Wikipedia:Proposed guideline for magic methods: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:56, 21 January 2006

Revision as of 18:15, 21 January 2006

Line 9:

The subject is a bit tricky, because there '''are''' intellectual rights to magic methods - it's just that those rights are not yet defined by law (just as it once was within a number of other fields).

Sometimes, the method posted is the result of clever reasoning and deduction by the person that posted the article, which means that it falls under the rule of "[[No Originaloriginal Research"research]], it also means that it can be plain wrong - or even a new innovation (meaning that the author has invented an alternative method that actually works, but differs from what he is attempting to explain).

Sometimes, and this is a huge transgression against the ethics within the field, the method described is separated from its innovator. Example: [[David Copperfield (illusionist)|David Copperfield]] performed an illusion where the Statue of Liberty disappeared. The method was created by [[Jim Steinmeyer]] - so, in the context of describing the method, it must be clear that the method belongs to Steinmeyer, and not Copperfield. Also, since Mr. Steinmeyer has not yet published his method anywhere, it is necessary to obtain his permission before posting the method. This is not as difficult as it sounds.