the ending changes from "v" to "ff". It should be stated from where his name derives, that's all for I took it in Bulgarian, not beacause he speaks Bulgarian. | |||
== Dates of Life == | |||
] (]) 17:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks for discussing this rather than reverting. I don't see a need to mention the history of the name in the lead - any reader that reads the fact that his father was Bulgarian would be able to deduce that the name is of Bulgarian, giving the Bulgarian spelling adds no information, but rather gives the false impression that he also goes by a Bulgarian version of his name.] 17:24, 21 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Ditto Maunus, spot on. ] (]) 01:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Manipulative revertings == | |||
I added the dates of birth and death back into the first paragraph even through these are now available in the info box as well. Formatting similar to ]. The info box is a very nice touch though. Good work! | |||
Stop it, do not delete sourced information, I am tired to revert your manipulations so many times. Atansoff's ancestry is half Bulgarian and you can't change this. It was unless to protect the page, that's not needed beacause of some editors remove ifno supported by sources, simply a kind of vandalism. ] (]) 11:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
::You need to stop your Bulgarian boosterism and in stead read our policies of ] so you know what vandalism is and isn't, ] so you know how we decide what goes into an article and what doesn't and ] so you know what happenes when editors keep reinserting the same information when confronted with disagreement.] 14:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
Your accusations to me for Bulgarian boosterism are not supported by any evidence. The contestable edit was John Atanasoff's name in Bulgarian, we agreed to remove it, but is not understandable why the next version was reverted-isn't John Atanasoff of half Bulgarian ancestry(not ethnicity and not nationality)- true fact and even supported by a source, for what this version was reverted with no explanation, followed by deffending of the page, isn't we removed the name written in Bulgarian? ] 17:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
*Ok. I was formatting similar to ]. I think they look fine in both places. --] ] 01:50, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC) | |||
:The evidence is your edit history. Half of which consists of editwarring over the inclusion of topics regarding Bulgarian nationalism in tangentially rleated articles. The article clearly states that his father was born in Bulgaria. that is sufficient information regarding his ties to Bulgaria.] 17:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
:Maunus has right. This page is periodically susceptible to revision by Bulgarian boosters. These editors are here principally to play up the fact that Atanasoff had a Bulgarian father, and not to contribute substantively to the article. You, Pensionero, are a Bulgarian booster, proudly and openly. Why can I say this? It's not an attack on your character or even an opinion; it is a fact deducible from your record. Among the user boxes on your user page: "This user is a member of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church." "This user is from the Balkans." "This user comes from Bulgaria." "This user is of Bulgarian ancestry." "This user is of Slavic ancestry." "This user supports Bulgaria." "This user is a fan of Bulgarian football." "This user supports CSKA Sofia." "This user participates in WikiProject Bulgaria." "It is approximately 6:50 PM where this user lives. (Bulgaria)." (Also, and not entirely irrelevant to the discussion here: "This user is a teenager.") Your talk page appears to be riddled with 3RR warnings. Your contribution history appears to be little else but Bulgarian-related pages. Have you ever studied Atanasoff's life or work, or his testimony in ''Honeywell v. Sperry Rand'', or his patents, or anything about him? Collected materials in this area? Or are you merely enamored with your discovery that Bulgaria has "claimed" Atanasoff as a native son? Are you qualified to contribute to this page in any way beyond playing up the already-adequately-covered fact of Dr. Atanasoff's ancestry? ] (]) 17:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC) | |||
What do you want to say with my userboxes, I haven't "This user is Bulgarian booster" or "This user is Bulgarian, proud and open" instead this I have "This user is Bulgarian", I just often edit and correct articles related to Bulgaria, such as I changed "John Atanasoff was an American physicist" to "John Atanasoff was a physicist", beacause he is not completely clean and full American, if you have sources where is saying that Dr. Atanasoff was completely and full American, show it, if not I will delete this unsourced info. The page is for John Atansoff, a person, not only for the "Atansoff's Berry computer" or "Honeywell v. Sperry Rand", except "testimony in Honeywell v. Sperry Rand, or patents of Atanasoff" there are other things for which can be contributed in the page including Dr. Atansoff's ancestry. ] 12:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Nonprogrammable versus electronic == | |||
==4-year edit war== | |||
How about non-programmable, electronic, digital computer? That's what it was. The reason the ] is still regarded as the first computer is because it's the first programmable (well ], to be precise) computer. Atanasoff did impressive, significant work, but the sweeping generalization first '''electronic digital computer''' ought to be modified with ''non-programmable'' or ''turing-complete'' in order to be most accurate and NPOV'ed. The sweeping statement sounds like something the might claim in their zeal to promote their man. | |||
Ok, this is ridiculous. Settle this on talk, because nobody gets to edit the page again until you can actually agree on something. Use the {{tl|editprotected}} template for anything that actually gets consensus. ] also work well. Have fun. --] (]) 02:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
I am glad someone stepped in and put this edit war on pause. | |||
In any case, I love the info box (as I said before), but there is no need to revert ] change to reflect more factual accuracy. I have merged both of your changes. This makes the claim as simple as possible, but no simpler. There is no desire for an edit/revert war here, however. I'm just an outside observer just trying to be in the spirit of NPOV. | |||
== American physicist == | |||
Happy editing. | |||
To start off with, I think that if he was born in the US and died in the US, it's perfectly appropriate to call him an "American physicist". Is this consensus to restore this wording?--] (]) 02:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
-] 02:18, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) | |||
:Yes. There really isn't a "content dispute" here; the factuality of the content is not in genuine dispute. The edits to this page to emphasize the paternal ethnicity of the subject are teenage vandalism. ] (]) 03:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
The person is not of full American ancestry and has equal other, it is clearly saying in the page born-New York, died-somewhere in the USA, etc.. and noone removes that One could be French in Australia and African in Albania, no matter in which country he lives. Good option and not any denial of the American nationality and citizenship is just "was physicist", in the infobox is written that Atanasoff has only American citizenship. ] (]) 15:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
Or alternatively, we could just use no capation or just a caption like "John Atanasoff in XXXX" like ]'s formatting (as I quoted above earlier). That might be an elegant way to deal with it and just let them read the article's text for a brief summary of the ABC-ENIAC dispute? I think it's a good solution. Thoughts? -] 02:23, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) | |||
::There is no such thing as "Full american ancestry" also we don't classify people by ancestry unless they do so themselves. He has never had other citizenships than American, so there is no basis for describing him as "Bulgarian-American". Every American, except Native Americans have ancestry outside of America. Nothing suggests here that he has more roots in Bulgaria than e.g. President Obama has in Kenya, and he certainly isn't a "Kenyan-American President of the United States". ] 16:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
Nobody is adding John Attanasoff was Bulgarian-American, I removed the vaguely "was an American" from the intro beacause it is not known for what it refers- for the nationality, citizenship, ancestry/ethnicity?, below in the article all of them are clarified, is not seem to be a problem nobody is arguing for Atanasoff's citizenship and nationality. ] (]) 17:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:I would claim that "electronic digital computer" is not overreaching, but accurate as a basic description. ENIAC, the machine most often cited in place of the ABC, was programmable in only the most rudimentary sense, requiring re-wiring to re-program. It didn't use a stored (paper tape) program like the ] relay logic computer, for example. And ENIAC used decimal rather than the more versatile ABC binary design. But I would agree that the more detailed description certainly should be in the text for clarity. --] 05:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
:Were you aware that the ] requires nationality be listed in the opening sentence? ] (]) 21:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
::The distinction between the ] and the ] I thought I had learned while helping rewrite this is that of the ] of the ENIAC while the ABC seems more specific to solving Diff Eq's, wasn't it? I'm actually slightly concerned that the textbox is a bit ''too'' wordy right now, but I'm happy to leave it as it is until someone finds a better or more elegant solution to le problem de textbox. Anyway, if you have better ideas, '''be bold'''. -] | ] 07:01, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
In the guideline is saying requiring of (location, nationality, or ethnicity). Then why not "John Atansoff was an American physicist and inventor of half Bulgarian descent"? ] (]) 16:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
: Why didn't you actually read the guideline first... ]. It's right there above the fold. "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". Atanasoff's scientific work is not related to the ethnicity of his father in the least. Per the guidelines, he was an American physicist and inventor. Mentioning that he was the son of a Bulgarian emigrant somewhere in the intro is already enough. <span style="text-align: center; clear: both; font-family:Georgia, serif; font-size: 10pt; font-variant: small-caps; font-style: normal;"> — ] ] —</span> 16:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
{{tlx|editprotected}} | |||
:The anonymous ] 2005 "multiple additions" was me. Thought I was logged in. I moved the 'non-programmable' bit to a subordinate place for now--] 10:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
Per the apparent guideline-based consensus above, please change the first line to read "was an American physicist and inventor". Thanks.--] (]) 16:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:{{done}} — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 17:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
I don't know how you decided that "ethnicity is not relevant to the subject's notability", however. The Bulgarian father stating in the article is enough, but American you wrote should redirects to United States like that "]", not to like that "]", beacause if not redirects to the American country, why not to write his other half ethnos in the first sentence? ] (]) 17:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
::→ Seems the primary contributor has a real issue with Mauchly/Eckert? Probably not appropriate for NPOV -- after all, Atanasoff's machine was never even fully functional (which is why no patent), and the final ENIAC was dramatically different from the ABC. Atanasoff never even stepped up to make claims until the Honeywell lawyers cajoled him. Because this article is about him, his accomplishments should be championed, but not exaggerated. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 06:42, August 14, 2006 (UTC{{{3|}}})</small> | |||
: This is a bit embarrassing for me to explain, but "American" is not an ethnos, so it makes no difference where the blue link redirects. Is Atanasoff notable ''because'' he is half-Bulgarian? No, he is notable because he invented the first automatic electronic digital computer. His notability does not derive from him partially belonging to an ethnicity. I know you are young, but I strongly advise you to get yourself familiar with the guidelines and read up before engaging in an argument because such ridiculous disputes should not be happening at all... <span style="text-align: center; clear: both; font-family:Georgia, serif; font-size: 10pt; font-variant: small-caps; font-style: normal;"> — ] ] —</span> 18:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC) | |||
:::This thread is over one year old. Your points have been addressed in this and associated articles on ENIAC and the ABC. --] 16:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
== George Stibitz references needed == | |||
Since we have something about the ] controversy over the first person to actually build a computer, perhaps we should also have something about the controversy involving ] too? He designed a calculator that worked via relay switches which based on my preliminary research was built almost a full two years before Atanasoff released the ]. I'll update this myself in a day or so (no time now), but if you're interested please do it yourself! I found information initially at: ... So. Knock yourself out. -] | ] 03:47, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) | |||
Ethnicity is relevant to the subject's notability. When was ethnicity not relevant? If the article said he was Bulgarian it would fast be changed to Bulgarian- American. It doesn't matter at all if it is important or relevant to the subject. It is a fact! Facts are not a subject of opinion they should be stated as they are. Therefore editing the text is obligatory. | |||
== American-Bulgarian == | |||
Perhaps you can explain why the country order is in this sequence. Anyway, Atanasoff was born in the USA, so I redacted that term and put a note about his Bulgarian father in the awards section where it explains the attention from Bulgaria. --] 11:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
-Guest <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
VMORO has reverted to Bulgarian-American without explanation. In the USA people born there are not usually regarded as hyphenated, unless there is a particular cultural context. That use is normally for immigrants (otherwise we would all be hyphenates!). This is not a big deal with me, and I see that he is frequently into revert wars elsewhere, so I will let it rest. --] 22:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
Maybe he is also ethnic Jewish. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Odd Points of Interest == | |||
1) Did anyone read the bio of Nobel laureate ], who described his invention of the ] reaction while cruising the Pacific Coast highway? Well John Atanasoff thought up his computer design in an incredibly similar fashion. Frustrated by his inability to solve the computer puzzles, he hopped in his car and drove absently drove ~200 miles in a frigid cold night from Ames past the Illinois border to a roadhouse. Here he stopped and once inside everything crystallized: the binary logic circuits, the regenerative refreshing of capacitor memory, etc. He realized that digital circuits were less affected by voltage fluctuations (errors) than analog circuits would be. | |||
== Improving the Article == | |||
2) During John Mauchly's testimony at the patent trial, he cited his invention of a railway flasher as evidence that he had previously thought about a binary logic device! | |||
* A picture could help to do this. ] (]) 21:47, 5 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
The "return" section of the Altanosoff article requires numerous edits to be put into English. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Would either of these stories (from the Mollenhoff bio of Atanasoff) be of interest here? --] 11:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
== Small Typo == | |||
:Certianly interesting to me. Since they have cites, they would be good additions to the article. —] ] <small><small></small></small> 04:00, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC) | |||
In the "Early life and education" section, Bulgarian is spelled "Bugarian" <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Fixed, thanks. --] 23:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
== Superscripted ordinals == | |||
:Yeah, just be sure to add the book under references if you add those stories. -] | ] 04:08, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC) | |||
{{tl|editprotect}} | |||
:The Burks references make much of the railroad flasher. It was one of several extant Mauchly constructions presented at trial as the only remaining evidences of Mauchly's contemporary thinking about digital circuits; this and the other devices from the 1930s exist today (and still work!). Mauchly did not claim to have "invented" this device as Blainster writes above. ] and ] circuits were both widely known prior art in digital electronics in 1940 (having been invented starting in 1919): it is ''prima facie'' inaccurate to state that John Mauchly was unaware of digital electronics principles prior to meeting Atanasoff, and such was not the ruling of Judge Larson in '']''. ] 06:09, 5 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
as these are not in conformity with ], kindly replace: | |||
* <nowiki>The John Atanasoff Bulgarian national tournament in informatics and information technologies, held in the city of ] annually since 2001<ref> Darik News website (in Bulgarian)</ref></nowiki> | |||
