Talk:Liner lock

Walker Linerlock Vs. Linerlock

I'm glad this article has finally been renamed from the biased "Walker Linerlock" to "Liner lock" as I suggested. But I'm disappointed that my extensive corrections, refs, and arguments were largely ignored & reverted, supporting the old biases, wives tales, and errors that I was trying to correct. Wiki even redirected "Liner lock" to "Walker Linerlock!" The original article made many similar & related errors as implied by it's old title. For example, in the intro section the popular old pre-1950s Camillus liner lock knife was fully described, but then called the hip, new (1980) "Walker Linerlock!" Huh!?

This is a very common mistake in the knife community, calling liner lock knives: Walker Linerlocks. Here and elsewhere it has the exact appearance that the popular old liner lock before 1980 never existed!. Please check this out in the knife literature! In my opinion this error came from Spyderco, Walker Knives, and others honestly over-hyping it. (Spyderco even created & dedicated a knife model to Walker, the "Sage 1 Walker LinerLock.") The result is that Spyderco fans and others in good faith swallowed this attitude, and misinformation making this false bias wide-spread. The Wiki article has since contributed to this mis-definition. It appears to me to me that perhaps Spyderco has recognized their good faith error and no longer describe the Walker linerlock in such grandiose, revolutionary terms.

For example notice Spyderco's change in description here, while celebrating Walker linerlock they FIRST call Walker "what Michael Jordan is to basketball," gushingly describe it this way: "This model is in recognition of knifemaker Michael Walker's contribution to the knife industry with his creation of the LinerLock? and ball bearing detent method of locking open a folding knife." That is decisively in error. In fact Spyderco heavily invested in and hyped it, both now at the time. However notice this subtle(?) change while they later dedicate the new Sage2: "The first Sage recognized knifemaker Michael Walker's creation of the LinerLock® with a ball bearing detent method of keeping a folding knife closed." This is NOT how the orig Wiki article described it, NOR a plethora of other "expert" sites. The good news is, this is NOT (yet) a matter without historical evidence.

Because a clear and unsupported bias still exists in the article, I intend to re-insert my changes, but I am open to evidence for corrections or other suggestions. Hopefully the article's biases can be corrected before then. Yet I am NOT open to bullying ad hom attacks such as "loser argument" made here in the past. Saying "I Disagree," is NOT an argument, it is just another utterly unsupported opinion.

Here is a repost of our earlier Talk discussion:

Since linerlock redirects here, I expanded the history of generic liner lock knives, including the Camillus TL-29 Electricians knife and the 1906 patent. Perhaps (?) it can be claimed that Walker invented the Walker Linerlock, (that he trademarked) but it cannot be honestly claimed (nor implied) that he invented the liner lock.

"Camillus made the electician's knives for the U.S. military and civilian sales for over 90 years. This was the #57 pattern."

"The next year, 1930 the liner locking system was added and adopted as the new TL-29 Issue B. ....The Army performed two tests on the all metal knife but the Signal Corps shot it down for the simple lack of a locking screwdriver."

This article has the feel of an advertisement or self-promotion. It seems to me that Walker Linerlock should be a sub-category of liner lock. Certainly NOT vice versa. Suggest renaming.
--68.127.85.25 (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Doug Bashford

Disagree, that's kind of a loser argument that gets tossed out when ever someone doesn't like something on here. Make a compelling argument and I might support the change.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 08:12, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, what kind of evidence do you require? And for me to respond; what exactly is your argument? ...Are you denying that a "Walker Linerlock" is a sub-category, a mere refinement of the much older liner lock? ...Or are you claiming that Walker invented the liner lock, as most advertising copy has long implied?

Also...what made the liner lock popular was not as advertised: Walker's lock, it was the popularity of one-handed OPENING, such as the "Spyderco Trademark Round Hole" and Kershaw's etc thumb studs applied to the wildly popular heavy duty Buck 110 Hunting Folder style, "one of the most popular knives ever made". To make that Buck style one-handed, just add studs and replace the lock-back with a liner lock. The old Camillus TL-29 series electricians knives already CLOSED with one hand, but they had mere nail-nick OPENing. Let's not confuse a rather minor refinement, market savvy, and trademark harnessed to market demand —with invention.
--68.127.86.60 (talk) 23:30, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Doug Bashford

Disagree on this paragraph, but you did persuade me to make Liner lock the title and make this a redirect.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 17:24, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

End repost.

If you like I can repost my old changed article here for disscussion.
--68.127.86.60 (talk) 03:19, 6 April 2013 (UTC)Doug Bashford

If you want to post it on the talk page you can. Bare urls do not count as "extensive refs" though. If you can produce links to published articles, books, etc that would be very helpful and very welcome.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 07:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry Michael, after studying the changes and corrections you made (to my reverted article,) as well as your posts here, I'm conditionally withdrawing that offer. As stated, one of my objectives is to correct the popular old wives' tales (false information and related attitudes) that many "experts" in the knife community have: overvaluing the quasi-god, knifemaker Michael Walker while devaluing the contributions of other knifemakers, (such as Camillus, & a loooong list). While you corrected some the errors that I obviously disproved, it seems your bias (uncritical blind acceptance?) permitted you to perpetrate this myth, both in attitude and clear falsehoods. Also, your seeming refusal to make logical arguments here in favor of authoritarian, unsupported declarations suggests hashing it out here could be utterly unproductive. However, should you decide to test, re-edit and correct your article with an unbiased critical eye, perhaps we can complete it here? Otherwise, I intend to be WP:BOLD.

Also, one of the arguments I implied (with refs) was that every knifemaker would love to get their fingerprints on the history of knife making, —one way they do this is by giving every refinement they make their own pet name and publicity. As I argued/suggested, attempting to list them all would be futile as well as unproductive. While you re-listed those very few I named, your context was the exact opposite, as if such a tiny, partial list of the endless pet names and minor refinements from just a few knifemakers was meaningful or encyclopedic. Of course it would be important —if one's goal was to insure the continual publication of Michael Walker's name in Wiki.
--68.127.86.60 (talk) 23:47, 6 April 2013 (UTC)Doug Bashford

Douglas it is up to you if you do not want to work together. I, personally, would prefer that we did this as a team effort. Before you make false accusations, I would ask you to assume good faith. Nobody is denying that a liner lock type mechanism existed prior to 1980, only that said mechanism was not designed for locking a blade into place and would be totally unsuitable for that role without Walker's improvements. (Have you actually ever seen or used an electrician's knife?) I have only met Michael Walker less than a handful of times, so there is no agenda there. Also note that postings on internet forums are not considered a reputable or reliable source. I write articles based on reliable sources not the rantings of people on message boards.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 23:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liner lock. 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/20121218194618/http://kershaw.kaiusaltd.com/knives/knife/nerve to http://kershaw.kaiusaltd.com/knives/knife/nerve

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)