User talk:2600:1700:EA0:81D0:DCE6:3E51:ED6:F65A

To: AGK Re: Telechrome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Date: 10-22-2018

Between 2016 and early 2018, I corrected minor errors in Wikipedia's Telechrome article. I also provided authoritative sources. During this time, another author inserted a paragraph alleging that a version of Telechrome could make lenticular, autostereographic images. In proof of his fringe hypothesis, the author cited articles in Wireless World and Popular Mechanics. These articles mention Telechrome, but not autostereography with Telechrome, and not the use of lenticular means.

I added a paragraph that explained that Telechrome autostereography is speculation. I then explained why. I cited the patent, which contains no claim that Telechrome has an autostereographic capability.

At the end of September 2018, another author deleted my contribution. My references are also missing. (This author erased several of my other edits, too.) The reason that he gave for deleting the "lenticular Telechrome" critique is that his Popular Mechanics reference supports it. Yet I find no such support in the article.

I used the "talk" feature to contact the other author. Recently, I noticed that my "talk" comments have vanished. I had in mind further improvements to the article. For instance, one citation that supports Telechrome as the first color tube is a seriously flawed, non-technical source. (Since this reference supports the thesis of this article, perhaps the whole article is a candidate for deletion.) Yet I won't waste time on further scholarship until I can resolve the vandalism issue.

AGK, I need your help. Even though I have support from authoritative sources, another author is deleting my work. I can't convince him to cooperate by providing better support for his unproven hypothesis. How can I resolve this conflict? ColorWheel (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

---