Talk:King levitation

message: cool.  :-)  needs to be cleaned up a little, though. - Omegatron 17:29, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
Isn't this just advertising? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnw188 (talk • contribs).
:this still needs cleaning up —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dfhhgfxdh (talk • contribs).
:NO!! WHY would you BUY an effect if the method is revealed to you?!?!Magician&Programmer 15:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original discussion 

message: Please take a look at Talk:Out of This World (card trick)#Request for comment. Bovlb 2005-07-04 18:20:53 (UTC)
:To expand on Bovlb's remark above, these arguments have already been presented with great length and detail at the linked page.  If I may be so bold, I might suggest that those who feel that that discussion missed somthing...add it there, just so we can have the whole thing in one place.  It will save a great deal of unnecessary duplication of effort. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment 

message: People hurt buy exposing this:
*Hobbyist Magician
*Pro Magician
*Creator of effect (he sells it of course!!!)
People helped by this:
*Mean people who have fun hurting people even though they gain nothing
SO why should you care if this is not here? REALLY?
Magician&Programmer 01:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY SHOULD YOU CARE??? 

message: I have begun editing this talk page. I intend to get the discussion in chronological order, with proper nesting of replies. As I go, I will follow proper procedure to identify the posters of each piece of text if they did not provide a signature.
I am interested in copyright discussions but am not really fan of magic (or illusion). Please bear with me and feel free to criticize as needed. — Wguynes 20:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. I'm finished with my last cleanup edit. Hopefully everyone can see who is saying what now. Please nest your comments with colons and sign with the quadruple tildes so we can all keep it clear who is saying what. — Wguynes 21:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving readability of this talk page 

message: The method given was entirely uncorroborated, and therefore removed, in accordance with pretty much every wikipedia guideline.--Iclavdivs (talk) 22:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The method is verifiable, based on the availability of a DVD explaining how to do it. I am formatting a reference accordingly. --Ckatzchatspy 06:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can cite it to the DVD without transgressing the license agreement either present on the DVD or in the email sent by the producer, then do so. But if it still isn't cited by the end of tomorrow (Friday June 20th 2008) I'm going to remove it. "[Citation Needed]" isn't good enough.--Iclavdivs (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that a citation is needed. However, no-one needs permission from the "license agreement on the DVD" or an "email sent by the producer" to cite a work. As long as the citation meets Wikipedia's citation guidelines it is acceptable and provides verifiability. Thanks, Gwernol 19:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This paragraph isn't cited to a DVD, placing a link to an advertisement for the sale of a DVD in the references section of the page is not the same as citing.--Iclavdivs (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it is, I'm afraid. This is exactly the same as citing a book - that's not an advertisement for the book, its telling the user that the book is the place they can verify the information. Please stop removing this validly cited information. Thanks, Gwernol 21:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

text: If you would prefer a different format for the citation, then by all means suggest one—or just go ahead and make the change.  As far as I can tell from the discussion here, there's no disagreement that the DVD linked does indeed describe the method used for this particular illusion and is therefore a reasonable source for the article's content. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed uncorroborated method 

message: Do not reveal methods for magical illusions for anyone to see.
PatrickSheck (talk) 16:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from PatrickSheck, 23 June 2010