Talk:Telectronics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 124.168.26.16 (talk) at 11:56, 5 July 2006 (INformation that you wil need to know). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

jeffcoat

The assertions that Jefacot introduced pacemakers to Telectronics are false just like the assertions made in the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Magazine that Dr Nicks approached him to make a radio frequency couplad pacemaker are also false. The radio frequency pacemaker was made by ex Kriesled engineer Eddy Hume and is what was described in the Medical Journal of Australia artilce by Nicks Hume And Senning in 1962 and the device mentioned in the Sun newspaper in 1963. Jeffcoat is not the instigator of pacmeakers at Telectronics he was a journalist with Radio and Hobbies and a radio ham and jaz musician, not a scientist or Ceo of anything. Imported pacemakers were known to the Telectronics founder Noel Gray and he knew about pacemaker long before Wickham or Jeffcoat as he studied the Lidwell/Booth pacemaker notes when he was a med student at the University of Sydney from 1948-50.

Edit war Telectronics

I am User Geoffrey Wickham Co-founder of the company Telectronics Pty Ltd. Persistant modifications to the page are being made by Christopher Gray, son of other co-founder, the late Noel Gray using IP's including 203.217.84.96, 203.214.139.165, 203.214.136.14, 203.206.228.34, 203.217.65.47, 203.158.46.74, 203.206.228.56,210.84.38.207,203.206.254.253,203.217.56.233,203.158.52.94.
C Gray was a boy at the time of the historical events & has made no effort to check the veracity of his view of history by open minded discussion with any of the other persons who were involved in the early years of the company. In those contacts which he has made with others, including me, he has resorted to shouting insults if their view disagrees with his.
His edits are intended to carry forward inaccuracies, fantasy and defamation contained in the private publication "Telectronics, The Early Years", Gray N D & Gray C J, 1994.
Of greatest concern to me, in his latest edits, is deletion of the names Jeffcoat and Nicks whose research and contact with Telectronics led to the company commencing cardiac pacemaker research in 1964.

(The only fantasy is that Jeffcoat and nicks research "led to the company commencing pacemaker research". Noel Gray had already made an implantable cardiac pacemaker when he was senior design engineer at Kriesler in the 50's and had studied the work of Mark Lidwell and Edgar Booth when he was a med student at the Universit of Sydney (1948-50) where Booth was a Physics tutor. this is highly slanderous of Chris Gray and his late father who cannot defend himself and so is a cowardly attack and should be seen as such.) Comment added by 124.168.16.214 29 June 2006 58.166.18.210 03:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not true. Implantable pacemakers were first used in Australia in Melbourne by Dr Greame Sloman in 1961 well before this and ther has long been a competitative argument between doctors in Australia about the pacemaker firsts.

Feb 2nd 2006 GW. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geoffrey Wickham (talkcontribs) 02:51, February 1, 2006 (UTC) Apolgies, I have now learned how to 'sign'.none 05:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that there is only circumstantial evidence that these IPs are related to Christopher Gray. And that the other claims here are yet to be verified. —WAvegetarianTALKCONTRIBSEMAIL 19:45, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The references for Telectronics all say 1963 and no mention of jefffcoat is made at the time events occured so wake up and read the refferences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.228.120 (talkcontribs)

To Christopher Gray, please do not be insulting. It would also be gentlemanly of you to cease the anonymity of Ip's and register as a User.

The references you cite are newspaper and magazine clippings of 'feature stories' which are most unreliable sources of historical fact, as the journalists write their story around whatever is said to them by whoever at the time of interview.

I cite: National Heart Foundation Grant G171 of 1963 to Jeffcoat.

I cite: Letter from Jeffcoat to Royal Prince Alfred Hospital 7/27/63. " I understand that under the terms of National Heart Foundation Grant no. G171, a sum of 160 pounds per annum has been put aside for my salary. It is my desire that this money be placed in a 'Pacemaker Fund'"

I cite: From Memoirs of Paul M Trainor, " I met bio-engineer Keith Jeffcoat wha was an adviser to some NSW hospitals and with others did pioneering work in pacemakers".

