Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2010 February 23

= February 23 =

fitness
Hi, I'm an indian 22 years old, height 5 feet 5 , weight 68 kg. I want six pac abs , what should me my exercise chat and eating chart ?pls suggest me .Supriyochowdhury (talk) 06:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * We have no way of knowing your present state of health so cannot give specific fitness advice. That said, these articles should be of help.
 * Abdominal exercise, which also has a large collection of links at the bottom of the page, and
 * List of weight training exercises, Bodyweight exercise and Weight training
 * For eating advice see Human nutrition, Nutrition, Dieting and related articles. 220.101.28.25 (talk) 08:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And we recommend asking your Doctor about it all as well. A specialist such as a dietician would be even better. Steewi (talk) 05:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Mentor concerns
I'm partaking in a mentorship program at college. The program assigned me a mentee at the beginning of January. The minimum requirement as a mentor is to send the mentee at least one email every week to keep in touch and meet face-to-face at least twice every month. I haven't done any of these, except that I only sent a canned, welcome email to the mentee after being matched with him in the beginning of January. The mentee replied to that email, saying he is looking forward to meeting me soon. Since then, I've not sent him a single email, nor have we met face-to-face. I don't even know what he looks like. In three weeks, I need to submit a mid-term report as a mentor, reporting my interaction with the mentee so far. We're already going into 6th week of the semester, but before it's even more late, I want to initiate contact with and meet my mentee and start fulfilling my role as a mentor. But how should I do that? What should I say to my mentee about leaving him unattended for this long and suddenly starting to fulfill my role as a mentor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.120.162 (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I think that since you failed to fulfill your side of the program, you need to notify the people who run the program of exactly what happened. Your intended mentee hopefully already has.  Maybe you can try again next semester.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 07:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The IP posed the same question at the Humanities desk, and rubbed out another editor's response which presumably hit a little too close to home. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * ...and I left a reply on the OP's talk page after the previous effort was deleted causing me an edit conflict. Astronaut (talk) 12:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ...I also replied at OP's talk page that is now the place for this thread, not here.
 * Comet's original answer here is nicely worded and is the best the ref desk can likely do with this. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Candy in 1880s
For a story, I need to know what kind of candy was available in 1886 in Wisconsin. I'm particularly interested in candy that has wrappers (if that was even done back then). Can anyone point me to a good source of information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.211.211.202 (talk) 13:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Taffy was around in the early 1800s so it could have been available. Probably wrapped in something like wax paper since plastics would be unavailable.  Candy canes were around then, so one would assume that other hard candies would also be available.  I would be surprised if they were individually wrapped though.  Googlemeister (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Chocolate would possibly have been wrapped - especially expensive ones. Rmhermen (talk) 14:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure about Wisconsin, but in the UK, most candy came from the factory in large glass jars and would be weighed out at the counter. This continued until quite recently, and can still be found in a few specialist stores here. The shopkeeper would weigh out the sweets (a "quarter" eg 4oz was the usual order) and wrap them in a sheet of paper, making a sort of cone closed with a twist called a "poke". Larger sweets like gobstoppers were sold and priced individually, but often came in jars too. I have seen decorative tin boxes from the 19th century which originally contained toffee, but I think these were bought as presents rather than for day-to-day consumption. Alansplodge (talk) 15:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is an 1888 article on candy manufacture. There was "stick" candy, lemon drops, and "musk lozenges(!)." There was what sounds like peanut brittle:"peanut or molasses candy." There were gumdrops. Thre was clear candy, colored candy, and striped candy sticks or canes. There were cough drops, cream bonbons, drops filled with wine or liquor,and sugar coated nuts. Some French confectioners sold candy colored with poisonous coatings including red lead, umber, and sienna, but reputable confectioners used vegetable dyes. An 1886 Harper's article focuses on sugar production and U.S. candy making. Page 94 and following discusses similar issues. It also noted the dangers of mineral colors, and counseled avoiding the green and blue candies. An 1890 article notes the dangers of vermilion pigment, made from mercury, in red candy,  and yellow and orage coloring made form chromate of lead, and green coloring based on copper compounds. White candy might be adulterated with clay or plaster. Authors in the 1880s thought that glucose or "corn sugar" in candy was dangerous, just like clay or arsenical compounds. A U.S. government analysis of adulterants in candy conveniently provides a long listing of candy types available for purchase in 1889. In addition to canmdies listed above, there were jelly beans, candy eggs, candy marbles, limejuice bonbons, marshmallows, jaw breakers, taffy, horehound sticks, "motto hearts (Valentine candy?)," strawberry creams,, cinnamon sticks, and marshmallow banana candy. Edison (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The Confectionery article has a link at the bottom of the page to a textbook written in 1865, which may give a few clues about what could in theory have been available. Didnt people eat maple syrup and snow, or was that just Canada? 00:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)92.29.57.43 (talk)