and | |||
* <nowiki>Prof. John Atanasoff 4<sup>th</sup> Primary School, ]<ref> Picture</ref></nowiki> | |||
with | |||
== Atanasoff and the NOL Computer == | |||
The popular biographies have glossed over some interesting parts of A's activities during the war. Von Neumann got him to head a project to build another computer, for NOL. Mauchly was actually a consultant to this project, and the information definitely flowed from Mauchly, not to him. The hardware lead on the project, Calvin Mooers, tells the story in the Annals. | |||
So I question the existing sentence in the wiki: | |||
" Mauchly visited Atanasoff multiple times in Washington during 1943 and discussed Atanasoff's computing theories, but did not mention that he was working on a computer project himself. Mauchly's own government work, he said, was too highly secret to reveal." | |||
Atanasoff had top security clearance. | |||
# "The Computer Project at the Naval Ordnance Laboratory," IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 51-67, April-June, 2001. (details Atanasoff's well-funded but unsuccessful second computer project in 1945-1946) | |||
________ | |||
* <nowiki>The John Atanasoff Bulgarian national tournament in informatics and information technologies, held in the city of ] annually since 2001<ref> Darik News website (in Bulgarian)</ref></nowiki> | |||
So I've updated the page to include the NOL computer. | |||
and | |||
Calvin Mooers goes into depth about A and M. He describes why they never built anything at NOL in 1945. Atanasoff was basically evading making any decisions on what type of computer to make. Apparently the engineers would ask for a decision and he would deliberately change the subject (Sometimes to the topic of making goat cheese, he recalls). A. never talked about his ABC to the staff at NOL, saying it was out-dated. I tend to agree. Von Neumann was not happy when he found out that Mooers had deserted the project. He pulled the plug. | |||
* <nowiki>Prof. John Atanasoff 4th Primary School, ]<ref> Picture</ref></nowiki> | |||
Thanks, --<small>] ]</small> 07:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
Meanwhile, in reading about Atanasoff, I've learned that he was a very prolific inventor and had dozens of patents (just not any in computers.) For example in 1937 he invented a way to measure the viscosity of eggs without breaking them - using a pendulum. Should this be in the Wiki? | |||
:{{Done}}--] ] 09:12, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
--] 15:35, 28 January 2006 (UTC) | |||
== Image == | |||
==Alteration to Opening Paragraph== | |||
Please upload ''John Vincent Atanasoff's'' image for this article . -- ] 06:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
I do not agree that Atanasoff can be considered the father of the electronic digital computer in any real sense - if you consult sources other than Burks, the arguments against may become clear. I will reference my moderation to the opening paragraph in a couple of days when I have the necessary books to hand.--] 17:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
== dab needed for school name == | |||
:Clearly there is some difference of opinion, primarily with regard to whether the definition of the term "computer" requires programability, or did sixty years ago. But there are plenty of references other than Burks to support the assertion, from both detailed sources (Mollenhoff) and general references (World Almanac and Encarta). --] 21:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
Should now be ]. ]] 09:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
::I found and corrected a number of problems with the opening paragraph. In no sense was Atanasoff a "prominent computer scientist" in his lifetime, despite his invention of the first electronic digital computer at Iowa State and his brief tenure as head of an unsuccessful computer construction project for the Naval Ordnance Laboratory during World War II. The occupation "computer scientist" can't have been said to have existed in the mid-1940s; both Atanasoff and Mauchly are better described as ''physicists'', which more accurately portrays their breadth of interests, researches, educations, employment positions, and job titles. With regards to the above remark, I agree with Blainster that there are additional sources that may refer to Atanasoff with the honorific "father of the computer"--but these sources may not hold to the standard of objectivity and neutrality we'd like to preserve in Misplaced Pages; the term "widely" presents problems I won't get into. Suffice it to say that more accurate and encyclopedic would be to cite the ''Honeywell v. Sperry Rand'' decision, wikilink to it, and use the judge's own language. Finally, no human can be the "father" of a computer in any literal sense. Would Clifford Berry be the "mother"? ] 05:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
== Edit request on 8 March 2012 == | |||
==Parentage== | |||
It should be mentioned that ONLY his father was Bulgarian... | |||
It's HILARIOUS to put an USA citizen on the page that represents Bulgaria, come one now... you guys must have another brain to replace this scientist... <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]){{#if:2007-04-29T12:23:57| 2007-04-29T12:23:57|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> | |||
==Fair use rationale for Image:John Atanasoff.gif== | |||
] | |||
''']''' is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under ] but there is no ] as to why its use in '''this''' Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use. In addition to the ], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with ]. | |||
{{FPER|answered=yes}} | |||
Please go to ] and edit it to include a ]. Using one of the templates at ] is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. | |||
<!-- Begin request --> | |||
Please change link from ] (which now leads to a disambiguation page) to <nowiki>]</nowiki>. | |||
<!-- End request --> | |||
] (]) 00:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
:{{done}} ] ] 02:33, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Ancestry == | |||
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on ]. If you have any questions please ask them at the ]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Missing rationale2 -->] 06:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Okay. So after ] HUGE debate, which included literary references...why exactly has all trace of Atanasoff's Irish (&English/French?) heritage been removed from the article...? ] (]) 09:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
:Addressed, but could be improved by uploader with more specific information. ] 08:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
Maybe he is also ethnic Jewish. <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 17:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
== Why Rock Island == | |||
== Historical accuracy == | |||
According to Iowa State lore, Dr. Atanasoff had his binary epiphany in Rock Island because it was the closest place to Ames that offered liquor by the drink (i.e., bars) in those days. The story is right there on his memorial plaque, but I don't know how one cites a plaque. ] (]) 02:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
It needs to be noted that public consciousness in Bulgaria will have you believe that John Atanasoff is fully Bulgarian, and that "he invented the computer". As if people before him had never considered using anything other than an abacus or pencil-and-paper to do their calculations... There is even talk by the ex-''Foreign Minister'' (a man who ought to know better) of naming Sofia Airport in his honour, in order "to remind people that it was Bulgarians who invented this computer that I have in my pocket " This WP article doesn't do much to dispel these two myths, and I feel that Atanasoff's Irish ancestry may even have been removed by propagators of that myth. Perhaps this whole twisting of history in Bulgaria, along with the relevant quotes etc. of course, could be specifically mentioned in the article? ] (]) 09:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
== "of Bulgarian origin"/"of Bulgarian ancestry" == | |||
Likely both Bulgaria and Ireland have equal reason to claim him as such. He did speak Bulgarian fluently though not gaelic and would often correct the pronounciation of his name to the Bulgarian pronounciation. | |||
Editors have been repeatedly inserting references to Atanasoff's Bulgarian heritage in the lead of this article. First, the facts. Atanasoff was born near ] and raised in ] and ] before moving to ] and later to Maryland. He spoke with a soft Floridan accent throughout his life. Atanasoff had never been to Bulgaria, except once as an old man, in the midst of a larger European vacation to Germany, Yugoslavia, and Greece in 1970, when he spent a week in Sofia and another week touring the rest of the country, and the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences presented him with the Order of ] (Mollenhoff 152). Atanasoff's ''name'' was of Bulgarian ''origin'', but Atanasoff can not be said to have been, as ''Atanasoff was not from Bulgaria''. | |||
== Cyclone Computer == | |||
Can Atansoff be said to have been of Bulgarian heritage or ancestry? Only paternally: his father John emigrated to the U.S. at the age of 13. | |||
Nothing is mentioned about his work with Clifford Berry on the Cyclone computer in 1959. I suggest adding something in the Post War section on it. See ].] (]) 04:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Nobel Prize nominations == | |||
Atanasoff's Bulgarian heritage is such a miniscule part of his identity as a physicist, a teacher, and an inventor that it does not bear mentioning in the lead. Having a father who was from Bulgaria isn't what made Atanasoff notable; it is an incidental, not a defining, detail. I have no problem with a section of the article mentioning Atanasoff's late-life recognition by Bulgaria and his travels there, or his father's origin being mentioned. But the lead sentence? Pure boosterism. ] (]) 04:30, 15 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
I had added a statement about how Atanasoff had repeatedly been nominated to receive the Nobel Prize, and included a YouTube source where his son (off camera) states this to a panel during an author interview where that author's book about Atanasoff is being discussed. My contribution under the rationale that I was in violation of Misplaced Pages's YouTube policy, ]. Clearly this editor has a gross misunderstanding of what that policy is saying. Just because the policy is abbr as "NOYT", it does not mean that YouTube should never be used as a reference. YouTube often contains many excellent sources which are great, particularly when they are authentic primary sources and solid secondary sources. In this particular case, the video I've cited is a primary source (the son) talking to a secondary source (the biographer). | |||
:] has re-added the "Bulgarian ancestry" to the lead once more with the following edit summaries: "Actually in his biography John Atanasoff states that he is a Bulgarian first and foremost. He was also a member of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and a recipient of the C&M order. Furthermore Bulgaria was the first country to recognize him as the inventor of the digital computer. At the ceremony he said he was proud to be Bulgarian and honoured by the recognition. Defining!" What JVA said in his biography or in a speech for a Bulgarian audience (please produce citations for these, by the way) doesn't define his notability. He isn't notable ''for Bulgaria finding him to be notable''. My problem with stating flatly and without qualification that Atanasoff was "of Bulgarian ancestry" is that it simply isn't true; Atanasoff's mother was not of Bulgarian ancestry. Since his ancestry is complicated by this fact, it can't be truncated and placed in the lead. Again, we should take no issue with the article describing Atansaoff's later-life identification with the Bulgarian people, who were kind to him and continue to cherish him as a national hero, if such an identification can be properly cited. But any ] Atanasoff may have himself displayed must not be transplanted into an encyclopedia article about him. ] (]) 03:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
YouTube has a wealth of such reliable references. The purpose of NOYT is to prevent spurious videos of totally unreliable origin from being cited as fact. I am reverting the revert, and maybe others here would like to help explain to ] that NOYT does not mean "don't every cite a YouTube video". =] (]) 18:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::] reverts again with this edit summary: "Being Jewish American isn’t what made Leonard Bernstein notable; being Italian-American isn’t what makes Nancy Pelosi notable; yet that appears in their articles' leads." Let's deal with Pelosi first. Her lead sentence is currently "Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi (born 1940-03-26) is currently the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives." This is a fitting lead, as it states simply what Pelosi is notable for without padding the sentence with irrelevant fluff. Only later, in the third paragraph of the lead, does it mention her ethnicity: "With her election as Speaker she is the first woman, the first Californian and the first Italian-American to hold the Speakership." Here, the context is significant; she is notable for each of these firsts. A lead for Pelosi that was written something like "Nancy Pelosi is the Italian-American current Speaker of the House" muddles the point with irrelevant detail. As for Bernstein (whose lead sentence reads "Leonard Bernstein (1918-08-25 – 1990-10-14) was a Jewish American conductor, composer, author, music lecturer and pianist."), his upbringing in a Jewish family is not irrelevant to his work output (], e.g.) and his career (], e.g.), and it is only one modifier that does not require extensive qualification. Leonard Bernstein is very much notable for being Jewish and for the influence that his heritage exerted on his music. By contrast, his "Bulgarianishness" was not a factor in Atanasoff's work or career; he was not "raised Bulgarian"; he was not the "first Bulgarian" to accomplish any feat for which he was not also the first ''person''; and his ancestry is complicated enough that it requires a caveat that taken all together distracts from the point. The Bulgarian-boosters don't seem to get it. This article is about writing a clear, concise description of John Atanasoff, it is not about assigning credit to a Bulgarian "native son" (whose "nativeness" requires more explanation than a single adjective in order for it to be completely truthful), and, by extension, to Bulgaria. I've come up with a lot of good reasons why mentioning Atansoff's ethnic heritage doesn't belong in the lead sentence, but those who keep restoring this absurdity haven't offered one good reason why it should be there, because in order to do so, they must answer this question: '''How did the fact that Atanasoff's father was from Bulgaria contribute to Atanasoff's invention of the Atanasoff-Berry Computer?''' ] (]) 13:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
:The son is not a primary source. At best he is hearsay. Is the evidence in the biography? If yes, then use that reference. If no, then it didn't meet the test for the biographer and YouTube is not acceptable as a source without any other back-up. If the statement is true, there will be other evidence. I can't find any. Can you? ] (]) 18:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::One more point on this matter and then I'll have said enough. For those who are not aware, the Misplaced Pages Manual of Style has ]. It says that the lead should mention the subject's ''nationality'' but that '''ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.''' ] (]) 14:20, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::My contribution to the article says that his son has stated that Atanasoff was nominated several times for the Nobel Prize. This is a solid unquestioned fact, as anyone who watches the video link can see for themselves. Notice how I put his statement in quotes, and that it is well sourced. And clearly the son is a ]. He is an eyewitness. He was there. He spoke with his father. You are mixing historiography terminology with courtroom terminology. Misplaced Pages does not apply courtroom standards for evidence, otherwise 99% of Misplaced Pages would be discarded (my estimate). | |||
::::Your reasoning is too hair-splitting. This article is not about the Atanasoff-Berry Computer, it's about Atanasoff. I don't say his ethnic ancestry must be in the first line, but your removing it from the lead section altogether is going too far, and seems to have more to do with your arguments with another user in this talk page here, and with your perception of possible Bulgarian-boosting rather than with the issue at hand. Indeed, you have failed to explain why don't you apply your approach to others i.e. '''How did the fact that Pelosi's parents were Italian-American contribute to her becoming Speaker of the House'''? How come Schwarzenegger's being Austrian-born is okay to appear in the '''very first sentence''' in his article? Some 'Austrian-boosters' probably? Sorry Robert, I am not going to reversals but, in my opinion, your double standards and attitudes are distinctly biased on this occasion. ] (]) 14:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::...and notice that the fact that I included into the article is perfectly acceptable for a biographer. I see absolutely no problem with an author publishing in a person's biography, "I spoke with his son and his son told me that he had been nominated for a Nobel Prize three or four times." If you had taken the time to watch the video, you would know that this info is not in her biography because her response to the son was, "that's not something I knew". Also notice that her response was not, "Do you have any evidence to back that up?" She appears to be well aware that she is speaking to an eyewitness primary source. | |||
