Talk:Automated teller machine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Automated teller machine was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 23, 2006 Peer review Reviewed
August 29, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
August 3, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

GA delisted[edit]

As the result of a GA Sweeps review that can be found here, this article has been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

What about countries?[edit]

In the list of ATM services around the world I think there should be some possibility of acknowledging easily the service that is used in a certain country.

For example, I would like to know what's the withdrawl limit in ATM in France... But I find no simple way of doing it.

512upload (talk) 20:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Health card rips off ATM for $100,000[edit]

LOL! Here's a source for anyone wanting to expand the Automated teller machine#Security section:

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/16.92.html#subj1

Unbelievable...

-- OlEnglish (Talk) 00:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Simjian invention claim[edit]

"The first mechanical cash dispenser was developed and built by Luther George Simjian" the text currently claims. However, the source says nothing about a "mechanical cash dispenser",it mentions a "hole-in-the-wall machine that would allow customers to make financial transactions" which could mean anything. It is also obvious that automatic "mechanical cash dispensers" have been around for decades before that time - they are called slot machines. There is nothing in the source to directly suggest that what Simjian invented has anything directly to do with an ATM as we would know it. Meowy 18:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Did Simjian's invention dispense cash?[edit]

Ross Anderson's book "Security Engineering," (2d Edition; 2008) on P. 333, in its section on ATMs, attributes the first ATM to inventor Simjian, describing them as "large-scale retail transaction processing systems." Anderson says Citicorp's 1939 model was withdrawn afterwards because the only ones using it were prostitutes and gamblers. He cites the same MIT website as this article.

Though there's no mention of an explicit ability to dispense cash I'd guess prostitutes and gamblers in 1939 were making cash transactions -- and not transferring direct deposit funds into secondary accounts or selling puts.

Also of historical notation, another one of the first ATMs was located in Columbus, Ohio at the Buckeye Federal Savings and Loan Bank on the far east side (Hamilton & Livingston Avenues). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.198.37 (talk) 22:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

"The History of the Automated Teller Machine," a website article by Billings Farnsworth, calls Simijian's 1939 ATM "the first mechanical cash dispenser."

DonL (talk) 10:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Who invented the ATM?[edit]

The introduction of this article claims that IBM invented the ATM and it was first put into use in 1972 by Lloyds Bank. Further paragraphs go on to claim multiple inventors at multiple dates, other banks, and patents; the narrative is inconsistent and untrustworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.234.175.66 (talk) 21:43, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

As stated in the article the IBM 2984 was designed by IBM for Lloyds Bank. It was the first example of modern ATMs because it contained the major features found in ATMs used today. It was connected to a network with two computer centres and a large number of end points. It used "start-stop" protocols. Magnetic cards and PINs could be used at any end point. Each transaction was verified on-line to check the previous overnight balance, a hot card list and the number of withdrawals in the day. It captured transactions on-line for debiting in that days overnight processing. In the 1970s it did not debit the account in real time as stated in the article. The system included proprietary cryptography algorithms. Machines were originally used inside the bank or its lobby and later upgraded for external, "though the wall", 24/7 operation. The IBM 3624 was a standard IBM product and used IBM SNA communication protocols and DES encryption algorithms. Pastera (talk) 13:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Motivation[edit]

Why do banks offer this service? It must cost a fair bit of money to keep them in operation, and I dont believe I've ever paid a penny to use one

Woscafrench (talk) 00:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

You are lucky. In the United States, most machines apply a surcharge of $1.50 to $3.00 per transactions to users who are not customers of the bank operating the machine. In the right location these machines can be quite profitable to the owner. The bank in turn applies its own additional surcharge. Although it does cost the bank some money, it is also a convenience to its customers so it is part of the bank services included in having an account. Further, it reduces the human labor and rental space that the bank would have to maintain if the customers performed the transactions before a live teller in the branch. - Wikidemon (talk) 09:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Bank Tellers are expensive, Machines are cheap. They provide the service so they don't have to employ as many people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.91.9.115 (talk) 07:20, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Card skimming and duplicating[edit]

I think card cloning and card skimming should be mentioned in both this article and Credit card fraud, but there should be a main article for both called something like "Bank card skimming and duplicating". Facts707 (talk) 19:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Apparent contradiction[edit]

The introduction of the article makes an unsourced and unreferenced claim that Scotsman John Shepherd-Barron "invented" the ATM machine in 1967. However, this sentence contradicts and runs contrary to what the history section entails which says that before 1959, Armenian inventor Luther George Simjian invented the first cash dispensing machine. Likewise, an ATM machine was used in Japan even before developments took place in the UK.