 * Thanks for the tips. If anyone has more information, please do share. I can't have too much. :) - 131.211.211.202 (talk) 10:25, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is a history of a Milwaukee candy company founded in 1861. Also, the Jelly Belly company was originally Goelitz Candy Company, founded in 1869; they'd be fun to mention. --jpgordon:==( o ) 16:40, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

What are some not astoundingly difficult yet very un-copyable routes to financial success?
Making something new doesn't seem sufficiently un-copyable despite the existence of patents, because people can find workarounds or litigate you into the ground. Any job for which there is a very limited pool of qualified applicants, while good for those applicants, is bound to be so because the obtaining of those qualifications itself is only possible with great ability and/or resources. And sadly just winning the lottery is outside anyone's locus of control. What then? 20.137.18.50 (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * If we knew an easy to way to get rich that only one person could use, don't you think we would use it ourselves rather than tell you? --Tango (talk) 16:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Is the OP the same one who asked how he could get a nice and easy yet high-paying job? In any case, you're right, if we were wealthy, we wouldn't be writing on wikipedia, we could be owning it. There are many books out there about how to get rich just like the author did. Before buying any of them, though, keep in mind a couple of Dogbert principles. One is that people who get others to buy books typically get lots of money; and also, "Beware the advice of successful people - they do not seek company." ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree that wealthy people wouldn't volunteer on Wikipedia, there are plenty of wealthy people around (they don't make a big deal out of the fact, since it is irrelevant, of course). The issue is the "un-copyable" bit. If I knew a get-rich-quick scheme that actually worked, I might well share it, but if sharing it would stop it working for me, I almost certainly wouldn't. --Tango (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yah. One thing about wealthy people is that they get to retire, often quite early. Retired people get to indulge themselves in hobbies, and Wikipedia is a more useful hobby than many. --jpgordon:==( o ) 16:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * One method that might work for awhile is counterfeiting. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I see this question is right down the same alley as the one just a little further up the page. I consent to the deletion of my question.20.137.18.50 (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Too bad; questions don't really get deleted because they're dupes. By the way, I contest the claim that patents are somehow not enforceable because of "workarounds".  Can you cite an example of what you're talking about?  Patents are litigated all the time and many individuals and companies owe their fortunes to patents.  If they were so limp and ineffectual of a protection mechanism, I don't think you'd see companies abusing the system as much as they do.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * If it's up to the inventor to sue infringers and a non-rich person comes up with an invention and scrapes together the funds to get a patent, what's really to stop a huge corporation from essentially infringing on it while putting forth a tsunami of words from an army of lawyers saying they're not, knowing that the small inventor's resources will be exhausted long before any judgment and umpteen appeals by the megacorp were heard?20.137.18.50 (talk) 18:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * This is indeed a concern, and it is the reason that there are law firms in the United States that work on contingency, meaning the poor inventor and the law firm agree that the inventor pays the law firm little or nothing up front, and then the law firm gets paid a percentage of the judgment if successful. This link claims it's usually 20% to 50%, which is quite a range.  The law firm takes care of the bewildering tsunami of motions for summary judgment and the umpteen appeals.  The large percentage guarantees the law firm will do their very best to try to win.  I'd love to see any data out there, if anyone has a link, discussing the success rate of patent cases taken on contingency.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The more common criticism of patents is that they are too strong and too easy to get, and thus larger firms are encouraged to carpet-bomb a field with patent applications, enter into patent trusts, and things of this nature, which greatly benefit the larger corporations and existing players. (See, e.g., Jaffe and Lerner, Innovation and its Discontents.) Personally I think one should focus on coming up with a good idea, first, before worrying about the possibility of how one will turn it into a good business model. If you can do the first, your chances of doing the second are not too bad. If you can't do the first then there is no point worrying about it. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