:::::Schwarzenegger's Austrian birth is both relevant as his ''nationality'' and for his political career as it disqualifies him from the presidency per the U.S. Constitution. (It is also part of his overall superficial identity--his accent, his looks, etc. It would have been notable even had he never gone into politics. He was famously told, while still in his bodybuilder years, that he could never become a box office star because American audiences would not accept a foreigner in lead roles.) The Pelosi question is the wrong one; the point is that her Italian-American heritage ''did not hinder her from becoming Speaker of the House''. Ethnicity and religion have always been of notable importance in American politics, because politicians in democracies must represent their constituencies in order to be elected to office, and the traditional constituencies are ethnic and religious. Persons from minorities ethnic, religious, or otherwise have a more difficult time achieving office. Ethnicity became less of an issue for European ethnicity constituencies (Irish, German, etc.) in the latter part of the 20th century as European immigration abated, but is becoming more of an issue for growing ethnic constituencies like Mexican-Americans (see, for example, ], whose article's first major section is rightfully "Lineage", or ], for whom "Religious background" is the second major section). In any case I would oppose mention of Pelosi's ethnic heritage in the lead sentence or lead paragraph of her article, despite the fact that she talks about her Italian family and upbringing in her stump speeches, because it would be a distracting detail until it was put in the context of her being the first Italian-American Speaker. I think I outlined this point pretty clearly above. I don't have any "arguments with another user in this talk page". I seek the same standards for all Misplaced Pages pages. ] (]) 14:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::The fact of his son informing us that Atanasoff had been nominated for the Nobel needs to be re-added to this article as highly salient. When further evidence comes to light, then we can strengthen that info by removing the quotes, etc. =] (]) 21:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::Robert K S, going by your logic Atanasoff's Bulgarian ancestry is relevant as Bulgaria was the first country to officially recognize his achievements. This reaches much further than your comparitively irrelevant statements regarding politcians whose ethnicity is defining since that's what got them into office. That is in no way even remotely as important as the fact that Atanasoff's ethnic background got him the Bulgarian support, both political and scientific, to be awarded the C & M medal for his achievements at an official ceremony in Bulgaria. Furthermore, this happened in the middle of the Cold War, and was regarded at the time as a gesture of scientific solidarity and peace that reached beyond the iron curtain in order to recognize the achievement of a beloved member of the Bulgarian diaspora. It was symbolic of the permeability between east and west and those ancestral ties that bound people across national borders and political spheres. That said, I will advise you to be very careful, for I deal with your type quite often and utilize the services of the Misplaced Pages administrators to overlook biased actions that do not represent NPV. Finally, when someone like Atanasoff defined himself as Bulgarian first and foremost at the award ceremony, it is clear that you are not the one who then decides that this is not important. As stated, his ethnic background stimulated his ethnic Bulgarian nation to support and honour his achievements when the USA still had not done so. It took the latter country another 20 years to follow in the footsteps of Bulgaria regarding this very defining act! This reality makes his ethnic Bulgarian ancestry exceptionally relevant, notable, defining and for all argumentative intents and purposes, crystallizing...--] (]) 23:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::: Bielle is right. Besides the fact that Nobel Prize nominations are private and not verifiable. You really have to stop using Youtube before you are reported to the administration.] (]) 01:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::The fact that I had posted to this article is totally verifiable. And notice that the fact is not that Atanasoff was nominated for the Nobel Prize. The fact is that his son has stated that he was. So while you see Nobel Prize nominations to be unverifiable, this one particular fact ''is'' verifiable. As I stated in my previous post, anyone can verify it for themselves. | |||
:::::::The above by ] has a number of fine points and a few confused statements. I'll deal with them one-by-one: | |||
:::::::* "Atanasoff's Bulgarian ancestry is relevant as Bulgaria was the first country to officially recognize his achievements." I agree that Bulgaria was the first country to officially recognize Atanasoff and that such should be mentioned in the article. But is Atanasoff ''notable'' for having been ''recognized'' in the style of so many Paris Hiltons who are "famous for being famous"? No--he is notable for his work on the ABC and for his involvement as a witness in '']'', which invalidated a patent that, if found enforcable, would have changed the face of the computer industry, as it would have given Sperry Rand and IBM a dual monopoly on the invention of the electronic digital computer. People have not written books about Atanasoff because he spent a couple of weeks in Bulgaria giving speeches, or because his father was from Bulgaria. | |||
:::::::*"...irrelevant statements regarding politcians..." All of my statements involving politicians were intended to helpfully explain why ]'s counterexamples were not applicable. I agree that they are not directly relevant to how Atanasoff's ethnicity should be handled in this article. The "since that's what got them into office" statement shows a complete misunderstanding of what I wrote, actually inverting my argument. To repeat, from the Manual of Style: '''ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.''' | |||
:::::::*"...was regarded at the time as a gesture of scientific solidarity and peace that reached beyond the iron curtain in order to recognize the achievement of a beloved member of the Bulgarian diaspora..." If such a statement can be ''attributed'' and '']'' (i.e., ''who said such a thing and where is it written?'') then it would be a good thing to put in the article (minus the "beloved", which is POV, unless part of a direct quote, from Sendov or whomever else). Trying to compress such an idea into a statement of Atanasoff's ethnicity in the lead sentence, however, is both a disservice to the expression of the fuller idea and reads as ] ("Yay Bulgaria!"). I would also oppose any addition of such material that was unsourced and unattributed. "Was regarded", without saying ''who'' did the regarding, is pure ]. | |||
:::::::*"I deal with your type quite often and utilize the services of the Misplaced Pages administrators" We have a disagreement about how the lead sentence should be written. The way to resolve it is through discussion, which is what we're doing here. If you believe Misplaced Pages administrators will be able to assist and provide interpretation of the MoS section I've quoted, then I think you should bring this discussion to their attention. | |||
:::::::*"...when someone like Atanasoff defined himself as Bulgarian first and foremost at the award ceremony, it is clear that you are not the one who then decides that this is not important." It is quite the contrary. ]'s lead does not read "Michael Jackson is the King of Pop"; ]'s lead does not read "Howard Stern is the King of All Media". Self-proclamation is not a standard for an encyclopedia to follow. (Did ]'s "]" make him a ]er?) I have no problem with a section in the article that discusses Atansasoff's identification with the Bulgarian people--''properly cited''--but Atanasoff's opinion of himself doesn't determine the lead sentence of his article. | |||
:::::::*"This reality makes his ethnic Bulgarian ancestry exceptionally relevant, notable, defining and for all argumentative intents and purposes..." Well, again, I ask, is Atanasoff's notable achievement that Bulargia gave him a medal, or is it that he invented a computer? ] was awarded honorary American citizenship, but is he notable for that, or is he notable for his role as British Prime Minister during WWII? Notability is determined by ''the acts and accomplishments that celebrated individuals were awarded for'', not for the awards themselves. | |||
:::::::The article could be much improved with a section about Atanasoff's Bulgarian recognition. Why not channel your energies into writing that, rather than ] in ways that are glaringly in violation Misplaced Pages guidelines? You seem to be an expert on this aspect on Atanasoff, and I might be able to assist. Cheers, ] (]) 05:37, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::And I would totally welcome admin oversight on all of your reverts to my contributions, as I expect every single admin to understand NOYT in the same manner that I understand it. =] (]) 03:55, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::Poor try, Robert. I'm not wasting my time, sorry you are unable to look objectively at your one-sided approach. Your desperate effort to demonstrate how special the cases of Pelosi and Schwarzenegger are really amuses me, for those were just two names that came to my mind; hundreds of articles on Americans of various origins mention ethnic ancestry in the lead section, often in the very first sentence indeed. So much for your ] endeavour. ] (]) 12:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::I understand the distinction you are making. There would still need to be some discussion in some other reliable source about this claim, or it has no significance. No one else, ever, including Atanasoff himself, and his biographer(s), has noted it. Any child of a famous parent can make any claim -and this one may even be true; we will know in 50 years after the relevant period. Has anyone else picked up on this claim? You would need further evidence that some one thinks his claim is worthy of note. ] (]) 04:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Pelosi and Schwarzenegger aren't special cases--they follow the MoS guidlines. Austrian was Schwarzenegger's nationality: he was born there. Italian isn't mentioned in the first sentence of Pelosi's article, and when it is mentioned, in the third paragraph of the lead, it's with regard to her being the first Italian-American Speaker of the House. ] (]) 15:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
::::::I just googled and got over 500 hits, so this is clear evidence that being nominated for a Nobel Prize is something that Misplaced Pages editors choose to cite. You are stating that Atanasoff himself never noted it, even after you've been informed that his son has stated that this had happened repeatedly. It would appear that your position here is that the son is fabricating this info. I would say that the onus is on you to provide evidence that the son is mistaken. I hope everyone would be open to recognizing that the son had much more intimate access to his father than most biographers did. =] (]) 04:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::Yes, and Pelosi is not Austrian, and Schwarzenegger is not Speaker of the House. And theirs, like hundreds of other articles on Americans of various origins mention ethnic ancestry in the lead section -- following the MoS guidelines no doubt -- yet Atanasoff's Bulgarian ancestry has no place in the lead. Your pretended explanations won't fool a baby. ] (]) 15:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
:::::::: |
::::::: No that is not evidence, see ]. You need something verifiable, otherwise you are simply continuing to vandalize Misplaced Pages and may be blocked for this. ] (]) 15:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
::::::: Also see ]. ] (]) 15:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
::::::: Lastly, I've done my own search for an RS that proves what you are trying to add and can find none. This leads me to be very suspicious of the claim the son is making of the father in terms of the veracity of its truth. If there is no RS, we shouldn't be adding it. ] (]) 15:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
John Atanasov has also order "People's Republic of Bulgaria", which is given in 1985, for contribution to the development of Bulgarian technology. I think that this also must be added in article --] (]) 16:46, 8 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
:Actually it was added. Sorry!--] (]) 16:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2014 == | |||
::::::::::::Sure. The difference is that they are all US nationals. ] (]) 18:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{edit semi-protected|John Vincent Atanasoff|answered=y}} | |||
:::::::::::::If you find articles where you think the rule is being misapplied, you can post something to my talk page, and I'll go and argue the cases over there, too. The pages you mention are at present in conformity with the guidelines. (Austrian is a nationality for Schwarzenegger, and Pelosi's ethnicity is mentioned with regards to something notable about her--as it should be so in the Atanasoff article as well, in some deeper section, not in the first sentence.) That the guidelines may not be followed on some other pages is not a reason that they should not be followed here. Cheers, ] (]) 18:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Begin request --> | |||
John Vincent Atanasoff (October 4, 1903 – June 15, 1995) was an American physicist and inventor of ] descent, best known for inventing the first electronic digital ]. | |||
<!-- End request --> | |||
] (]) 10:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
{{Not done}} - According to the article he was of "Bulgarian, French and Irish ancestry" - there seems no reason to emphasize one over the others - especially as was US born. ] (]) 10:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
Other than the fact he was 50% bulgarian and at best 25% irish and french each? | |||
:::::::::::::::If conciseness, relevance, and anti-boosterism are POVs, they are POVs I am happy to espouse. Cut the fat, get the to point, and don't use articles to further nationalistic agendas--that's what I'm about. Atanasoff was a physicist who built a computer and was involved in a notable commercial court battle. The Bulgarian recognition was an epiphenomenon. It's worth mentioning in the article, but it doesn't make Atanasoff's ethnicity directly relevant to his notability. I've said this six ways from Sunday and I'm still not sure which part of my logic you disagree with. ] (]) 18:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== PARENTS == | |||
::::::::::::::::I'm not that liberal in applying labels or I might have said that yours is rather a 'nationalistic anti-Bulgarian boosterism'. Relevance? What's the relevance of your bringing in Bulgarian recognition in your response to my comment? I never even mentioned Bulgarian recognition. Your bringing it in is fallacy not logic — surely Bulgarian recognition is no reason for removing Atanasoff's ancestry from the lead section. ] (]) 20:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
In the article it mentions his father was killed by soldiers and then the very next sentence says he was raised by his parents (plural). "While Ivan was still an infant, Ivan's own father was killed by Ottoman soldiers after the Bulgarian April Uprising. In 1889, Ivan Atanasov immigrated to the United States with his uncle. Atanasoff's mother, Iva Lucena Purdy, was a teacher of mathematics. | |||
:::::::::::::::::There's no anti-Bulgarianism in my observance of the MoS guidelines. I've repeatedly said I think Atanasoff's Bulgarian ties and recognition deserve deeper coverage in the article. I might even be able to assist in improving such sections. I was referring to the mobius-strip reasoning elaborated by Monshuai above in bringing up the Bulgarian recognition. According to Monshuai, Atanasoff's ethnicity is directly relevant to his notability because he was recognized by the Bulgarians for inventing the ABC. No, I say: he is not notable because the Bulgarians gave him a medal. He is notable for the thing that they gave him the medal for. If the Bulgarians never gave him a medal, this article would still exist. If he hadn't invented the ABC, it wouldn't. Any mention of Bulgarian anything in the first sentence of this article places undue weight on something incidental and can only serve to obfuscate and confuse. The new reader to this article shouldn't have to ask himself within the first sentence, "Wait, was this guy Bulgarian? Did he make something Bulgarian?"--he wasn't, and he didn't, and Bulgaria-boosting shouldn't be the focus of this article. ] (]) 21:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Atanasoff was raised by his parents in Brewster, Florida." | |||
] (]) 11:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::::::::Actually the recognition given to Atanasoff by Bulgaria helped him win the patent dispute. The Bulgarian authorities researched his achievements and created a huge array of evidence to support his claim that he was the inventor of the world's first digital computer. This compilation of ethno-politically motivated evidence was used in the patent related dispute. Furthermore, it prompted the USA to do the same much later when he recieved a medal by George Bush Sr. In essence Atanasoff's Bulgarian ancestry helped him get the recognition he deserved. This is not about whether Bulgaria per se helped him invent the computer, but about the fact that his Bulgarian ancestry helped him achieve the status and official recognition that no one, including the American courts, would give him until the Bulgarian nation decided to lend a helping hand. Remember, the People's Court of Bulgaria recognized him as the winner in the patent dispute in order for him to be eligible for the order. As Monshuai said, this is indeed defining and notable without doubt, because this article may very well not have been written about Atanasoff if the "other" party had won the patent case without the support of the Bulgarians, their government and supreme court. Rober K S, I am not a Bulgarian so I don't know what your issues are with these people, nor do I car all that much, and I'm sure you are not a bad guy. However, what I can say is that it seems that you have something against the Bulgarians and therefore trying to hide Atanasoff's ancestral background. I'm sure you realize that this could get you into trouble since your arguments do seem biased and in my opinion not nearly as solid as those of Monshuai a few paragraphs ago. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 03:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