I have also found reference from MIT that Simjian may have in fact, evidenced in his 20 or so patents, invented the ATM or "hole in the wall" around 1939 which was much earlier than 1959 (as sourced in the article as it is). [1]

It would be nice for a change to get a non-British and a more global viewpoint to this contradictory which adds nothing but undue weight article. Yoganate79 (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

And again, Smijian is supported to have invented the ATM machine in 1939 while Shepherd-Barron's came much later in 1967. [2] [3][4] Yoganate79 (talk) 22:33, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

From Ireland...

Well, Yoganate79, CNN have just given an answer as to the first use of the ATM and gave three options to the question they had asked, earlier and that is why I came here to check: New York, London and Japan were the options. . They have just given the answer, which is London and it's use in 1967 - and they also spoke of John Shepherd-Barron as the inventer. So, just thought I would add this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.77.44 (talk) 03:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

  • The problems described by Yoganate79 seem to be fixed, so I've removed the tags. —rybec 04:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

first atm[edit]

The June 27 wikipedia page lists the first ATM as the one installed in Enfield Town in 1967, however the page here lists one that was first operated in 1959, in Ohio. Which of the two is correct, or are they different types of ATM machine or whatnot? CybergothiChé word to your mother 01:35, 27 June 2012 (UTC)


The first "true" ATM, for the reasons stated above was the IBM 2984 developed at IBM Hursley Park for Lloyds Bank in the UK. None of the previous claimants would be recognised as an ATM today because they did not interact with the bank's computer system and only issued fixed amounts of cash, based an a voucher/card which was retained by the machine.

Nonsensical claim should be removed[edit]

I feel that this article should get rid of one of the nonsensical statements in it. It says that many banks charge fees for use of ATMs - this is not so, although there are some ATMs that do involve payment of fees, most of those at banks are very good and do not charge money for their use. There have been those that charge money - ATMs charging money are normally at shops. This article could point out that it was not until 1998 that ATMs began to charge money. It could also point out how controversial the concept of an ATM that charges money for its use has been, as any one who ever reads any newspapers will know full well.ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe you're misunderstanding the statement about fees. When it says that the bank charges fees, this isn't referring to the physical bank branch that an ATM might be within. This is referring to the bank (meaning the company, ie Chase, Citigroup, etc.) charging a fee, regardless of where the ATM is located. As for the other information you want added, please provide reliable sources and someone will probably make an edit. Or you could just add the sourced information to the article yourself, since I'm pretty sure this isn't a protected page. -- Fyrefly (talk) 17:11, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Image of ATM with person[edit]

Person uses a bank's ATM in a street in Athens, Greece.JPG

DO you think this image would be useful in the article? Cogiati (talk) 20:19, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Foreign Exchange[edit]

I think it is misleading to say that when withdrawing money in a different currency, "the money will be converted at an official wholesale exchange rate", although it is probably true to say "ATMs often provide one of the best possible official exchange rates for foreign travellers". As the cited article points out, there will almost always be a flat fee or percentage added. (There's a small number of accounts, at least in the UK, where they do not make any charge). Alternatively, some ATMS will offer to charge you in your own currency, and there will always be a percentage mark-up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.255.115 (talk) 11:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Reverse PIN entry claims[edit]

The Security section claims that in some countries entering your PIN backwards sounds an alarm at the police station. Snopes.com claims this urban myth is entirely untrue in the USA (some attempt was made to implement it, and there's a patent, but it's never been done) but this is insufficient to declare that it's not true worldwide. Needs a citation or removal.

http://www.snopes.com/business/bank/pinalert.asp

128.243.253.108 (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

... and it would be unhelpful to anyone whose PIN number is (say) 4664. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Early patents[edit]

I'm not sure just where this should fit in. I invented the idea of an "Access Controller" with a patent applied for in 1962 and granted in 1964. I think it is closer to the ATM machine than L. G. SIMJIAN's one and predates the other patents mentioned. The idea came about because of a problem Shell Oil had with an unattended coin operated gas pump, where the local yobos thought it funny to pump the gas onto the ground and set light to it. I was working for W.S.Atkins and Partners at the time and realized my solution had universal application. The current use of a credit card to buy gas is the original idea.

Brit Pat 959,713 "Access Controller" dated June 1964, applied for Feb 1962. Inventor Adrian Walter Francis Ashfield. Link to first page http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=GB&NR=959713A&KC=A&FT=D&ND=&date=19640603&DB=&&locale=en_EP I think it at least deserves a mention.

W.S.A. never did anything with it (probably forgot they even had it) and as it was assigned to them I had no incentive to follow it up myself. I was paid 10 shillings for it, like all patents.

Any suggestions? Parallel (talk) 21:13, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Automated teller machine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Why was this moved?[edit]

The more common phrase among the majority of English speakers worldwide (because American English has by far the highest number of native speakers) is ATM.