My career advice to one with the OP's mindset is to become a corporate lawyer. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The inventor of the pet rock comes to mind. Googlemeister (talk) 19:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that you win the Powerball. It will require very little investment and almost no effort. Afterward many people will try to copy you, but only a minuscule percentage of them will succeed. APL (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Businesses or people that make big profits over many years all have some barrier to entry that stops others imitating them and diluting their profits. So consider what you can do more easily than others. 89.241.153.57 (talk) 20:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have a good one I'm using now. But unfortunately it's uncopyable, so it won't be any use to you. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The 'easy' way to make money is to have a very long time-frame. For example buy a house(s) with a mortgage - twenty or thirty years later the mortgage will have been paid off and you will fully own it. 92.29.57.43 (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Of course, if you take 20-30 years to pay it off, you would have paid at least 2x what the original price was in interest. Googlemeister (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've made a lot of money out of that attitude. 92.27.144.212 (talk) 23:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps he hasn't watched the news for two years thinks real estate prices are just going to keep going up forever! This bubble will never burst! APL (talk) 17:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See above. 92.27.144.212 (talk) 23:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, then, buy my house for 2x what I paid for it to prove to me that your method works :) Googlemeister (talk) 16:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If you bought it long enough ago, then yes please! One house I owned for a few years long ago was recently sold for more than ten times what I had paid for it. 78.147.93.182 (talk) 20:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Is that real value or nominal value? --Tango (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The price would have been nominal value, but the deposit money I had invested in it would, if I'd kept it, have grown by more than that in real value. Cannot be bothered to do the exact calculations. 84.13.26.33 (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Marrying a rich person...hotclaws 18:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Preparing for an eating contest.
Hey everyone. I just challenged another guy in my office to a pancake-eating contest to be held one week from today. How can I best prepare myself and my stomach to ensure the best chance at consuming the largest amount of pancakes? I'm in relatively good shape; six feet and one-sixty. However, my eating-contest experience is limited to late nights at Del Taco, back in high school, and I was looking for some advice. Should I fast beforehand, or eat to expand my stomach? Will lactase or other supplements help? Should I eat them with or without syrup? I'm not above laxatives or purging— office bragging rights are on the line here. Thanks! AlexHOUSE (talk) 17:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia of course has some handy hints for you. See also Sonya Thomas; being big isn't necessarily an advantage. PhGustaf (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That section was actually the first place I looked before posting this question. The part about drinking water to stretch the stomach, I somehow missed. On that note, I've also searched the archives a little more and the only help I've found is to eat empty carbs the day before— a little trick we used to do back in water polo (which, you know, has everything to do with competitive eating).AlexHOUSE (talk) 17:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There is a warning here that the OP should weigh against the lure of bragging. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Dangerous and disgusting. 89.241.153.57 (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Make sure you finish off the pancake eating contest by chugging a bottle of maple syrup. Googlemeister (talk) 21:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Duly noted. AlexHOUSE (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, butter and syrup might lubricate the flapjacks enough to make them easier to swallow. As suggested above, be sure that someone in attendance is capable of handling emergencies. PhGustaf (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand that the Guinness Book of Records refuses to include eating contests because of the health danger. I've advise competing at an athletic task instead. 92.29.57.43 (talk) 00:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Knife throwing? AlexHOUSE (talk) 01:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Knife throwing is not an athletic sport, using the definition of "athletic" used by normal British people. 89.242.101.23 (talk) 12:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

health
Question removed because, predictably, some people can't help themselves FiggyBee (talk) 23:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid we can't give you medical advice here. If you're worried, please go and see a doctor. FiggyBee (talk) 17:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, here's an idea: when a first-time poster with a medical concern asks a question, let's tell them "not to worry about it" and make fun of their english... FiggyBee (talk) 23:28, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * We have a medical disclaimer for good reasons, one of which is to discourage so-called advice from non-experts like "don't worry about it". Astronaut (talk) 05:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Training your biceps without doing pull-ups or chin-ups
Is it possible to train your biceps with your body-weight and without using a bar? Specially for people who sometimes don't have access to a bar, what are the alternatives?Non Zero-sum Ed (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Lots of possibilities, for example, a door-frame for pull-ups, press-ups need no equipment, containers full of water can replace dumb bells, etc. You don't need expensive equipment or a gymnasium.    D b f i r s   19:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The usual biceps-specific exercise is the curl. It can be done with dumbbells (hush, Bugs) or any handy heavy objects. Pushups do little for the biceps. PhGustaf (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