:Sentence is actually quite clear - says the father of Ivan Atanasoff(John Atanasoff's grandfather), was killed while Ivan was an infant. John Atanasoff was raised by his parents, which included Ivan. ] (]) 15:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
::I think since neither John nor his father actually knew his grandfather, it's ultimately pointless information. At the very least this paragraph needs to be edited to follow a chronological order. Something like: | |||
::- John Atanasoff's grandfather was killed while his father, Ivan, was still an infant. Ivan then emigrated with his uncle to the US. Later in his life, he got married to Iva Lucena Purdy, teacher of mathematics of French-Irish origin. Atanasoff was born on the 4th of October 1903... | |||
::I think skipping his grandfather altogether would be better still as it provides no valuable information about his actual early life: | |||
::- John Atanasoff was born on the 4th of October 1903. His father Ivan, had emigrated from Bulgaria as a child and was electrical engineer. His mother, Iva Lucena Purdy was teacher of mathematics of French-Irish origin. | |||
::Reason for the suggested edit is that people just don't read Wiki articles like novels. People will skim over a paragraph will expect the word "father" to refer to the father of the article subject. ] (]) 10:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC) | |||
== Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2015 == | |||
::::::::::::::::::::Gug. For the last time, '''I think the article could be improved with a section about the Atanasoff-Bulgaria connection''', including his ancestry (properly explained, not just stuffed into the lead as boosterism), his recognition, and anything else that can be properly sourced. There's nothing anti-Bulgarian in keeping a lead that is in line with MoS and sticks to matters relevant to the subject's notability. Please provide a source re: the Bulgarians researching Atanasoff's case and assisting with providing evidence in ''HvSR''. It's news to me and strikes me as a theory of the utmost unlikelihood given that the Bulgarians wouldn't have had access to any evidence that wasn't available to attorneys scouring file cabinets in Ambler, Ames, Philadelphia, and Maryland. ] (]) 07:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{edit semi-protected|John Vincent Atanasoff|answered=yes}} | |||
(''unindent'')This discussion thread went too messy; I wished Bulgarian recognition were deiscussed separately as it certainly can be no sound reason for removing Atanasoff's ancestry from the lead section. | |||
<!-- Begin request --> | |||
Please change "John Vincent Atanasoff was an American physicist and inventor" to "John Vincent Atanasoff was an Bulgarian physicist and inventor" ,becouse he is Bulgarian. | |||
<!-- End request --> | |||
Robert, your insistence that it's appropriate for '''hundreds''' of American biographical articles to have ancestry mentioned in the lead section, albeit not so for Atanasoff, demonstrates nothing but your biased attitude. As that attitude has already been amply demonstrated in your comments above, there is no need to continue. Subject closed. ] (]) 08:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 13:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
:] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Born in New York. ] (]) 15:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
Likely best to change to Bulgarian-American. It is quite accepted nowadays to refer to the ethnic background. As in Italian-American, Greek-American, African-American etc. Nothing particularly wrong with adding the extra color denoting his background. | |||
:As per MoS, ancestry should be mentioned in the lead of biographical subjects only for whom it is directly relevant to the subject's notability. I assert that Atanasoff's ancestry bears no direct relevance to his notability as a computer inventor and subsequent patent trial witness. Those who assert that it does have confused Atanasoff's ''recognition'' for his accomplishments with the accomplishments themselves as a reason for his notability. Apcbg's position seems to be that it's fine to include ancestry (which, for most Americans, including Atanasoff, is not as cut-and-dry as one national heritage) in the lead of biographical articles willy-nilly. The problem with this is that it promotes "claiming" and boosterism, which degrade the presentation of encyclopedic material. ] (]) 08:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Sources modified on ] == | |||
::Please do not distort my position. I never wrote if 'it's fine to include ancestry'. I just observed the fact that ancestry '''is included''' in such leads (with less than cut-and-dry cases of three relevant nations involved too). Your idea that Atanasoff should be excepted to suit your selective boosterism sensitivity is ridiculous. I am really not wasting more time, and I trust that the present aberration would be corrected earlier or later as some reasonably neutral editors get involved; happens in Misplaced Pages all the time you know. Bye, ] (]) 08:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
:::Sorry if I misrepresented what you said. Misplaced Pages is a work in progress and it's possible that there are many other articles that do not conform to the MoS. You can post links to them to my talk page and I'll bring up the issue there, too. I've already explained why the examples you provided conform to MoS: | |||
:::*His being brought up in a Jewish household is directly relevant to ]'s notability as he wrote (lots of) Jewish music and conducted an orchestra in Israel. Atanasoff did not make anything "Bulgarian" or do anything notable in Bulgaria, so his ethnicity is not directly relevant to his notability. | |||
:::*"Austrian" is a ''nationality'' for ]; he was born there. MoS calls for an individual's nationality to be introduced in the lead of biographical articles. Obviously, for persons of complicated nationality (''e.g.'' those who obtain citizenship in three or more countries throughout their lives), trying to cram all such information in the lead sentence may not be appropriate. In the case of Arnold, "Austrian-born" does not considerably complicate the lead. ] also fits this pattern. Her nationality is no more complicated than calling her "an American-born Greek". Atanasoff was not born in Bulgaria and was never a citizen of Bulgaria, so his ''nationality'' should be appropriately identified in the lead as "American", not "Bulgarian". | |||
:::*Nancy Pelosi's ethnicity is not mentioned in the first sentence of her lead, and is only mentioned in the lead at all with reference to a notable achievement (being the first Italian-American Speaker of the House). No such similar reference can be made of Atanasoff. (He was not "the first Bulgarian-American" anything for which he was not also the first ''person''.) Just as I would oppose Nancy Pelosi's lead reading "Nancy Pelosi is the Italian-American Speaker of the House", I oppose Atanasoff's lead reading "John Vincent Atanasoff was a Bulgarian-American physicist". | |||
:::I can helpfully keep clarifying this as long as you have doubts or questions about my reasoning. I am disappointed that I have not satisfied you that I am interested in applying the rule across the board in an unbiased way. ] (]) 09:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
I have just attempted to maintain the sources on ]. I managed to add archive links to 1 {{plural:1|source|sources}}, out of the total 1 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead. | |||
::::'''Here's something I posted in the conflict of interest discussion page that showcases Robert K S's biases:''' | |||
::::Unfortunately 'YOU = (plural)' missed the point I was making. In the Nancy Pelosi article it states, "With her election as Speaker, she is the first woman, the first Californian, and the first Italian-American to hold the Speakership." Indeed, the key words are, "first Italian-American" None of you criticized this, nor have you criticized such statements in other articles either. Yet according to your above arguments regarding Atanasoff, one can conclude that Pelosi's Italian background is also not the key to her notability. The fact that she is Italian was not " the reason why did/does great work". That quote and interpretation of MoS comes directly from EdJohnston. Or as Robert K S states, where is the evidence that because of "genetic heritage they were notable for such-and-such accomplishments". Unfortunately his original statement examines Atanasoff's notability only, as he has firmly stated that it does not apply to Pelosi. As you can see I placed the words "" and "" in a direct quote from him in order to showcase his subjectivity by highlighting the fact that he should have applied his opinion and intepretation of rules to the Pelosi article as well, which he instead vehemently defended as an model article that adheres to MoS. That's where his bias is obvious and his anti-Bulgarianism apparent. From his support of the Pelosi article, one can only deduce that he feels Pelosi's genetic heritage is both the agent/catalyst and more importantly the undeniable reason for her achievements and notability. Said another way, he (and the rest of you involved in this herein discussion who support his bias) is/are saying that in fact her Italian heritage is the reason she became a notable human being. Your bias will be neutralized, and others who are indeed neutral will clearly see and at present do agree that the Atanasoff article should and WILL be treated the same way that the articles of other notable personas are treated. I will not allow you or anyone else to demonstrate hypocrisy and variable rules that are applied subjectively 'here and there'... The rules will be the same for each and every article! There are two options at this moment of time: (A) Either those other 'people' articles will be re-edited under the objective lens of a consistent editorial microscope, or (B) the Atanasoff article will have the Bulgarian-American portion included. Pelosi being the first Italian-American speaker is no more pronounced a truth than Atanasoff being the first Bulgarian-American scientist of prominence. He is also the first Bulgarian-American inventor who gained international notability and the first Bulgarian-American to receive the "United States National Medal of Technology, the highest U.S. honour conferred for achievements related to technological progress." Due to his achievements he is also many other Bulgarian-American firsts!--] (]) 22:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::: why not fix the Nancy Pelosi article instead of repeating the same mistake here? Be BOLD! ] (]) 01:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::: Re: ]'s remarks above, which are a welcome return to good faith discussion of the issue. | |||
:::::* I'm not going to say anything more about Nancy Pelosi or the others. I've outlined why I think she and the other examples fall within guidelines, so I don't plan on making changes to the other articles. If anyone believes that they are not within guidelines, then yes, as Harlock says, those issues should be taken to their respective articles' talk pages. Boosterism in one article is no justification for boosterism in another article; two wrongs do not make a right. | |||
:::::* Referring to Atanasoff as a "Bulgarian-American", in the lead or elsewhere, is a statement of limited honesty, as it neglects Atanasoff's maternal lineage. The only completely honest way to handle Atanasoff's ancestry is to say that he had a Bulgarian father. I think the article already does this well. If Atanasoff's mother's ancestors' lineages can be verifiably sourced, they can be added too. (One editor added that she was was of Irish descent, but when I asked that editor what his source was, he told me he had seen it posted to an Irish Nationalism message board .) | |||
:::::* If Atanasoff is indeed the first notable scientist of Bulgarian ancestry, and if such a statement can be attributed and verifiably sourced, I have no problem with such a statement appearing in the article. Does it belong in the lead? I'll leave that up for discussion. Does it belong in the first sentence of the lead? No. Books haven't been written about Atanasoff because he had a Bulgarian father. Books have been written about Atanasoff because he built a computer and testified at a patent trial. | |||
::::: ] (]) 02:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{tlx|cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add <code><nowiki>{{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}</nowiki></code> to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post. | |||
:::::: Another interesting note is that i can not find any biographies that calls him a 'Bulgarian-American'... the strongest statement i can find is 'Bulgaria-Descended' (from www.johnatanasoff.com). Honestly i think this may be notable enough to include in the lead off section (reading something like American of Bulgarian descent, not 'Bulgarian-American') if it is true that he is the foremost scientist (or one of the foremost scientists) of Bulgarian descent (which i would agree is the case). ] (]) 02:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made: | |||
:::::::johnatanasoff.com is a source with a boosterism agenda: "Modern Bulgarians need, among many other things, a well-grounded national confidence. The source of self-confidence is our history and the talent of people with Bulgarian blood in their veins." Is Atanasoff notable for inventing a computer and testifying in a patent trial, or for having a Bulgarian father? Is the mission of Misplaced Pages to forge unbiased, neutral-point-of-view content, or to bring self-confidence to Bulgarians? If Atanasoff's Bulgarian descent is to be mentioned, and an Irish nationalist "claims" Atanasoff through his mother, does the lead then become "John Vincent Atanasoff was an American physicist of Bulgarian and Irish descent? If Atanasoff's mother had both Irish and English ancestry, do we now list three ethnicities? The objective way to handle ethnicity, the way that prevents unfettered multiplication of nationality name-checks, the way to keep an article free of boosterism, is to follow the MoS guideline. ] (]) 05:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071025004654/http://www.chitalishte.bg/pageview.php?chitid=234 to http://www.chitalishte.bg/pageview.php?chitid=234&PHPSESSID=78dd7c01fbae5ab2f9bb4ace8d6b9292 | |||
:::::::: my point was that even a site pushing the Bulgarian/Atanasoff connection didn't refer to him as 'Bulgarian-American' so I don't see how this article could ever do so. As for the rest we'll agree to disagree, clearly the fact he had a Bulgarian ancestor is relevant in his life and i don't mind it being mentioned in the lead (as it is one of the first things you learn about him when reading about him) but i don't feel strongly enough about it to push it into the article, esp since it's mentioned later on. I'm not sure why his mother keeps on coming up... clearly she wasn't a recent immigrant to the US and her ansestory isn't notable enough for even a passing mention in any source i can find (except for how long her family had been in america).] (]) 11:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
Cheers.—]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 17:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::Re: "it is one of the first things you learn about him when reading about him"--this depends on what you mean by "one of the first things". In the book that deals most personally with Atanasoff (Mollenhoff), it shows up at the end of a foreward and then again in chapter 2. In many technical articles that give brief biographical sketches of Atanasoff, it is not mentioned at all. In boosterish presentations of Atanasoff, it is highlighted foremost, as if having Bulgarian heritage is the most siginificant thing about Atanasoff. This is the type of skewed presentation I've specifically been combating. Since the lead was scanty in comparison to the whole article size and deserved to be extended per the ], I've added a paragraph to the article which develops Atanasoff's career and recognition and also mentions Atanasoff's Bulgarian heritage. ] (]) 14:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2015 == | |||
