Talk:Independent inventor

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Invention Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Invention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Invention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InventionWikipedia:WikiProject InventionTemplate:WikiProject InventionInvention Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

I've removed this line but added a relevant See Also entry: "Independent inventors may be characterized as patent trolls since they license, but do not practice their inventions."

Never heard of that term but from the entry it doesn't seem to fit, since none of the definitions implies that "those who license but don't practice(?) their inventions" are under the definition. Indeed, isn't this self-contradictory? Directly manufacturing and using technology vs. licensing it for manufacture and use is effectively the same. Additionally, it adds undue weight to this article since a corporation could just as easily be described that way. --70.143.56.143 (talk) 02:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added the following Independent Inventor which happens to have hundreds of patents and they are licensed to over 300 major corporations, not sure why this was undone. Could someone enlighten me? Hundreds of patents granted, granted in 192 countries and two major inventing and development awards. How could this be not notable by Wiki standards?

• German-American Jovan Hutton Pulitzer^[1] (who's birth name was Jeffry Jovan Philyaw^[2]) invented the first machine-readable code (CRQ - See Our Cue - Q Code) whereby computers using a scanning peripheral device or a mobile device's camera to open a web page. Known as the Scan Commerce, Scan Connect and eCommerce Connect patent portfolios^[3]; this independent suite of almost 200 patents was sold to RPX Corporation - Patent Risk Management company^[4]. The portfolio of Pulitzer patents have now been licensed to over 340^[5] companies ranging from early-stage firms to Fortune 100 Industry Leaders such as eBay, IBM, AOL, Cisco, Google, and others. Pulitzer's inventions have won 2 notable industry awards, the Codie Award[[1]] and the Computerworld Smithsonian Award[[2]].

LinkDigger (talk) 20:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, notable is shorthand for 'has a Wikipedia article or would qualify for one'. That means that there are multiple independent , reliable sources about the person in question. Patents are not independent sources. We'd need to see newspaper articles, biographies, etc. - MrOllie (talk) 20:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MrOllie you actually hit delete too soon. I was adding those when the article disappeared. Since I am new, I add a few and then make sure I did it right and then add a few more and as I was beefing up, it vanished. Better suggestion? I have everything but trying to learn as I go. If it would of have been up a bit longer all would of have been there.

Opps forgot to tag me LinkDigger (talk) 20:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you have enough independent sources to write an article, you're better off writing the article before making list entries. Since your edits seem to be focused on this particular individual, I'd also suggest you read over WP:COI. If it is applicable, certain disclosures may be required by Wikipedia's terms of use. - MrOllie (talk) 20:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MrOllie The plan is to enter 4 modern-day inventors who are independent. It seems my mistake it thinking I should enter and check them one at a time. Probably being way too cautious, but since new did not want to post tons of things at one time and thus just adding to the list one at a time. I will take your advice and plot them all out first on one addition and then see if it fits. But it is four different inventors who are a national hall of fame inventors who happen to be independents who should really be on this list. Thank you for the advice and heads up. Was just going about it the wrong way. Seems my cautious approach was the issue and will do better and get better. Thanks very much. LinkDigger (talk) 23:08, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]