I cite: Manuscript "Telectronics and the History of Pacemaking in Australia" Wickham & Jeffcoat, 1987. This is an accurate and scholarly paper in which Jeffcoat details his research conducted at RPAH. I have said to you previously that I am prepared to Swear an Affidavit testifying to the accuracy of that paper.Geoffrey Wickhamnone 21:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The attempted character assasination of the late Noel Gray continues! What a cowardly attack this is! Paul Trainor was not involved at all in the early days at Telectronics nor was Jeffcot, neither gentleman was employed at telectronics until 1968, when the character assisanation began! If you want to reffer to a "scolarly paper" please cite refferences! The "oficial report" to the National Heart Foundation is not cited in the Wickham Jeffcoat unpublished book. According to the National Heart Foundation grant No G 171 was to Dr Nicks and Dr Nicks alone. This work using the grant G 171 was on a surface mounted radiofrequency generator pacemaker first sugested by Abrams and was a continuation of experiments on a device made by Eddy Hume as reported in the Nicks Hume paper of December 1962. (a perort on this ecperiment is in a newspaper The Sun in 1964) Please explaine how this work contributed to Telectronics development of totally implantable pacemakers which were based on totally implantable pacemakers imported into Australia from 1962 on! This is what was reported in the Buletin article of 1976! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.128.196 (talkcontribs)

C Gray was not a "boy at the time" but a teenager and remembers well what happened and is not dependant upon recolections of his late father. What was your year of birth ?

Not an engineer?

What leads you to make this claim. He is credited everywhere I've seen on line with being a founder of the company. He copublished at least one journal article (Dwyer AF, Wickham GG: Direct current stimulation in spine fusion. Med J Austr 1:73, 1974). What basis is this claim made on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WAvegetarian (talkcontribs)

== not an engineer ?== It seems that this claim is based on the fact that I do not have a University degree, but neither did the late Noel Gray, so if Chris Gray wishes to use this criterion he should apply it equally. My career evolved from technician level to engineer level by study and practical experience. By 1955 I was chief engineer transformer design department of Philips TCA, Hendon works, Adelaide. M.I.I.E. 5 patents issued USA assigned to Telectronics. list of papers read can be provided.none 22:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)Geoffrey Wickham[reply]

(What "study" what formal study did Wickham undertake, Noel Gray is a Graduate of the Institution of Engineers and studied Medicine at the University of Sydney from 1948 to 1950. He also graduated from No 6 Officer Cadet Training Unit and was trained in RADAR at the Radiophysics Depo and CSIR. Where is the "equality" of that Mr Wickham?(Anon) [Comments added by 203.158.61.229]58.166.18.210 03:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

==re Ray Swan== As I recall, this chap was a friend of Noel Gray and a potential financier. It is possible that he was nominated in the original Articles of Association of Telectronics. I met him once only.none 22:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)Geoffrey Wickham Ray Swan invested 500 pounds in Telectronics that was the faith he had in Noel Gray and was registered as a founding director of telectronics Pty Limited. This whole talk page is biased in contravention with the policy of Wickapedia because the opening unsubstantiated statements by Wickham collor the discussion! If you at Wickapedia are only interested in pushing one barrow and have read only one referrence (Wickahm and Jeffcoats) then you are not worth anyones time because you have no accademic rigor. The recent criticism of Wickapedia that refferences are not checked must be true because this work is biased! end — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.146.98 (talkcontribs) [reply]

Please type ~~~~ at the end of your comments. This creates an automatic signature, so we can keep track of who is saying what. Cnwb 23:03, 23 February 2006 (UT

Re Radiofrequency generator powering implanted electrode in 1962-3

The allegation that Telectronics followed this work is false and irrational as there were totally implantable pacemakers being implanted in patients in Australia from 1961. To fail to acknowledge the views of the managing director Noel Gray as written in his book Telectronics the early years is biased. By the way the work was reported in the Medical Journal of Australia and was originally an ideah of Abrahms and a device was made for Dr Nicks by ex-Kriesler engineer Eddy Hume. Please read the Medical Journal article and do not accept one view above others as this is biased and not displaying academic rigor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.158.51.34 (talkcontribs)

Please type ~~~~ at the end of your comments. This creates an automatic signature, so we can keep track of who is saying what. Cnwb 23:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What refferences has Wickapedian WAvegetarian sourced to be an expert on the history of Telectronics?