::::::::::It has already been shown that throughout Misplaced Pages many articles exist that describe Chinese-Americans, Italians-Americans, African-Americans etc where the notability of the person is in no way more related to his/her ancestral lineage than that of John Atanasoff. Various administrators working on said articles agree across the board that these peoples' ethnicities as XYZ-Americans must be mentioned in the articles. Even so, a few people here such as Robert K S have shown a very biased attitude towards Bulgarians, and therefore believe their perspectives should only be applied to this article and not to others. Thus it is their view that it's not OK to call someone a Bulgarian-American, but it is OK to call someone else a Chinese-American or an Italian-American. This is evidence that they simply do not want to get into heated debates with editors and administrators of other nationalities, especially those whose lineages stem from larger countries. Why is that? Are they intimidated by bigger countries whose Wikipedian populations have significant human ressources and therefore more influence and ability to defend their perspectives? Does Robert K S therefore enjoy mutilating the articles of small countries such as Bulgaria simply because he feels there won't be as much opposition to his prejudiced actions? Or does he just have something against Bulgaria, its people and its national heroes? It should be of no surprise that Atanasoff is indeed a Bulgarian heroe. Kids learn about him in school, TV programs highlight his professional achievements and year after year people in the country celebrate his birthday. There are Bulgarian books written about him and even the yearly national John Atanasoff Science and Technology Award given to talanted researchers in Bulgaria. Strangely, Robert once said that there were no books written about Atanasoff in Bulgaria. This shows that he simply says things without having the least bit knowledge of the Bulgarian language and therefore minimal concept of what Bulgarian literature exists regarding its national heroe(s). Does this sound like an objective and impartial Wikipedian editor? See his above comments for more information and judge for yourself. Anyway, more intriguing is the fact that the only momument built in Atanasoff's honour also resides in Bulgaria. It has no counterpart elsewhere in the world, including the USA. The said statue was erected specifically in his ancestral country because he is notable for being the first Bulgarian-American to become a globally famous inventor and scientist. That is also why Bulgaria was the first country to recognize his invention and bestowe him with the first national award for his scientific achievements, the Order of Saints Cyril and Methodius a striking 20 years before America did so. One should also note that the only institutions and streets named after him are in Bulgaria, not in America. Indeed it is obvious that his connection to Bulgaria is much stronger than the connections other famous personas have with their ancestral lands. It should also be noted that the Bulgarian populace has largely helped make Atanasoff famous. This is not only because they supported and recognized him as the inventor of the digital computer before anyone else did so, but also because through their actions Atanasoff's name has been repeated in national media outlets. Everybody in Bulgaria knows his name and can list his achievemments, while no one in the USA , excluding a fraction of the IT oriented professionals there, has even heard of him. Robert K S may not like to admit this, but his actions thus far are extremely partial. Perhaps he needs to edit Michelle Kwan's article, remove any mention that is Chinese-American and then move on to a few thousand other ones before he comes back to this one.--] (]) 13:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
{{edit semi-protected|John Vincent Atanasoff|answered=yes}} | |||
Monshuai's arguments still boil down to "Atanasoff is beloved in Bulgaria, therefore his ethnicity is germane to his notability." The nation of Bulgaria did not assist with '']'' and played no role in that trial. I'm not going to spend a tremendous amount of energy debating this further, but will, instead, summarily revert boosterism and will continue to request the temporary full protection of this article. ] (]) 00:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Be sure to state UNAMBIGUOUSLY your suggested changes; editors who can edit the protected page need to know what to add or remove. Blank edit requests WILL be declined. --> | |||
: Please don't blindly revert edits to this article, and please don't continually ''"request the temporary full protection of this article"'' - that's just being disruptive and you'll end up blocked. It's pretty obvious from the above discussion that this is a content dispute. If you cannot come to agreement, at least go down the path of ] - ] <sup>]</sup> 00:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Begin request --> | |||
::Alison, this is not a content dispute. It is uncontested that Atanasoff was a Bulgarian American. The question here is, is this article going to adhere to guidelines designed to keep articles free of boosterism, or is it going to be a boosterism piece? ] (]) 00:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
Atanasoff was not Bulgarian! He was born in America and never lived in Bulgaria and didn't even speak Bulgarian so please correct your information. If you state where everybody's parents in America were born there would not be one American amongst you unless they where indigenous. | |||
::: You're not listening to a word I'm saying here. In short; quit using rollback inappropriately and quit repeatedly requesting full-prot at ] - ] <sup>]</sup> 00:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::Alison, I ask that you retract the above, which portrays me as having repeatedly used rollback to revert Monshuai, when in fact I did so once. Someone reading this thread in the future might get the wrong idea without checking the edit history. ] (]) 00:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::: No. It does no such thing. You misused the rollback function in a content dispute. Please don't do that again - ] <sup>]</sup> 01:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
:::::: Umm - and and count as multiple abuses of Rollback on the ] article - ] <sup>]</sup> 01:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
:I will also point out that since I posted the above comment, Robert K S has made two revert edits without responding to my premise and/or contributing to the discussion page in any way, form or fashion. The information/analysis I provided above was intended to clarify the current predicament and apparent revert war that Robert K S seems to want to start or has seemingly already started. He has also been using coercive tactics to intimidate Wikipedian editors who don't agree with him by "telling" them that he will have this article locked unless they accept his prejudices. Upon careful evaluation of the situation and after conducting an analysis of the edit dynamics over the last 2 years, it would seem that Robert K S has assumed that he owns this article. His behaviour is a clear example of the disruptive territoriality described in ]. Luckily, administrators who look into the article will be able to compare reverts made with or without contributions to this discussion page. As such it serves as primary evidence detailing the evolution of the circumstances at hand. In other words, some editors follow the rules and clarify their positions before making edits, while others such as Robert K S do not do so when the evidence is stacked against them. They simply make threats! Such behaviour clearly does not live up to Wikipedian ideals.--] (]) 00:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
:: I'm aware of that and I'll say to ''both'' of you, please don't edit war over this or you ''will'' be blocked ]. Note that the '3' part of 3RR is not a requirement for being blocked; disruptive edit-warring is. Both of you need to resolve this here - ] <sup>]</sup> 01:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
*Not true. - Actually he spoke Bulgarian and often would correct the pronounciation of his name to the Bulgarian. You can see this on one of his interviews in the very beginning. | |||
::(Disclaimer: I am neither American nor Bulgarian.) I have read all of the claims above. I have also taken about 20 minutes to check Atanasoff as he is treated on the Internet. I am keepng in mind that I am only seeing articles available in English (and could not read them in any other language, except French, even if they were available.) The ] section that is linked above appears to be quite clear: ''Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.'' Well, clear for WP; "should" and "generally" allow for there being exceptions, without establishing any guidelines for such exceptions. Nothing about what made Mr Atanasoff notable had anything to do with Bulgaria. Bulgaria did acknowledge some of his work before the same acknowledgement came in America. The country claimed him first. Bulgaria has also, according to some of the preceding statements, given him greater prominence than has occurred in the US. However, the fact that he is well (or, at least "better") known in Bulgaria has nothing to do with basis for his notability. Atanasoff was born in the US, educated there, and did his research there. There is nothing of Bulgaria in his work, and it is for his work that he is known. I can find nothing that says he spoke, read or wrote Bulgarian, or that he was even in the country except very near the end of his life. Unless I missed something, I would tend to agree that Bulgarian-American in the lede is stretching the matter, as is the use of a Cyrillic version of his name. To put this lengthy reference to his ethnicity in the lede gives it ]. ] (]) 01:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
<!-- End request --> | |||
:::I appreciate your opinion Bielle, especially so because you have presented it in a very polite manner. Still the question remains, what do you think of the thousands of other Misplaced Pages articles and their respective administrators who have allowed African-Americans, Indian-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Italian-Americans, German-Americans, etc to be presented in the leads of articles when a majority of personas therein have even less connections to their ancestral lands than John Atanasoff? Thanks again Bielle. :) --] (]) 02:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 21:24, 10 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
*] '''Done'''<!-- Template:ESp --> This was a recent change that had no consensus behind it. So I have reverted it and changed "Bulgarian-American" back to "American." Thank you. --] (]) 04:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
Stating of ancestry is not bad, but he was American since was born in America. I love to know even all grandparents of famous people and their ancestry and ethnicity. | |||
== The Atanasoff fraud == | |||
::::The usual answer to such a question is a blunt reference to ], except that its subsection on ] suggests that there is sometimes merit in checking to see how articles with similar concerns have handled the question. I am just speaking of the lede for both Atanasoff and the other examples below. Some examples of "Hyphenated Americans" given in the preceding sections are: ], born and educated in the US, is in his WP lede an "American composer, conductor"; his Russian Jewish ancestry comes up only in the following section about his early life. ]'s only identification as "Italian-American" is a qualifier in the lede to her list of firsts. (I don't know enough about American politics to be sure, but perhaps not giving her nationality is because all members of the US Congress have to be US citizens.) ] who was born in the US is identified in the lede as an "American figure skater", with a pinyan name; both her parents were from Hong Kong. ] is different in that he is identified in the lede as "Austrian American"; however, unlike all the others, he wasn't born in the US, but in Austria, and was schooled in Austria; he didn't come to the US until he was 21. So far, calling Atanasoff "American" in the lede is consistent with the examples. I don't know about "hundred" or even 'thousands" of others, nor do I have the time to check for that many. I have looked at: ] (born in the "German Empire" and came to the US as an adult) is "German American"; ] is a "German-born American" having been born in Bavaria and naturalized as an American in 1943; ] appears as "an American . . ." though his parents were Ukrainian Jews; ] is a "Chinese American mathematician" who was born in China; ] is an "American . . ." born in the US to Lebanese parents; and, last, because it is late and the list I could check is almost endless, ] an "American actress" born in the US to a Bulgarian father who was born in Greece and a Greek mother. | |||
Many people do not realize that the Atanasoff story in Bulgaria is a product of an intentional fraudulent compaign. Judge Larson did not rule anywhere that Atanasoff’s ABC is the first automatic electronic digital computer. The most he says is p. Introduction 6.6, where it written | |||
::::The precedent appears to be that the form "XXX American" is used in the lede when the subject was born somewhere other than the US. When the subject was born in the US, the form in the lede is simply "American". This isn't a personal argument for me. If the examples I have pulled at random are not representative, then that will become clear soon enough. If they are, then I would suggest that Mr Atanasoff be a plain "American" in the lede, and his Bulgarian heritage be given proper weight in the sections on his background. If we knew his mother's ethnicity, we could credit that, too. ] (]) 03:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
“In reaching these Findings, the Court has weighed the evidence relating to defendant's patent rights and business activities against the background evidence which was presented to show:” | |||
…. | |||
p.Introduction 6.6.3 | |||
“The history of design and construction of the earliest automatic electronic digital computers and, particularly, the so-called "ABC" (Atanasoff-Berry Computer) at Iowa State College, and the "ENIAC" machine (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer) of Army Ordnance at the Moore School of the University of Pennsylvania;” | |||
:::::Misplaced Pages's List of Chinese Americans defines the meaning of the term. It clearly states that Chinese Americans are "original immigrants who obtained American citizenship and '''their American descendants'''." The word "descendents" seems to be rather clarifying! A few examples below: | |||
That is all … it is different isn’t it? | |||
:::::-Michael Chang: http://en.wikipedia.org/Michael_Chang (It clearly states in the lead section that he is Taiwanese American even though he was born in the US. | |||
The whole trial is not about Atanasoff. Atanasoff is just a witness. It is about patent validity, patent fraud, antitrust violation, preferential licensing. | |||
:::::-Anna May Wong: http://en.wikipedia.org/Anna_May_Wong (Clearly states that she is a Chinese-American actress in the lead even though she is born in Los Angeles, California) | |||
The Atanasoff fraudulent compain is on national level in Bulgaria. It is initiated by Georgi Alipiev, Kiril Boyanov and Blagovest Sendov. These three individuals will be marked as AБC. Georgi Alipiev read the Russian translation of the Richard Kohler Richards (fiend of Berry from IOWA State College) book “Electronic digital systems” where he suggested that may be ABC is the first digital computer. The documents (the patents of Athur Dickinson, Joseph Desch, Robert Mumma and Samuel B. Williams all of them part of the trial) prove that he is at least wrong. Geori Alipiev shows the book to Kiril Boyanov and Kiril Boyanov shows it to Blagovest Sendov. At that time Blagovest Sendov is a high ranged professor in the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and senior administrator. Sendov himself claims that after that he invited Atanasoff to visit Bulgaria. Having in mind that at that time Sendov is under constant surveillance of the Bulgarian Secret Services with nick Object “the Scientist”, this innocent invitation is highly unlikely, not to say impossible. Probably in the archives of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party and the Bulgarian Secret Services documents regarding Atanasoff’s invitation will be found one day. | |||
:::::As you can see Bielle, you are incorrect when you say that those born in America are not called XXX-Americans. I am not sure how you could have missed this. | |||
The aim of the propaganda campaign is to propagandize “the achievements of the Bulgarian creative genius during the socialism under the wise leadership of Todor Givkov”. For this purpose Atanasoff has to be assimilated and the communists translated his name Dzohn (Ivan) Vincent Atanasov. Atanasoff does not say anything. Just a note -judge Larson gives a very interesting qualification of the Atanasoff’s character – in p. 13.25.2 of the decision judge Larson writes “Atanasoff saw the ENIAC machine as it existed on October 26, 1945, and in early 1946 extensive publicity was given to the ENAIC project, acknowledging Eckert and Mauchly as the inventors, but Atanasoff did not assert that the ENIAC machine included anything of his until two decades later.” In other words, 20 years silence. | |||
:::::The fact of the matter is that I have no problem saying that John Atanasoff is an American physicist in the first sentence as long as it is stated in the second or third sentence that he is the first Bulgarian-American to achieve prominence in the fields of science and technology in the USA. This is no different than the case of Nancy Pelosi being the first Italian-American to be a Speaker of the House. It should also be known that I suggested this to Robert K S over a year ago, in essence proposing a compromise, call it a partial departure, from both of our original positions. I will kindly extend this offer to him one more time in the hope that he will be more reasonable than he was in our past discussions. | |||
During his visit in Bulgaria Sendov presented him as “Prometheus of the electronics” and that "without ABC we should not have had computers". Atanasoff again did not object, again silence.The whole propaganda machine was full on – TV, radio, meetings, you name it. Atanasoff was everywhere. The communists started looking for his relatives (80 years after his father emigrated to US). It was farcical. On the TV appeared confused elders that seemed scared or at least concerned and said “A-a-a, Ivan there was such a person and Atanasoff was smiling politely at the back”. This scene is probably in the archives of the Bulgarian TV if the Secret Services did not destroy it. The orders of Bulgaria started flying towards Atanasoff like jubilee pins for contributions to Bulgaria. Probably, until his visit to Bulgaria, he did not know where Bulgaria is. | |||
