Talk:Mousepad

Optical mouse reference

I'm contesting a reference shown in the article, inserted here and later linked to a scanned copy. A couple of glances within the article doesn't show anything about mousepads, and I suspect that the article might not be related to the statement at hand. If the reference can't be confirmed (either providing a page number or a quotation), I am suggesting it be removed. --Sigma 7 02:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

See p.21, last paragraph in the short section titled "Design Goals," which says "...most users of ball mice use a special pad anyway to increase the friction on the ball." Dicklyon 03:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Now I see it. I strongly suggest adding the page number for that reference, as a single quote like that is easy to miss. --Sigma 7 02:37, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Go for it. Dicklyon 03:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Book ref for Jack Kelley

Milestones in Computer Science and Information Technology, by Edwin D. Reilly, 2003, says "The first such pad was 'invented' by Jack Kelley, who went on to become a noted designer of furniture." He probably got it from one of the sources we already cite, so it's not really much of a confirmation. It's not clear what he intended by putting "invented" in quotes. Dicklyon 05:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps the quotation marks indicate that he is repeated a quotation, or perhaps that he doesn't think the mouse pad is much of an invention. Luckily, it's not our job to solve that riddle. Either way, it's a source. Good find! Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 13:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

These are from the Stanford MouseSite

So I decided since we can't find much textual proof in any direction to instead look for photographic evidence of the use of mousepads during the 1970s to determine when something that we would now call a mousepad first possibly started appearing in pictures of computer work environments. As soon as I started to look for the environment, instead of the mousepad itself, I found MouseSite, a Stanford site detailing the history of the mouse. Nowhere on the site is the mousepad mentioned, however, what there *is* is photographic evidence of Englebert's time spent with the Augmentation Research Center (ARC) from the late 60s to 1974 when the funding dried up and a good many of the researchers moved to Xerox PARC. All photos were donated to Stanford by Douglas Englebert (can be found here: http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/index.html). While it can be assumed that these pictures (since they were owned by Englebert) all predate him leaving ARC in 1975, the only one that can be definitely dated just based on website information are the Kudlick photos.

• http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/slides1/mice/mice.html (note the 'circa 1968' on the 3-button mouse picture that clearly shows a mousepad)

• http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/photos/w09.html
• http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/photos/w09-2.html
• http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/photos/m14.html (third and fourth pics esp; this person, Mike Kudlick, left ARC in 1974; thus these images predate 1974, unlike the others where we only have 'early 70s' as a time frame)

There are many, many more that show partial photos with mousepads, or that show them less clearly, this was just a sampling before I decided I had enough to come back and report. These mousepads seem more similar to modern ones than the one described in Fernandez' disclosure, which was obviously made for the later optical mice over the early mice with wheels.--Thespian 07:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Images aren't loading for me, although they did in the past. When it comes up, we can grab a small portion of the image or otherwise get a Request for permission? Of course, we don't want the page turning into a gallery but showing the progression of the mousepad history would be useful for the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigma 7 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Found a few colour photos: http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/gallery/slides2/nlswork.html - in some of those photos, you can see the mouse distinctly on the desk - in others, you see a mouse surface or mousepad. --Sigma 7 10:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't see anything I'd identify as a mousepad in those, but there were some very clear in the photos linked before, so it doesn't really matter. Dicklyon 16:44, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Mouse pad or Mousepad

Having looked up mousepad in the OED, I have found that there should be a space in it - ie "mouse pad" not "mousepad".

Quote from OED

"mousemat chiefly Brit., a small pad over which a computer mouse is moved to produce movement of the pointer on the monitor screen. mouse pad = mousemat."

British here - no one actually says "mouse mat" that I know of. Google seems to agree, hits for "mousemat" and "mouse mat" are in the low hundreds of thousands, while "mouse pad" and "mousepad" total multiple million. Changed.80.169.171.14 (talk) 08:50, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

A quick google search seems to confirm that "mouse pad" is more common although, being British, I don't know because I always say "mousemat". I think the article should be moved. Any thoughts? GDallimore (Talk) 09:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

What the OED claims as standard American English, and what is actually used, is often a little different, dear to my heart as they are. 6,490,000 ghits for "mousepad", 2,310,000 ghits for "mouse pad". Leave as is. --Thespian 09:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the hits for "mouse pad" include the hits for "mousepad", but not vice versa, so the numbers are meaningless. You have to look at the term that people are actually using within those hits. GDallimore (Talk) 09:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Are you doing it *with* the quotes? Because if you do it with the quotes, to preserve *exactly* what's between them, what you'll find is exactly what I say. Often a page will use both, but if one only uses "mousepad", it does not show up when you search for "mouse pad". Try them with the quotes, and pay attention to what is bolded in your search results. --Thespian 09:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I would oppose a move, because the current name is fine, and very popular. "Mousepad" gets way more google hits than "mouse pad". Also note that the OED didn't find the use of "special patterned mouse pad" in the cited 1982 article. Dicklyon 15:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

But also note that the 1982 article uses "mouse pad" :) Anyway, I've sent that article off to the OED now to see if they will update the entry. Also, the OED suggests looking at a particular Scientific American as part of the history of the mouse.

1977 Sci. Amer. Sept. 234/2 The user makes his primary input through a typewriterlike keyboard and a pointing device called a mouse, which controls the position of an arrow on the screen as it is pushed about on the table beside the display

Anyone able to get their hands on a copy - I wasn't reading SciAm when I was three months old! GDallimore (Talk) 07:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Alan Kay's article from that is reproduced at Digibarn. No mouse pad in sight. Dicklyon 18:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

File:Mouse tray.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mouse tray.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Images

Shouldn't it be mentioned that mouse pads often have a popular or custom image printed on them, and are a part of office decoration? (Please don't say "someone else has to publish it first before we can add it paraphrased" because nobody else is going to publish that. Verifiability doesn't apply to simple, pointless, and obvious facts.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.130.241 (talk) 07:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Cleaning

Quote of disputed content:

"Some mouse pads with fabric bonded to rubber can be put into a washing machine. But it should be inside a pillow cover, the temperature not higher than 30C/86F and the shortest program being used. A laundry detergent without softener because of the rubber and no centrifugation. Drying the Mousepad is done between two towels without exposure to direct sunlight."

The Reference is common sense. This has been here for months and nobody did mind the information that fabric mouse pads can be cleaned. Then a edit war between me and a keen user swept over here and time got wasted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.193.87.140 (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a manual or guidebook. It's that simple. It doesn't add any context to the article. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | ~ 12:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

From the edit history, you were actually reverting four different editors who all removed it for the above reason. Beyond that, "common sense" and "Years of experience with cleaning mouse pads and operating washing machines" are not reliable sources, and Wikipedia shouldn't be giving out vague, unsourced information about how "some" mouse pads will be undamaged by a washing machine cycle. --McGeddon (talk) 12:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Another of his IP addresses has again put the section back, along with a suggestion to "use the talk or start your own wiki". I prefer the former. But where is 79? Do we need to seek semi-protection? Dicklyon (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

If he's unwilling to discuss this beyond "it's common sense", "this has been here for months" and a lie about it only being one user reverting him, sure. I'll request it now. Given that another editor has taken the time to find a source and only found sources saying never to wash a mousepad, the WP:BURDEN is now on the IP to provide a source that says otherwise before re-adding it. --McGeddon (talk) 19:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mousepad. 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/20070929120300/http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2002/3/2002_3_48.shtml to http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2002/3/2002_3_48.shtml

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) 04:27, 7 February 2018 (UTC)