Vandalism is occuring on the Telectronics site by a 19 yo who is biased as he has not recognised references pointed out on the site. This has resulted in one view being promoted in favour of Wickham and Jefacot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.248.118 (talkcontribs)

First off, my age is irrelevant. Second off, that isn't my age. Third off, I have looked at some, and in fact added to, the list of references. The stuff I've found online contradicts your edits. —WAvegetarianCONTRIBUTIONSTALKEMAIL 23:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference material is required for academic rigor

The assertions about the "following on" coments in regard to Telectronics entry into pacemakers is not based on any reference. This is in stark contrast to the refference material contained in Telectronics the Early Years in which there are ove 36 reffernces. I would like to ask Wickapedia if it is possible for someone there to read the relevant references and establish from these a story that accords with them. If it is left as a conclusion that there are differing views then so be it. I must strongly protest that it appears to be that knowone has bothered to read any of the refferences cited. There semes to be knowone in charge and knowone responsible for what is published on this site. This makes it extremely dificult to contribute to the encyclopedia with legitimate refferences as they seem to be ignored. I see this as a real problem for you and your work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.248.118 (talkcontribs)

For the third time! Please type ~~~~ at the end of your comments. This creates an automatic signature, so we can keep track of who is saying what. Cnwb 12:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The people responsible are the community. Everything is based on consensus. If I had access to those sources, I would be happy to read them. I'm not really sure where I might find a copy of Telectronics: The Early Years. It seems to not have been publicly published as I haven't found evidence that it actually exists. Even if it does, it seems to violate WP:OR. There's also the problem that the WA in my name stands for Washington State, USA not Western Australia. I don't have any way to verify these sources. If they were available online or locally to an editor in Australia, then they could be verified. The article is currently protected from editing by anyone without Wikipedia:Administrator powers. Neither Geoff nor I have these, so the article will remain in its present state until something gets worked out. —WAvegetarianCONTRIBUTIONSTALKEMAIL 23:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC


The book 'Telectronics the early years' is published andhas an ISBN number. It is the only published book on the early times at Telectronics and a number of other people were contacted before its publication. It is available in all major Australian Libraries and many universities!

from Geoffrey Wickham

I have today once again emailed Christopher Gray,in a courteous manner,in the hope that common sense might prevail in resolving this dispute without it having to go to arbitration. A reply was requested. It would probably be beneficial if a copy of "Telectronics - The Early Years" is read by an editor in Australia. Chris would probably co-operate in this. Should the dispute need to go to arbitration I shall accept the decision of the arbitrators.none 02:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC) Geoffrey Wickham No answer was receivednone 06:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotecting

No recent discussion. Time to edit. --Tony Sidaway 00:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC) There is bias at Wicki! Please reffer to Australian ASIC records for an acurate record of shareholding in Telectronics and note that a "controling interest" was not acheived in 1967 because Nucleus and Trainor certianly did not have this in 1967 over Telectronics.[reply]

(Response: In 1967 Telectronics was facing bankruptcy because Noel Gray had spent all loan monies on grandiose self promotion. By way of a 'handshake agreement' Paul Trainor/Nucleus Holdings took over the day to day management of the company. The 'handshake agreement' was formalised in January 1968 by Nucleus taking up 50% of the issued voting shareholding. From that point in time Telectronics was run in a professional manner& traded out of debt. In 1969, after some internal dispute, Trainor was formalised as Chairman of Directors with the power of casting vote on the 3 man Board of Directors). none 06:39, 22 April 2006