In 1985 he visited Bulgaria for a second time and during his visit the Vice Prime Minister Georgi Jordanov, member of Politburo of the Bulgarian Communist Party says “We would like to believe, that deep in the roots of Your magnificent creation, product of an extraordinary scientific vision, there is a seed of the creative enthusiasm of the talented Bulgarian nation”. This is the end of the assimilation of Atanasoff, he does not say anything yet again, and from now on he is “one of us” and the Bulgarians invented the computer. The so called “Atanasoff story” was all over us, everywhere. Atanasoff participated in this national fraud voluntarily. For an American this means nothing, but from the perspective of an ordinary Bulgarian the behavior of the communists is treason. Atanasoff collaborated voluntarily to the Bulgarian Communist Party and the Bulgarian Secret Services for the indoctrination of the Bulgarian nation. This lasts more then 45 years and that is the reason why today a lot of Bulgarians believe Atanasoff is Bulgarian. Well he is an American and if the Americans do not want him he is an Irish for sure. The whole story of this compaign is published by Ivan Ruskov in http://liternet.bg/publish14/i_ruskov/ivan_asen.htm. Unfortunately it is in Bulgarian. The Atanasoff compaign in Bulgaria is anti-Bulgarian compaign, that make Bulgaria and its nation laughing stock for the whole world. | |||
:::::I will be listing many examples of XYZ-Anericans tomorrow. What I've given above is just the tip of the iceberg or the icing on the cake if you will. As for now it's time for me to go to bed. Good night or good day wherever you all may be.--] (]) 06:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
The technology Atanasoff invented in ABC is covered completely by Turing by mid 1943. Not many people know that Turing used regenerative tape in the Aquarius machine, part of the Colossus machine. The regenerative memory is a real contribution of Atanasoff. The contribution to the parallel processor is shared with George Stibitz. George Stibitz uses two processors in parallel to process the real and imaginary part of the complex numbers. The George Stibitz patent is from 1941 and this is the first parallel SIMD processor. The Atanasoff parallel processor is one of a kind - 30 Serial processors. Serial processors are not in use. At the beginning Atanasoff considers ABC as an early unsuccessful attempt. After the Trial he changes his opinion and it became the first computer. Calvin Mooers gives a very good assessment of the Atanasoff’s character in his postmortem memoir “The Computer Project at the Naval Ordnance Laboratory” published in IEEE Annals of the Histrory of Computing, Apr. 2001 pp.50-67 and available at IEEE Explore. | |||
::::: ''“Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.”'' If Atanasoff’s notability did not derive from his being Bulgarian American, then it did not derive from his being American either. Therefore, it is equally appropriate or not so to mention that he was an American or that he was a Bulgarian American in the lead. As it is not disputed that he was Bulgarian American, that ought to be mentioned in the article’s text I believe, if not in the lead then perhaps at the point saying that his father immigrated from Bulgaria. | |||
Most of the pro-Atanasoff literature is journalist romance where truth, manipulations and lies are well stirred. A good source to read about the Atanasoff’s partisan wars is Bernard O. Williams “Atanasoff: Forgotten Father of the Computer/The First Electronic Computer: the Atanasoff story” published in “The Annals of Iowa”, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa department od Cultural affairs” Vol.50, Num.5, 1990, pp.568-572 | |||
:::::''“... is stretching the matter, as is the use of a Cyrillic version of his name.”'' His Bulgarian family name is originally written in the Cyrillic alphabet; I cannot see what’s wrong in including this information in the article, and the usual place for that seems to be just after the first occurrence of the name, together with the IPA transcription to which it is relevant. ] (]) 06:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
In the end I would like to state I am not pro-Mauchly or anti-Atanasoff, but the lies have to stop. What Mauchly did the judge found and invalidated his claims. It is about time to put the Atanasoff's records straight. Atanasoff's machine is not the first electronic computer. The first electronic computer is the Accounting apparatus of Arthur Dickinson from IBM. The second is the calculating machine of Joseph Mumma from NCR. Atanasoff in fact tried to steal their achivements, hiding behind the decision of judge Larson and relying that not many people will read it. ] (]) 01:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | |||
::::::@] "Ethnicity" is different from "nationality". Atanasoff's nationality is American, and that is what appears to belong in the lede. As for using "Bulgarian American" in the same place it says that his father emigrated from Bulgaria, that's unnecessary duplication: one or the other, but not both, would be this editor's choice. | |||
::::::@] I think I already noted I had made a random selection of names, and fully expected there would be counter-examples. I was only surprised I did not find any in my research. I am struggling here to articulate what appear to be the differences, because there are differences, even if it isn't as simple as "born in the USA". It is something like the fact that the subjects are given two affiliations where both are significant in what has made them be notable. For the actress Wong, for example, the fact of her Chinese (and Asian) roots are significant in what she achieved, in what she was "permitted" to achieve. For the tennis-player Chang, his Taiwanese roots made him a visibly unusual figure in American, and even world, tennis circuits, so that his ethnicity was well recognized during his career. This would also be true of all, or almost all, African Americans. And Nancy Pelosi's political campaigns, as I recall, had a focus on her Italian heritage. What is there about having had a Bulgarian father that had any visible or acknowledged or known or even suspected effect on Athanasoff's notability? | |||
::::::I suspect there are enough inconsistencies in WP that we'll soon have a list too long to read, and have proven nothing that we have not already said. So, when looking for precedents has given us no clear answer, the only WP guidance remains ''“Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.”'' As for saying that Athanasoff "is the first Bulgarian-American to achieve prominence in the fields of science and technology in the USA", we would have to have a reliable source saying just that before we could include it. ] (]) 07:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
:::::::@], you believe that for people such as Anna May Wong ethnicity is notable because of "what she was permitted to achieve." In essence, you are suggesting that race plays a part here. Your premise is that those people of non-white racial backgrounds can be called XXX-Americans, while those who look similar to the majority do not have this right. I hope you see the irony in your statements. After all, you are valuing the notability of people's ethnic affiliations based on how others, and yourself, subjectively judge/view their physical appearance. You further highlight your perspective by saying that Michael Chang was a Taiwanese American because he was a "visibly unusual figure". Again, your message is that those who look different should be treated differently. Let me repeat this because I find it unbelievable: The more white and thus the less "visibly unusual" an American person looks, the less they can be called an XXX-American because that, in your words, makes their ethnicity less important and less notable. Your conclusion is that whiter looking people are more American, and thus less XXX-American. Do you see the problem there? I realize it's not your intention, but that perspective is about as subjective and non-scientific as it gets. Not only is it a prejudiced way of "seeing" things, it is also confusing the concept of an ethnic background with that of a so-called racial background. Race and ethnicity are not the same thing. Likewise, ethnic affiliations and the notability of those affiliations is not directly tied to physical appearance.--] (]) 17:29, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
::::::::] I would ask that you reconsider carefully what claims you have made above about what I believe. Most of what you have written needs to be deleted and the rest moderated. It is full of outrageous commentary and vile accusations that are only tangentially related to what I have presented. You have me taking some racist position that I didn't say and do not espouse. I was telling you what I found on WP, not what I believed or what I thought "ought to be" in any social sense. Indeed, it is not only "not my intention", it is not even in the same universe of possible intentions. It does appear to be true that those who are visibly identifiable as belonging to a specific ethnic group, even when born in the USA, appear to be more likely to have a description of "XXX American". In many cases, what these people have achieved, given the racial tensions in America in the 19th and 20th centuries is all the more significant because of what they had to overcome to get there. That is in keeping with the directive that ethnicity is included when it is a factor in the subject's notability. Nowhere do I claim that it is right or just that ethnicity should be such a factor; nowhere. I am observing what I have read in article after article. It is your conclusion (not mine) that this means that "whiter looking people are more American", and it is complete nonsense, unscientific and subjective. I am not confusing either race or nationality with ethnicity. You have completely mis-stated my comments and, in doing so, have furthered no discussion with respect to the concern at hand. If Atanasoff's ethnic heritage is in some acknowledged way pertinent to his scientific achievements, then his heritage belongs in the lede. Otherwise, to the extent that we have reliable sources to confirm his heritage, it belongs in the section(s) on his background. ] (]) 22:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
I have just modified 9 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
:::::::::], your tone sounds very threatening, whereas I have been rather polite and I specifically stated that I do not believe critical points of your statement were intentional. Look it up! Further still, if you believe that I have misrepresented your statement then you need not worry. After all everyone can read it and judge for themselves. On top of that, it is most certainly not your right to censor anyone whose opinion you do not agree with. That's unacceptable, especially since it seems to me that you are using your emotional reaction as both an excuse and incentive to disregard the flaws in your own argument. You see, as a Wikipedian I have a responsibility to analyze what you have written and deduce what I feel are your intentional, or in this case unintentional, assertions. You clearly talk about observable physical differences and tie them into your concept of notability. Did you really expect that I wouldn't notice? Simply put I have used your statement to show that what you have written is in fact ironic and not very well articulated. Upon reflection, did you not say that you were having trouble articulating the differences between someone such as a Bulgarian-American and Chinese-American who are both born in the USA? Did you not say that Michael Chang was a "visibly unusual figure"? You are frustrated simply because you are pulling at breakable strings when sculpting your argumentative basis, which is more a consequence of using double standards to attempt to prove your points and not because someone such as myself has the ability to critique what you have written in the first place. By telling me that my comments should be erased you are in effect suggesting that Misplaced Pages should not have free speech, and/or contributors with advanced reading, comprehension and debating skills lest someone have the ability to point out where you are mistaken. Well guess what Bielle, I will not stand for that. So here comes another critique courtesy of myself... Your bullying tone and your conviction that censorship is an appropriate tool in Misplaced Pages, shows me that you (A) do not consider the perspectives of others to be equally valid or deserving of public recognition, and (B) that you were not objective from the onset of entering this debate. Nor have you satisfactorily justified the use of double standards for one ethnic group relative to another. Why should Bulgarian-Americans, Chinese-Americans, African-Americans etc be treated differently? Is that not a form of prejudice and/or discrimination in itself? I have composed a lengthy rebuttal disproving your other points as well, which shall be posted later in the discussion as a positive mechanism to evolve it and make it maximally crystallizing. Finally, should you feel the urge to threaten and attempt to intimidate me again, first take a deep breath and then take note of the fact that I do not accuse you of intentional partiality. However I do hold you responsible for not identifying, correcting or even admitting it. We are all guilty of making mistakes. That is without question! It is however up to us to not be guilty of making them a second, third or fourth time. My advice, please be cultured and kind enough to keep this a civil discussion and do be more vigilant when composing your next reply.--] (]) 00:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
*Added archive https://johnatanasoff.weebly.com/ | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080611140415/http://yambol.government.bg/physics/atanasov.htm to http://yambol.government.bg/physics/atanasov.htm | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080110185242/http://www.nvu.bg/faculty/computing/john.html to http://www.nvu.bg/faculty/computing/john.html | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610143958/http://dobredoshli.net/news.php?lang=2&cat=0&itm=369 to http://dobredoshli.net/news.php?lang=2&cat=0&itm=369 | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080104053038/http://electronica-stz.hit.bg/bul/photos.html to http://electronica-stz.hit.bg/bul/photos.html | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216171546/http://www.jaschool.org/priem.html to http://www.jaschool.org/priem.html | |||
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://pgii.hit.bg/ | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024001827/http://rdesc.uni-plovdiv.bg/JAClub/JAClub.htm to http://rdesc.uni-plovdiv.bg/JAClub/JAClub.htm | |||
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/sidebar_761599223/Dr_Atanasoff%5C%27s_Computer.html | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011170707/http://users.augustana.edu/arwalters/jva/ to http://users.augustana.edu/arwalters/jva/ | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
==Honors and distinctions== | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
Hate to say it ] but your edition to that section is not appreciated. | |||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 03:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC) | |||
The 1970 Sts. Cyril and Methodius Order was originally appearing in the opening paragraph of that section, until removed by someone last September. | |||
== External links modified == | |||
I restored it as it rightly belongs there, being an early highest national scientific award Atanasoff got, preceding in particular the other highest national scientific award of Atanasoff's, the 1990 National Medal of Technology. | |||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
There is nothing special about the 1981 IEEE Computer Pioneer Medal, or Atanasoff Hall, or 'Project Vincent' in comparison with the other awards, institutions, and features named for Atanasoff, hence the right chronological place for the Medal, the Hall, and the Project is among the other honors listed below. | |||
I have just modified 4 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
There is and was no 'Order of Bulgaria' by the way. | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080613201326/http://web.cs.iastate.edu/news/news.jsp?id=51 to http://web.cs.iastate.edu/news/news.jsp?id=51 | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610202612/http://spge-bg.com/index2.php?lang=en to http://spge-bg.com/index2.php?lang=en | |||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610153004/http://mall.neogen.bg/katalog/?cat_nl_p=show_company&idcompany=15930&clid=4 to http://mall.neogen.bg/katalog/?cat_nl_p=show_company&idcompany=15930&clid=4 | |||
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/sidebar_761599223/Dr_Atanasoff's_Computer.html | |||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. | |||
As I mentioned earlier — in connection with your biased removal of Atanasoff's ancestry from the lead — I am not going into reversals, so I would expect you to revert your inappropriate (to put it mildly) edit that has degraded the Honors section text. ] (]) 10:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} | |||
:Which edit of mine are you referring to? ] (]) 10:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 03:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC) | |||
::, the 'Honors and distinctions' section. ] (]) 11:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Computer was first invented and built by Vannevar Bush == | |||
:::I see what you're saying. Something weird happened when I made that edit. It reverted some of my changes, too, not just yours. I'll try to repair the damage, but feel free to make further corrections. PS--always remember to ]! ] (]) 11:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Just was partly analogous due to lack in 1930 of electronic components | |||
::::Okay, fixed. Apologies for the mix-up. It wasn't intentional. ] (]) 11:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
== Bulgarian origin == | |||
:::::Thanks for fixing it. I always do assume good faith — both in Misplaced Pages and out of it. Unless/until the opposite is confirmed, that is; to continue assuming good faith afterwards would be less than reasonable I reckon. ] (]) 12:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
According to Atanasov, Bulgarian was never spoken in their home and his family did not maintain close ties with Bulgarian emigrants. He described his mother as a typical American of mixed Irish-French descent. Their home language was English. There is no evidence that he felt Bulgarian, or that he spoke fluently Bulgarian. It is clear that he was an American of mixed ancestry, not simply Bulgarian. Stop pushing this incorrect claim in this article. Thanks. ] (]) 07:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 02:39, 29 September 2024