If you search Google for "cash machine," the vast majority of results are get-rich-quick schemes. Any objections before I move this back to the more common title? --Coolcaesar (talk) 13:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I object. The article's title was not ATM. That's too ambiguous (hence the disambiguation page), so its title was Automated teller machine. Nowhere in the world is the article's subject most commonly known by that phrase (as opposed to its abbreviation). Even where "ATM" is the most common designation, one is far more likely to encounter "ATM machine" (reflecting a lack of knowledge that the "M" stands for "machine").
On my end, a Google search for "cash machine" yields page after page of results pertaining to this article's subject (including reliable news sources, some of which are in the United States), with only a few other usages (most of which are styled as the proper name "Cash Machine") mixed in. It's significantly more common than "automated teller machine" and compliant with MOS:COMMONALITY. —David Levy 16:08, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
At first I was going to concede the point last month, but then sat on the issue while I thought about it.
Then I just I realized I needed to run more selective and carefully structured searches and immediately saw the problem.
The underlying issue is that American English has traditionally used the term "cash machine" to mean a get-rich-quick scheme. However, it looks like over the past two decades, some American English speakers on the East Coast have become much more receptive than those on the West Coast to also using it as a synonym for ATMs (most likely due to cultural exchange as a result of frequent transatlantic flights). And in turn, the phrase "cash machine" keeps recurring in East Coast newspaper articles as a synonym for ATM.
But West Coast speakers still rarely use the term "cash machine"; or if they use it at all, they use it as slang in an informal register. The small number of West Coast newspaper articles that use the term seem to be taken from newswires or written by East Coast transplants.
One way to discern how the term "cash machine" is not universally understood in American English as obviously meaning "ATM" is to search for the phrase on song lyrics Web sites. All the results coming back for "cash machine" appear to be from British bands and singers. But if you search for "ATM" on those same sites, a huge number of songs from American bands and singers come up right away. What's probably happening is that East Coast songwriters are trying to prepare lyrics that are universally understood across the United States, which means they end up using the universal term "ATM" and not the regional term "cash machine." --Coolcaesar (talk) 09:59, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Your hypothesis seems plausible, but given Wikipedia's international readership, it has little bearing on which term is most suitable as the article's title. —David Levy 19:38, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Again, I must respectfully disagree. The last time I checked, this is the English Wikipedia, not the valley girl or slang Wikipedia. We rarely, if ever, use slang terms used primarily in oral English for article titles, unless the article is about a slang usage in and of itself. For example, we have an article titled personal water craft, the term in common usage in industry literature and the English-speaking maritime community, even though consumers frequently refer to them as Jet Skis.
If you search Google Books for "cash machine uk" versus "automated teller machine uk," a lot more of the results for the latter are business, legal, and financial textbooks, while a lot more of the results for the former tend to be consumer-oriented books like novels and travel guidebooks. That is, even in British English, there is an implicit recognition by people who write or edit for a living that "automated teller machine" (or variants) is the common usage when writing in a formal register (i.e., for a textbook) while "cash machine" is the common usage when writing in an informal register. --Coolcaesar (talk) 02:08, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
"Cash machine" is neither slang nor a trademark (as in the "Jet Ski" example). It's a common name for the article's subject, widely used by reliable sources (including those appearing in print) around the world. As noted at Wikipedia:Article titles, "the choice of article titles should put the interests of readers before those of editors, and those of a general audience before those of specialists." When feasible, our terminology usually bears a closer resemblance to that of a newspaper than it does to that of a textbook or other industry literature.
Also, if you're under the impression that including "uk" in a Google Books search limits the results to UK publications, you're mistaken; "UK" (or another term that Google considers a match) need only be mentioned in the text. —David Levy 04:15, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I have experience with about a dozen programming languages plus x86 assembly, and I've written parsers in C#, Java, and JavaScript. I deliberately structured those search strings as noted in order to search text broadly, not to limit those searches to UK-only publications. The reason for such a natural language search with the "uk" keyword in the text strings (I did not use quote marks around the strings as entered into Google Books) was to pick up text from all sources that might note in passing the British flavor of a particular usage. That should have been obvious to any experienced researcher.
The problem with your reading of "Article titles" is that you are implicitly reading "readers" and "general audience" as speakers of British English, and you are implying that readers of textbooks are "specialists." Lay students (non-specialists) read textbooks. Real specialists don't need textbooks. They read professional journals and professional treatises. You do know the difference between a textbook and a treatise, right?
Far more English Wikipedia editors and readers are speakers of American English, in which the primary meaning of "cash machine" is "get rich quick," as one would immediately realize by browsing any large American bookstore or public library and paying close attention to how the phrase is actually used in American English. For example, a leading authority on American English, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, marks "cash machine" as a British usage.