Telectronics was not facing bankruptcy in 1967. It was selling it's cardiac monitors and defibrulators through selling agents and they stoped paying Telectronics and it was this withoulding of payment that cause a need for cash, working capital. Up till that point under Noel Gray's leadership he, Wickham and the loyal staff of Telectronics had designed, researched and developed, and put into production a range of medical electronic equipment on a very tight budget. This was an extraordinary acheivement with the cost of setting up a pacemaker production facility in 1965 with clean room forward ordering of components and component testing equipment designed by Len Troubridge, all paid for by Noel Gray from the sale of his TV service business and mortguages on the family home and borrowings from his father in law Robert Simes and friend Harold Duffell. When Paul Trainor was issued with shares in 1968 he bought an interest in all this hard work and proven products. The only thing that changed was that Telectronics started to sell this equipment directly and Nole Gray was responsible for this. Noel Gray never enguaged in "grandiouse self promotion". Paul Trainor did not take over the "day to day management of the company". In support of this see The Age Newspaper article by Phillip McIntosh quoting Trainor; "Therefore, I made four different companies with Nucleus as the centerpoint, but each company was autonomous with its own board and its own executives" He said. Noel Gray was in 1968 registered as Managing Director a position that Paul Trainor was never recorded as having in the Corporate Affairs records. Managing director performs the task of managing the day to day running of the company. Nucleus pruchased a 50% shareholding recorded in January 1968 and that does not add up to a "controling interest" in anyones language. Control must be more than 50%. The "control" of the Board was attempted in 1969 when the Articles of Association were changed but at the same time the shareholdings also changed with the conversion of debt into shares owed to Noel Gray Beth Gray and Harold Duffell. Nucleus' shareholding fell below 50%. The three afformentioned now owned more than 50% until 1971 when a new share issue was made and paid for by declaring a dividend after issuing them to Nucleus Wickham and Gray. This devalued the percentages of the Grays and Duffell. The taxation records of the company and Noel Gray support the existance of "B Class Ordinary Shares" as do other documents.

edit of 23 March 2006

This edit reconciles the numerical notations in the text with the footnotes. Some footnotes not referred to in the text were deleted while some footnotes of relevence were moved to 'Sources'.It is my hope that C Gray will find these changes to be in the best interest of the encyclopedic quality of the entry.My first edit of 3/23 inexpicably was 'saved' before editing was completed, hence the 2nd edit.Geoffrey Wickhamnone 04:12, 23 March 2006 (UT

Refference (sic) material should be published in accordance with Wickapedia rules ./// For the fourth time please type none 03:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC) after your comment. The preceeding comment was added by 203.206.238.54none 03:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no published refference for the incorrect assertion that Telectronics "followed" Jeffcoat and Nicks work. My understanding of Wicki rules is that there must be a published sourse for material to be encyclopedic!

Unsubstanciate claims are continually asserted about Telectronics entry into medical electronics. The truth is that Noel Gray studied medicine from 1948 50 and there he formulated the ambition to develop pacemakers and defibs and monitors. It should be recognised that Mark Lidwell adn Edgar Both made and use the first pacemaker in the world in 1926 in Sydney and that Noel studied their work when he was a med student at the Univesity. I know that misleading information is being promoted and there are people who remember Noel and his ambition, so be warned I have support for my position and I will not give up, after all Noel is my father.

April edits=vandalism

If you look at this source you will see support both for Wickham being an engineer and acquisition by Nucleus. Any changes refuting this will be seen as vandalism. —WAvegetarianCONTRIBUTIONSTALKEMAIL 14:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Gray states " I have support for my position". Would he please provide to me, or to this Wikipedia discussion, evidence of his "support"Geoffrey Wickhamnone 23:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC

This refference about Trainor is self promoting and is not backed up by published refferences. The taxation returns for Telectronics shows clearly that Nucleus did not own 50% of Telectronics shares from 1969 and that arguable legally he therefore did not control the Board. The changes to Telectronics Articles of Association and share capital in 1969 required Nucleus to hold 50% of the issued ordinary shares in the company to have the right to two directors on the Board and for Trainor to be Chairman and to have a casting vote IOW control.