This level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archives |
|
Name
Atansoff's last name derives from the Bulgarian language, in it and in other Slavic langs. the name ends in "ov" for male and in "ova" for female. To the emigrants to western Europe and Americas the ending changes from "v" to "ff". It should be stated from where his name derives, that's all for I took it in Bulgarian, not beacause he speaks Bulgarian. Pensionero (talk) 17:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for discussing this rather than reverting. I don't see a need to mention the history of the name in the lead - any reader that reads the fact that his father was Bulgarian would be able to deduce that the name is of Bulgarian, giving the Bulgarian spelling adds no information, but rather gives the false impression that he also goes by a Bulgarian version of his name.·Maunus·ƛ· 17:24, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- Ditto Maunus, spot on. Robert K S (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Manipulative revertings
Stop it, do not delete sourced information, I am tired to revert your manipulations so many times. Atansoff's ancestry is half Bulgarian and you can't change this. It was unless to protect the page, that's not needed beacause of some editors remove ifno supported by sources, simply a kind of vandalism. Pensionero (talk) 11:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- You need to stop your Bulgarian boosterism and in stead read our policies of WP:VANDAL so you know what vandalism is and isn't, WP:CONSENSUS so you know how we decide what goes into an article and what doesn't and WP:EDITWAR so you know what happenes when editors keep reinserting the same information when confronted with disagreement.·Maunus·ƛ· 14:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Your accusations to me for Bulgarian boosterism are not supported by any evidence. The contestable edit was John Atanasoff's name in Bulgarian, we agreed to remove it, but is not understandable why the next version was reverted-isn't John Atanasoff of half Bulgarian ancestry(not ethnicity and not nationality)- true fact and even supported by a source, for what this version was reverted with no explanation, followed by deffending of the page, isn't we removed the name written in Bulgarian? Pensionero 17:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- The evidence is your edit history. Half of which consists of editwarring over the inclusion of topics regarding Bulgarian nationalism in tangentially rleated articles. The article clearly states that his father was born in Bulgaria. that is sufficient information regarding his ties to Bulgaria.·Maunus·ƛ· 17:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Maunus has right. This page is periodically susceptible to revision by Bulgarian boosters. These editors are here principally to play up the fact that Atanasoff had a Bulgarian father, and not to contribute substantively to the article. You, Pensionero, are a Bulgarian booster, proudly and openly. Why can I say this? It's not an attack on your character or even an opinion; it is a fact deducible from your record. Among the user boxes on your user page: "This user is a member of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church." "This user is from the Balkans." "This user comes from Bulgaria." "This user is of Bulgarian ancestry." "This user is of Slavic ancestry." "This user supports Bulgaria." "This user is a fan of Bulgarian football." "This user supports CSKA Sofia." "This user participates in WikiProject Bulgaria." "It is approximately 6:50 PM where this user lives. (Bulgaria)." (Also, and not entirely irrelevant to the discussion here: "This user is a teenager.") Your talk page appears to be riddled with 3RR warnings. Your contribution history appears to be little else but Bulgarian-related pages. Have you ever studied Atanasoff's life or work, or his testimony in Honeywell v. Sperry Rand, or his patents, or anything about him? Collected materials in this area? Or are you merely enamored with your discovery that Bulgaria has "claimed" Atanasoff as a native son? Are you qualified to contribute to this page in any way beyond playing up the already-adequately-covered fact of Dr. Atanasoff's ancestry? Robert K S (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
What do you want to say with my userboxes, I haven't "This user is Bulgarian booster" or "This user is Bulgarian, proud and open" instead this I have "This user is Bulgarian", I just often edit and correct articles related to Bulgaria, such as I changed "John Atanasoff was an American physicist" to "John Atanasoff was a physicist", beacause he is not completely clean and full American, if you have sources where is saying that Dr. Atanasoff was completely and full American, show it, if not I will delete this unsourced info. The page is for John Atansoff, a person, not only for the "Atansoff's Berry computer" or "Honeywell v. Sperry Rand", except "testimony in Honeywell v. Sperry Rand, or patents of Atanasoff" there are other things for which can be contributed in the page including Dr. Atansoff's ancestry. Pensionero 12:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
4-year edit war
Ok, this is ridiculous. Settle this on talk, because nobody gets to edit the page again until you can actually agree on something. Use the {{editprotected}} template for anything that actually gets consensus. WP:Requests for comment also work well. Have fun. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 02:39, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I am glad someone stepped in and put this edit war on pause.
American physicist
To start off with, I think that if he was born in the US and died in the US, it's perfectly appropriate to call him an "American physicist". Is this consensus to restore this wording?--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yes. There really isn't a "content dispute" here; the factuality of the content is not in genuine dispute. The edits to this page to emphasize the paternal ethnicity of the subject are teenage vandalism. Robert K S (talk) 03:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The person is not of full American ancestry and has equal other, it is clearly saying in the page born-New York, died-somewhere in the USA, etc.. and noone removes that One could be French in Australia and African in Albania, no matter in which country he lives. Good option and not any denial of the American nationality and citizenship is just "was physicist", in the infobox is written that Atanasoff has only American citizenship. Pensionero (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- There is no such thing as "Full american ancestry" also we don't classify people by ancestry unless they do so themselves. He has never had other citizenships than American, so there is no basis for describing him as "Bulgarian-American". Every American, except Native Americans have ancestry outside of America. Nothing suggests here that he has more roots in Bulgaria than e.g. President Obama has in Kenya, and he certainly isn't a "Kenyan-American President of the United States". ·Maunus·ƛ· 16:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Nobody is adding John Attanasoff was Bulgarian-American, I removed the vaguely "was an American" from the intro beacause it is not known for what it refers- for the nationality, citizenship, ancestry/ethnicity?, below in the article all of them are clarified, is not seem to be a problem nobody is arguing for Atanasoff's citizenship and nationality. Pensionero (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
- Were you aware that the guideline for the lead of biographical articles requires nationality be listed in the opening sentence? Robert K S (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
In the guideline is saying requiring of (location, nationality, or ethnicity). Then why not "John Atansoff was an American physicist and inventor of half Bulgarian descent"? Pensionero (talk) 16:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
- Why didn't you actually read the guideline first... Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (biographies)#Opening paragraph. It's right there above the fold. "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". Atanasoff's scientific work is not related to the ethnicity of his father in the least. Per the guidelines, he was an American physicist and inventor. Mentioning that he was the son of a Bulgarian emigrant somewhere in the intro is already enough. — Toдor Boжinov — 16:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
Per the apparent guideline-based consensus above, please change the first line to read "was an American physicist and inventor". Thanks.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
- Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't know how you decided that "ethnicity is not relevant to the subject's notability", however. The Bulgarian father stating in the article is enough, but American you wrote should redirects to United States like that "American", not to like that "American", beacause if not redirects to the American country, why not to write his other half ethnos in the first sentence? Pensionero (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
- This is a bit embarrassing for me to explain, but "American" is not an ethnos, so it makes no difference where the blue link redirects. Is Atanasoff notable because he is half-Bulgarian? No, he is notable because he invented the first automatic electronic digital computer. His notability does not derive from him partially belonging to an ethnicity. I know you are young, but I strongly advise you to get yourself familiar with the guidelines and read up before engaging in an argument because such ridiculous disputes should not be happening at all... — Toдor Boжinov — 18:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Ethnicity is relevant to the subject's notability. When was ethnicity not relevant? If the article said he was Bulgarian it would fast be changed to Bulgarian- American. It doesn't matter at all if it is important or relevant to the subject. It is a fact! Facts are not a subject of opinion they should be stated as they are. Therefore editing the text is obligatory.
-Guest — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.49.69 (talk) 13:55, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Maybe he is also ethnic Jewish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.246.219.87 (talk) 17:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Improving the Article
- A picture could help to do this. Jccort (talk) 21:47, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
The "return" section of the Altanosoff article requires numerous edits to be put into English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.126.182.196 (talk) 03:19, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Small Typo
In the "Early life and education" section, Bulgarian is spelled "Bugarian" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.186.93.75 (talk) 14:58, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Superscripted ordinals
{{editprotect}} as these are not in conformity with WP:MOSNUM, kindly replace:
- The John Atanasoff Bulgarian national tournament in informatics and information technologies, held in the city of ] annually since 2001<ref> Darik News website (in Bulgarian)</ref>
and
- Prof. John Atanasoff 4<sup>th</sup> Primary School, ]<ref> Picture</ref>
with
- The John Atanasoff Bulgarian national tournament in informatics and information technologies, held in the city of ] annually since 2001<ref> Darik News website (in Bulgarian)</ref>
and
- Prof. John Atanasoff 4th Primary School, ]<ref> Picture</ref>
Thanks, --Ohconfucius 07:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Image
Please upload John Vincent Atanasoff's image for this article . -- Raghith 06:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
dab needed for school name
Should now be Mulberry High School (Mulberry, Florida). PamD 09:24, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Edit request on 8 March 2012
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change link from Mulberry High School (which now leads to a disambiguation page) to ]. Certes (talk) 00:06, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Ancestry
Okay. So after this HUGE debate, which included literary references...why exactly has all trace of Atanasoff's Irish (&English/French?) heritage been removed from the article...? BigSteve (talk) 09:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Maybe he is also ethnic Jewish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.246.192.54 (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Historical accuracy
It needs to be noted that public consciousness in Bulgaria will have you believe that John Atanasoff is fully Bulgarian, and that "he invented the computer". As if people before him had never considered using anything other than an abacus or pencil-and-paper to do their calculations... There is even talk by the ex-Foreign Minister (a man who ought to know better) of naming Sofia Airport in his honour, in order "to remind people that it was Bulgarians who invented this computer that I have in my pocket " (link here) This WP article doesn't do much to dispel these two myths, and I feel that Atanasoff's Irish ancestry may even have been removed by propagators of that myth. Perhaps this whole twisting of history in Bulgaria, along with the relevant quotes etc. of course, could be specifically mentioned in the article? BigSteve (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Likely both Bulgaria and Ireland have equal reason to claim him as such. He did speak Bulgarian fluently though not gaelic and would often correct the pronounciation of his name to the Bulgarian pronounciation.
Cyclone Computer
Nothing is mentioned about his work with Clifford Berry on the Cyclone computer in 1959. I suggest adding something in the Post War section on it. See CYCLONE.Ikerus (talk) 04:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Nobel Prize nominations
I had added a statement about how Atanasoff had repeatedly been nominated to receive the Nobel Prize, and included a YouTube source where his son (off camera) states this to a panel during an author interview where that author's book about Atanasoff is being discussed. My contribution got reverted under the rationale that I was in violation of Misplaced Pages's YouTube policy, WP:NOYT. Clearly this editor has a gross misunderstanding of what that policy is saying. Just because the policy is abbr as "NOYT", it does not mean that YouTube should never be used as a reference. YouTube often contains many excellent sources which are great, particularly when they are authentic primary sources and solid secondary sources. In this particular case, the video I've cited is a primary source (the son) talking to a secondary source (the biographer).
YouTube has a wealth of such reliable references. The purpose of NOYT is to prevent spurious videos of totally unreliable origin from being cited as fact. I am reverting the revert, and maybe others here would like to help explain to Jeremy112233 that NOYT does not mean "don't every cite a YouTube video". =Dustin Dewynne (talk) 18:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- The son is not a primary source. At best he is hearsay. Is the evidence in the biography? If yes, then use that reference. If no, then it didn't meet the test for the biographer and YouTube is not acceptable as a source without any other back-up. If the statement is true, there will be other evidence. I can't find any. Can you? Bielle (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- My contribution to the article says that his son has stated that Atanasoff was nominated several times for the Nobel Prize. This is a solid unquestioned fact, as anyone who watches the video link can see for themselves. Notice how I put his statement in quotes, and that it is well sourced. And clearly the son is a primary source. He is an eyewitness. He was there. He spoke with his father. You are mixing historiography terminology with courtroom terminology. Misplaced Pages does not apply courtroom standards for evidence, otherwise 99% of Misplaced Pages would be discarded (my estimate).
- ...and notice that the fact that I included into the article is perfectly acceptable for a biographer. I see absolutely no problem with an author publishing in a person's biography, "I spoke with his son and his son told me that he had been nominated for a Nobel Prize three or four times." If you had taken the time to watch the video, you would know that this info is not in her biography because her response to the son was, "that's not something I knew". Also notice that her response was not, "Do you have any evidence to back that up?" She appears to be well aware that she is speaking to an eyewitness primary source.
- The fact of his son informing us that Atanasoff had been nominated for the Nobel needs to be re-added to this article as highly salient. When further evidence comes to light, then we can strengthen that info by removing the quotes, etc. =Dustin Dewynne (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- Bielle is right. Besides the fact that Nobel Prize nominations are private and not verifiable. You really have to stop using Youtube before you are reported to the administration.Jeremy112233 (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- The fact of his son informing us that Atanasoff had been nominated for the Nobel needs to be re-added to this article as highly salient. When further evidence comes to light, then we can strengthen that info by removing the quotes, etc. =Dustin Dewynne (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- The fact that I had posted to this article is totally verifiable. And notice that the fact is not that Atanasoff was nominated for the Nobel Prize. The fact is that his son has stated that he was. So while you see Nobel Prize nominations to be unverifiable, this one particular fact is verifiable. As I stated in my previous post, anyone can verify it for themselves.