"Cash machine" is a parochial British usage. The far more common usage in American English (and many other Englishes) has always been the more elegant, clearer, and unambiguous "automated teller machine". Please review WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. (Wikipedia takes a neutral point of view and Wikipedia is not a soapbox.) --Coolcaesar (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
No response. I have moved this back to the more common and less ambiguous usage: automated teller machine. Next time, please assess consensus before changing article titles. I always do. --Coolcaesar (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Coolcaesar: "No response"? That was my impression. (For months, I checked back from time to time.) Then more months elapsed and you replied without pinging me. Did you expect me to notice?
My objection (which you invited) notwithstanding, you were welcome to move back the article at any time. I renamed it in good faith, explained my reasoning in good faith, and assumed that you were satisfied. At no point have I sought to override consensus. When I'm less busy, I'll initiate a move request (and notify you, of course). —David Levy 20:18, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I deliberately structured those search strings as noted in order to search text broadly, not to limit those searches to UK-only publications. The reason for such a natural language search with the "uk" keyword in the text strings (I did not use quote marks around the strings as entered into Google Books) was to pick up text from all sources that might note in passing the British flavor of a particular usage.
A person writing about this subject in an international context doesn't typically adjust his/her terminology in accordance with local flavor. Unless focusing on the terminology itself (which usually isn't the case), he/she simply refers to it by a particular name and mentions its use in various countries.
The problem with your reading of "Article titles" is that you are implicitly reading "readers" and "general audience" as speakers of British English,
I don't know what gave you that impression. It would be a peculiar position for me to take, given that I'm American.
I cited MOS:COMMONALITY, noting that "cash machine" is widely used across multiple English varieties (including American).
and you are implying that readers of textbooks are "specialists."
I'm implying that writers of textbooks are specialists.
Far more English Wikipedia editors and readers are speakers of American English,
That's true, but it isn't the only valid consideration. (Otherwise, the entire encyclopedia would be written in that variety.)
in which the primary meaning of "cash machine" is "get rich quick," as one would immediately realize by browsing any large American bookstore or public library and paying close attention to how the phrase is actually used in American English.
Evidently, my experience as a speaker of American English differs from yours. As you wrote in June, perhaps this is a matter of regional usage.
I don't assert that "cash machine" is the predominant term in the United States. "ATM" is, but that's too ambiguous to serve as the article's title. I'm comparing the usage of "cash machine" with that of "automated teller machine", both in the United States and internationally.
The far more common usage in American English (and many other Englishes) has always been the more elegant, clearer, and unambiguous "automated teller machine".
How often do you hear someone call it that (as opposed to "ATM")?
Please review WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. (Wikipedia takes a neutral point of view and Wikipedia is not a soapbox.)
What non-neutral viewpoint do you believe I'm attempting to use Wikipedia to advocate? Why would I seek to influence what people call these machines in their day-to-day lives? —David Levy 20:18, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't have the time to respond to all your points right now, but here's one point: Your understanding of textbooks is still off---a writer of a textbook is normally writing for an audience of students, not for an audience of fellow specialists. With the exception of textbooks for graduate students (especially those in science and mathematics), most textbooks for primary, secondary, and undergraduate education strive to use formal written English that is also clear, simple, and easily understood by the general public. A writer of a treatise can safely assume knowledge of a common vocabulary that a writer of a textbook cannot. Thus, if American English textbook writers are regularly using "ATM" or "automated teller machine," rather than "cash machine," that's a sign that they prefer the former as clearer and less ambiguous because they know their audience will read the former as such. --Coolcaesar (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Your understanding of textbooks is still off---a writer of a textbook is normally writing for an audience of students, not for an audience of fellow specialists.
You appear to have misunderstood my point, which relied on the context of the message to which I replied in July:

If you search Google Books for "cash machine uk" versus "automated teller machine uk," a lot more of the results for the latter are business, legal, and financial textbooks, while a lot more of the results for the former tend to be consumer-oriented books like novels and travel guidebooks. That is, even in British English, there is an implicit recognition by people who write or edit for a living that "automated teller machine" (or variants) is the common usage when writing in a formal register (i.e., for a textbook) while "cash machine" is the common usage when writing in an informal register. --Coolcaesar (talk) 02:08, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

This is the comparison to which I'm referring. I'm not asserting that most textbooks are written "for an audience of fellow specialists". (To reiterate, the aforementioned Google Books search doesn't actually restrict the results to British English, so the point is largely moot.)
Thus, if American English textbook writers are regularly using "ATM" or "automated teller machine," rather than "cash machine," that's a sign that they prefer the former as clearer and less ambiguous because they know their audience will read the former as such.
Again, we're in agreement that "ATM" is the predominant term in American English. As noted above, I was addressing a claim about British English. —David Levy 13:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cash machine. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)