There are things called Corporate Affairs Records that companies are suposed to submit records of their legal happenings. Things like Special resolutions, changes to share holdings, changes to authorised shares of a company etc. There are no records in the Corporate Affairs to suport the claim that Nucleus had a "comtroling interest in Telectronics" in 1967 or 1968 or into the 70s.

vandalism

Christopher Gray has continued to delete and modify the article page using multiple IP's and without signing by four tildes since the page was unprotected by Tony Sidaway March 13. I have twice emailed him rebutting the comments he has posted on this discussion page but he has failed to answer my mails. He appears to be obsessed with his version of history, for which he claims to have "support" of others but fails to provide evidence of support by any others either by providing that evidence to me or by publishing in 'discussion'. It is time for the page to once again be protected.Geoffrey Wickham. none 03:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC) Discussions continue with Wickham and there is evidence.[reply]

It is confirmed that email discussion has commenced. Geoffrey Wickham none 06:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC) [The references cited of paul Trainor's memiors and a letter writen by Keith Jeffcoat are not relevant to incidents that occured before they joined the company. The decision maker before they joined was Noel Gray he paid the bils and provided the finaces He who pays the piper calls the tune!] Comments added by 203.158.61.229 28 June 2006 58.166.18.210 03:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Keith Jeffcoat was the informant for an aricle in the AUSTRALIAN GEOGRAPHIC in which it is claimed that Jeffocat founded a company called telectronics in 1960. When the magazine editor was contacted he said that he sent the copy to Jeffcoat to check for inaccuracies before publiction. It was published adn it is false.) Comment added by 203.158.61.229 26 June 200658.166.18.210 03:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffcoat

Keith Jeffcoat was a journalist for Radio and Hobbies in the 60's and a part time jaz musician he was not a scientist nor was he the originator for Telectronics' entry into medical electronics. Telectronics was not started with the objects to only make industrial electronics. The Objects of the company include statements that suport an entry to medical electronics. If the Articles Objects did not Telectronics would not have been able to do this because of the legal Doctrine of Ultra Vares. This doctrine prevents a company from acting outside its stated Objects contained in its Articles of Association. This means that it is misleading to make the statement that Telectronics was set up with limited Objects to only work on products for industry. (CHris Gray BA LL B)

The statements above are refuted.

Re Jeffcoat : 1) See citations under heading "Edit War". 2) Jeffcoat was not a journalist for 'Radio & Hobbies', he was a staff journalist of 'Electronics Australia' in 1963-4. 3) Jeffcoat conducted cardiac pacemaker research at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, including the design of an implantable pacemaker which survived 9 months of canine implant in 1963-4. 4) Jeffcoat visited Telectronics in early 1964 showing the explanted canine pacemaker. This visit was pivotal to the decision by Telectronics to commence pacemaker research. 5) Between 1964 and 1967 Jeffcoat, while CEO of Weston Electronics, gave of his time without charge to Telectronics in conducting animal research At RPAH & RNSH in collaboration with me and Lab. technician Ray Kearns. 6) Jeffcoat became an employee of Telectronics in 1968 and had at least one US patent granted in his name assigned to Telectronics. The attempts by C Gray to exclude Jeffcoat from the Wikipedia article "Telectronics" are deplorable.

Re "ultra vires" : 1) The stated objectives of Telectronics, at incorporation in 1963, recited a) To design manufacture instal and maintain instruments and eqipment for science and industry b) To conduct research and experiment in the future development of specialised electronics equipment. (no mention of medical equipment or cardiac pacemakers). The letterhead of Telectronics from 1963 - 1965 read " Development design and manufacture - sales and service of electronic measuring controlling and recording equipment for science and industry" [source: " Telectronics - The Early Years" Gray ND & Gray CJ, page 9]

--Geoffrey Wickham 06:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Geoffrey Wickham 1. I am not sure which version of history is being read from but the year 1963 therer was no "Electronics Australia" magazine. The journal was caller Radio TV and Hobbies.

2. Keith William Jeffcoat was never "CEO Western Electronics"! For the reader that would make him the cheif executive officer of a company run by its founder and owner, sound familiar. Media reports also claimed that Keith Jeffcoat was founder of Telectronics (the Australian Geographic)

3. The mention of medical electronics would not be required if the generic wording is stated. Need I explain this? The letterhead is irrelevant for the purposes of the Doctrine of Ultra Vares.