Talk:Fearson's floating cigarette
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Many magic secrets are closely guarded. In accordance with Wikipedia guidelines, only those with reliable and cited sources can be included in Wikipedia articles. If a secret cannot be verified through independent sources, it will be removed from the main article. Any "secret" revealed on this talk page may not be accurate; it may be speculative, erroneous, or even deliberately deceptive. |
Method removed
[edit]I have removed the method from the article as it is unsourced. This is following the guidelines laid out in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Magic#Magic_Methods_and_Exposure. If the method can be properly sourced, then it can be re-added. StephenBuxton (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
NB: The material was removed in this diff and contained the following information:
/== Method ==
The main principle is based on using a very thin thread, an old principle. But what Fearson had discovered during his attempts to duplicate John Kennedys' effect was a new and unorthodox way of arranging the thread. One end of the invisible thread is attached by wax to the cigarette and the other end is attached to the right thumb, with the middle of the invisible thread attached to the head, making it possible to create effects that previous to Fearson's discovery had been impossible, such as making the cigarette fall to the ground (performed by placing the right thumb near the head, causing the cigarette to fall down). This arrangement is now referred to as the "Fearson's Hookup", and has spawned many variations.
Editors are encouraged to restore the material when they find appropriate sources, or to restore the content if the original removal of the material was in error, and to correct any errors in the method described. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Secrets removed (again!)
[edit]As the method was unsourced, I have removed it in accordance with WP:OR and these guidelines. Stephen! Coming... 17:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- This one is a little more subtle; if his manuscript has been published, it could be a source for the method, so the claim that he's published a manuscript also requires a source. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)