- And I would totally welcome admin oversight on all of your reverts to my contributions, as I expect every single admin to understand NOYT in the same manner that I understand it. =Dustin Dewynne (talk) 03:55, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- I understand the distinction you are making. There would still need to be some discussion in some other reliable source about this claim, or it has no significance. No one else, ever, including Atanasoff himself, and his biographer(s), has noted it. Any child of a famous parent can make any claim -and this one may even be true; we will know in 50 years after the relevant period. Has anyone else picked up on this claim? You would need further evidence that some one thinks his claim is worthy of note. Bielle (talk) 04:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- I just googled and got over 500 hits, so this is clear evidence that being nominated for a Nobel Prize is something that Misplaced Pages editors choose to cite. You are stating that Atanasoff himself never noted it, even after you've been informed that his son has stated that this had happened repeatedly. It would appear that your position here is that the son is fabricating this info. I would say that the onus is on you to provide evidence that the son is mistaken. I hope everyone would be open to recognizing that the son had much more intimate access to his father than most biographers did. =Dustin Dewynne (talk) 04:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- No that is not evidence, see WP:GOOGLEHITS. You need something verifiable, otherwise you are simply continuing to vandalize Misplaced Pages and may be blocked for this. Jeremy112233 (talk) 15:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- Also see Misplaced Pages:Google searches and numbers. Jeremy112233 (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- Lastly, I've done my own search for an RS that proves what you are trying to add and can find none. This leads me to be very suspicious of the claim the son is making of the father in terms of the veracity of its truth. If there is no RS, we shouldn't be adding it. Jeremy112233 (talk) 15:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
John Atanasov has also order "People's Republic of Bulgaria", which is given in 1985, for contribution to the development of Bulgarian technology. I think that this also must be added in article --195.24.37.106 (talk) 16:46, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Actually it was added. Sorry!--195.24.37.106 (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2014
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
John Vincent Atanasoff (October 4, 1903 – June 15, 1995) was an American physicist and inventor of Bulgarian descent, best known for inventing the first electronic digital computer. Titaka (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Not done - According to the article he was of "Bulgarian, French and Irish ancestry" - there seems no reason to emphasize one over the others - especially as was US born. Arjayay (talk) 10:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Other than the fact he was 50% bulgarian and at best 25% irish and french each?
PARENTS
In the article it mentions his father was killed by soldiers and then the very next sentence says he was raised by his parents (plural). "While Ivan was still an infant, Ivan's own father was killed by Ottoman soldiers after the Bulgarian April Uprising. In 1889, Ivan Atanasov immigrated to the United States with his uncle. Atanasoff's mother, Iva Lucena Purdy, was a teacher of mathematics. Atanasoff was raised by his parents in Brewster, Florida."
Bratwiz (talk) 11:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Sentence is actually quite clear - says the father of Ivan Atanasoff(John Atanasoff's grandfather), was killed while Ivan was an infant. John Atanasoff was raised by his parents, which included Ivan. Cannolis (talk) 15:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think since neither John nor his father actually knew his grandfather, it's ultimately pointless information. At the very least this paragraph needs to be edited to follow a chronological order. Something like:
- - John Atanasoff's grandfather was killed while his father, Ivan, was still an infant. Ivan then emigrated with his uncle to the US. Later in his life, he got married to Iva Lucena Purdy, teacher of mathematics of French-Irish origin. Atanasoff was born on the 4th of October 1903...
- I think skipping his grandfather altogether would be better still as it provides no valuable information about his actual early life:
- - John Atanasoff was born on the 4th of October 1903. His father Ivan, had emigrated from Bulgaria as a child and was electrical engineer. His mother, Iva Lucena Purdy was teacher of mathematics of French-Irish origin.
- Reason for the suggested edit is that people just don't read Wiki articles like novels. People will skim over a paragraph will expect the word "father" to refer to the father of the article subject. B1-66ER (talk) 10:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2015
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "John Vincent Atanasoff was an American physicist and inventor" to "John Vincent Atanasoff was an Bulgarian physicist and inventor" ,becouse he is Bulgarian.
FortonBG (talk) 13:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
- Not done: Born in New York. Cannolis (talk) 15:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Likely best to change to Bulgarian-American. It is quite accepted nowadays to refer to the ethnic background. As in Italian-American, Greek-American, African-American etc. Nothing particularly wrong with adding the extra color denoting his background.
Sources modified on John Vincent Atanasoff
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just attempted to maintain the sources on John Vincent Atanasoff. I managed to add archive links to 1 source, out of the total 1 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.
Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}}
to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.
Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071025004654/http://www.chitalishte.bg/pageview.php?chitid=234 to http://www.chitalishte.bg/pageview.php?chitid=234&PHPSESSID=78dd7c01fbae5ab2f9bb4ace8d6b9292
Cheers.—Talk to my owner:Online 17:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2015
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Atanasoff was not Bulgarian! He was born in America and never lived in Bulgaria and didn't even speak Bulgarian so please correct your information. If you state where everybody's parents in America were born there would not be one American amongst you unless they where indigenous.
- Not true. - Actually he spoke Bulgarian and often would correct the pronounciation of his name to the Bulgarian. You can see this on one of his interviews in the very beginning.
Chapmansbg (talk) 21:24, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- Done This was a recent change that had no consensus behind it. So I have reverted it and changed "Bulgarian-American" back to "American." Thank you. --Stabila711 (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Stating of ancestry is not bad, but he was American since was born in America. I love to know even all grandparents of famous people and their ancestry and ethnicity.
The Atanasoff fraud
Many people do not realize that the Atanasoff story in Bulgaria is a product of an intentional fraudulent compaign. Judge Larson did not rule anywhere that Atanasoff’s ABC is the first automatic electronic digital computer. The most he says is p. Introduction 6.6, where it written “In reaching these Findings, the Court has weighed the evidence relating to defendant's patent rights and business activities against the background evidence which was presented to show:” …. p.Introduction 6.6.3
“The history of design and construction of the earliest automatic electronic digital computers and, particularly, the so-called "ABC" (Atanasoff-Berry Computer) at Iowa State College, and the "ENIAC" machine (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer) of Army Ordnance at the Moore School of the University of Pennsylvania;”
That is all … it is different isn’t it?
The whole trial is not about Atanasoff. Atanasoff is just a witness. It is about patent validity, patent fraud, antitrust violation, preferential licensing.
The Atanasoff fraudulent compain is on national level in Bulgaria. It is initiated by Georgi Alipiev, Kiril Boyanov and Blagovest Sendov. These three individuals will be marked as AБC. Georgi Alipiev read the Russian translation of the Richard Kohler Richards (fiend of Berry from IOWA State College) book “Electronic digital systems” where he suggested that may be ABC is the first digital computer. The documents (the patents of Athur Dickinson, Joseph Desch, Robert Mumma and Samuel B. Williams all of them part of the trial) prove that he is at least wrong. Geori Alipiev shows the book to Kiril Boyanov and Kiril Boyanov shows it to Blagovest Sendov. At that time Blagovest Sendov is a high ranged professor in the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and senior administrator. Sendov himself claims that after that he invited Atanasoff to visit Bulgaria. Having in mind that at that time Sendov is under constant surveillance of the Bulgarian Secret Services with nick Object “the Scientist”, this innocent invitation is highly unlikely, not to say impossible. Probably in the archives of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party and the Bulgarian Secret Services documents regarding Atanasoff’s invitation will be found one day.
The aim of the propaganda campaign is to propagandize “the achievements of the Bulgarian creative genius during the socialism under the wise leadership of Todor Givkov”. For this purpose Atanasoff has to be assimilated and the communists translated his name Dzohn (Ivan) Vincent Atanasov. Atanasoff does not say anything. Just a note -judge Larson gives a very interesting qualification of the Atanasoff’s character – in p. 13.25.2 of the decision judge Larson writes “Atanasoff saw the ENIAC machine as it existed on October 26, 1945, and in early 1946 extensive publicity was given to the ENAIC project, acknowledging Eckert and Mauchly as the inventors, but Atanasoff did not assert that the ENIAC machine included anything of his until two decades later.” In other words, 20 years silence. During his visit in Bulgaria Sendov presented him as “Prometheus of the electronics” and that "without ABC we should not have had computers". Atanasoff again did not object, again silence.The whole propaganda machine was full on – TV, radio, meetings, you name it. Atanasoff was everywhere. The communists started looking for his relatives (80 years after his father emigrated to US). It was farcical. On the TV appeared confused elders that seemed scared or at least concerned and said “A-a-a, Ivan there was such a person and Atanasoff was smiling politely at the back”. This scene is probably in the archives of the Bulgarian TV if the Secret Services did not destroy it. The orders of Bulgaria started flying towards Atanasoff like jubilee pins for contributions to Bulgaria. Probably, until his visit to Bulgaria, he did not know where Bulgaria is.
In 1985 he visited Bulgaria for a second time and during his visit the Vice Prime Minister Georgi Jordanov, member of Politburo of the Bulgarian Communist Party says “We would like to believe, that deep in the roots of Your magnificent creation, product of an extraordinary scientific vision, there is a seed of the creative enthusiasm of the talented Bulgarian nation”. This is the end of the assimilation of Atanasoff, he does not say anything yet again, and from now on he is “one of us” and the Bulgarians invented the computer. The so called “Atanasoff story” was all over us, everywhere. Atanasoff participated in this national fraud voluntarily. For an American this means nothing, but from the perspective of an ordinary Bulgarian the behavior of the communists is treason. Atanasoff collaborated voluntarily to the Bulgarian Communist Party and the Bulgarian Secret Services for the indoctrination of the Bulgarian nation. This lasts more then 45 years and that is the reason why today a lot of Bulgarians believe Atanasoff is Bulgarian. Well he is an American and if the Americans do not want him he is an Irish for sure. The whole story of this compaign is published by Ivan Ruskov in http://liternet.bg/publish14/i_ruskov/ivan_asen.htm. Unfortunately it is in Bulgarian. The Atanasoff compaign in Bulgaria is anti-Bulgarian compaign, that make Bulgaria and its nation laughing stock for the whole world.
The technology Atanasoff invented in ABC is covered completely by Turing by mid 1943. Not many people know that Turing used regenerative tape in the Aquarius machine, part of the Colossus machine. The regenerative memory is a real contribution of Atanasoff. The contribution to the parallel processor is shared with George Stibitz. George Stibitz uses two processors in parallel to process the real and imaginary part of the complex numbers. The George Stibitz patent is from 1941 and this is the first parallel SIMD processor. The Atanasoff parallel processor is one of a kind - 30 Serial processors. Serial processors are not in use. At the beginning Atanasoff considers ABC as an early unsuccessful attempt. After the Trial he changes his opinion and it became the first computer. Calvin Mooers gives a very good assessment of the Atanasoff’s character in his postmortem memoir “The Computer Project at the Naval Ordnance Laboratory” published in IEEE Annals of the Histrory of Computing, Apr. 2001 pp.50-67 and available at IEEE Explore.
Most of the pro-Atanasoff literature is journalist romance where truth, manipulations and lies are well stirred. A good source to read about the Atanasoff’s partisan wars is Bernard O. Williams “Atanasoff: Forgotten Father of the Computer/The First Electronic Computer: the Atanasoff story” published in “The Annals of Iowa”, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa department od Cultural affairs” Vol.50, Num.5, 1990, pp.568-572 In the end I would like to state I am not pro-Mauchly or anti-Atanasoff, but the lies have to stop. What Mauchly did the judge found and invalidated his claims. It is about time to put the Atanasoff's records straight. Atanasoff's machine is not the first electronic computer. The first electronic computer is the Accounting apparatus of Arthur Dickinson from IBM. The second is the calculating machine of Joseph Mumma from NCR. Atanasoff in fact tried to steal their achivements, hiding behind the decision of judge Larson and relying that not many people will read it. Vebar (talk) 01:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on John Vincent Atanasoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://johnatanasoff.weebly.com/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080611140415/http://yambol.government.bg/physics/atanasov.htm to http://yambol.government.bg/physics/atanasov.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080110185242/http://www.nvu.bg/faculty/computing/john.html to http://www.nvu.bg/faculty/computing/john.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610143958/http://dobredoshli.net/news.php?lang=2&cat=0&itm=369 to http://dobredoshli.net/news.php?lang=2&cat=0&itm=369
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080104053038/http://electronica-stz.hit.bg/bul/photos.html to http://electronica-stz.hit.bg/bul/photos.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080216171546/http://www.jaschool.org/priem.html to http://www.jaschool.org/priem.html
- Added
{{dead link}}
tag to http://pgii.hit.bg/ - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024001827/http://rdesc.uni-plovdiv.bg/JAClub/JAClub.htm to http://rdesc.uni-plovdiv.bg/JAClub/JAClub.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/sidebar_761599223/Dr_Atanasoff%5C%27s_Computer.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011170707/http://users.augustana.edu/arwalters/jva/ to http://users.augustana.edu/arwalters/jva/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on John Vincent Atanasoff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080613201326/http://web.cs.iastate.edu/news/news.jsp?id=51 to http://web.cs.iastate.edu/news/news.jsp?id=51
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610202612/http://spge-bg.com/index2.php?lang=en to http://spge-bg.com/index2.php?lang=en
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080610153004/http://mall.neogen.bg/katalog/?cat_nl_p=show_company&idcompany=15930&clid=4 to http://mall.neogen.bg/katalog/?cat_nl_p=show_company&idcompany=15930&clid=4
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://encarta.msn.com/sidebar_761599223/Dr_Atanasoff's_Computer.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Computer was first invented and built by Vannevar Bush
Just was partly analogous due to lack in 1930 of electronic components
Bulgarian origin
According to Atanasov, Bulgarian was never spoken in their home and his family did not maintain close ties with Bulgarian emigrants. He described his mother as a typical American of mixed Irish-French descent. Their home language was English. There is no evidence that he felt Bulgarian, or that he spoke fluently Bulgarian. It is clear that he was an American of mixed ancestry, not simply Bulgarian. Stop pushing this incorrect claim in this article. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) 07:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Categories:- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in People
- C-Class vital articles in People
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class biography (military) articles
- Military biography work group articles
- Start-Class maritime warfare articles
- Maritime warfare task force articles
- Start-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
- Start-Class North American military history articles
- North American military history task force articles
- Start-Class United States military history articles
- United States military history task force articles
- Start-Class World War II articles
- World War II task force articles
- C-Class physics articles
- High-importance physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of High-importance
- C-Class physics biographies articles
- Physics biographies articles
- C-Class Bulgaria articles
- High-importance Bulgaria articles
- WikiProject Bulgaria articles