jumping inside a plane
If i was flying inside a plane and i decided to jump up would i land on the same spot? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starwars31 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Assuming the plane was travelling in a straight line and constant speed and constant altitude, yes. Galilean relativity is enough to ensure that. The one exception would be if you were standing on the wing, or something, where the air would push you backwards (the air inside the place is moving with the plane). --Tango (talk) 17:59, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Provided the plane is flying at a constant velocity (not accelerating, not banking, not yawing) you will land on the same spot in the plane. If the plane happens to be accelerating like this then don't expect to come down in the plane at all...for a while. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Jumping in a moving boat
Why do I land in the same spot when i land if the boat is moving?Accdude92 (talk to me!) 18:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Why do you land in the same spot on the moving Earth if you jump on land? —Tamfang (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * These are two slightly different situations. If you are on the deck of a boat, the air is not necessarily moving at the same speed as you, so in this case you won't. Non Zero-sum Ed (talk) 18:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec) Actually, if you are standing on an open deck of the boat when you jump, you are likely to land very slightly farther aft and perhaps to the side on the boat than you were when you jumped up from the deck. The reason for that is air resistance and the uneven motion of the boat due to swells, waves, and wind gusts.  If you are in an enclosed cabin on the boat, the boat's uneven motion is also likely to make you land in a slightly different spot, but not as much so as on an open deck, because the air in the cabin will be moving along with the boat, whereas the air on an open deck offers resistance to the boat's movement.  The reason why you don't land much farther aft on the boat, or in the water behind the boat, is, as Tamfang suggests, the same reason why you land in the same spot on Earth if you jump:  Earth's movement gives you momentum when you jump, and the air offers little or no resistance that would slow you down, since the atmosphere moves with Earth's surface and is not displaced by Earth's movement through space.  That said, even when you jump on Earth, you are likely to land in a slightly different spot because it is difficult to jump perfectly vertically, and you are likely to have a small horizontal momentum when you jump. Even if you could jump perfectly vertically, air movement would offer enough resistance that you would move horizontally an infinitesimal distance. Also, microseism would result in infinitesimal uneven movement that would shift the Earth's surface such that you would not land in precisely the same position as you were when you jumped.  Marco polo (talk) 18:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)The boat could also be rocking in the waves, so if you jump up you would land at a different spot. In fact, if you jump from a spot on the earth, if there's a sufficient strong wind you could end up in a different spot. In either case, if you're inside with the windows closed, that should take away the wind factor. Then you should land in the same spot, assuming you actually jumped vertically relative to the floor, and assuming the boat is not rocking and that an earthquake doesn't happen at that very moment. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If the boat is accelerating, you will also not land in the same location as one moving at constant velocity. Googlemeister (talk) 19:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * More importantly, you will only land in approximately the same spot if the boat is moving at constant speed in a straight line. If it is accelerating, you will land further aft.  If it is slowing down, you will land further forard.  If the boat is turning, you will go off at a tangent, and will land to the outer side of the curve (or even off the side of the boat for a tight turn).    D b f i r s   19:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, just like with the airplane question. The more traditional version of this question had to do with riding on a train traveling a constant speed, and dropping a ball. To the rider, it appears to drop straight down. To the observer, it describes a parabolic arc respective to the earth. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Einstein called -- he wants his thought experiment back.
 * Here's one for you, Accdude92. If you were asleep in an silent elevator and woke up while it was in the middle of a free fall, how would you know (before it landed) that it wasn't standing still?  Or:  If you were in a windowless spaceship traveling at constant speed toward the sun, but its diabolical pilot would steer clear only if you could prove the ship wasn't standing still ... how could you avoid a fiery death?
 * By the way (see free fall) "the gravitational and the inertial mass of any object are the same." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.17.89.64 (talk) 01:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * On my planet an elevator looks like one of these and Accdude92 would notice whether it was in free fall. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 22:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I recommend trying this experiment. Next time you are in the car, try to flip and catch a coin.  Its pretty easy, right?  Just like when your at home standing still.  Even relatively minor accelerations, you tend to instinctively compensate for so that you easily catch the coin; unless the acceleration/deceleration occurs while the coin is in the air.  So, try flipping a coin while on the open road, and compare the results to two other situations: flipping while the car is decelerating or accelerating and flipping a split second before the car is about to accelerate or decelerate.  You'll find that, in the third situation, the coin appears to "take off" in the opposite direction from which the car is changing speeds.  That;s because, when you aren't in contact with the coin, it retains the same relative velocity that it had when you flipped it.  If the car changes its velocity while the coin is in the air, the coin keeps going at the old speed, but the car isn't going at that speed anymore.  -- Jayron  32  06:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I recommend only trying Jayron's experiments while someone else (who isn't easily distracted by being hit on the nose by errant coins) is doing the driving! FiggyBee (talk) 07:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you disable the 2006 Toyota Scion ignition key security chip?
Is there anyway to disable or get around the so called security feature on the Scion cars that have a chip in the key itself which must match the programed chip in the vehicle in order for it to start? A new key will cost about $250 and then another $150 to "program" it...ridiculous! Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajax69 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Almost certainly not. The whole point is to prevent thieves from "getting around" or "disabling" this feature so they can steal the car.  One solution I've heard of that worked (but it wasn't a Scion) was to go to a junkyard, find a wrecked car of the exact same type and to buy both the key(s) AND the on-board computer and replace both in your car.  The car's computer is what keeps track of the key information - so swapping both should allow you to continue to drive your car.  This would certainly cause "interesting" questions to be asked the next time you visit your Scion dealership though - they typically use key codes to track service histories and such and would be surprised to find the VIN not matching.  The donor car would have to be pretty much identical though - especially, it would need the same engine type and might even require matching accessories if they are electronic things like Sat Nav.  Doing that might also throw up some "issues" if your car is still under warranty or something.  $400 to replace a key is daylight robbery though...especially on a budget car like a Scion.  You could also ask the dealership whether you could buy a used key from the scrapyard and have the dealership charge you just the $150 reprogramming fee.  Again, it may be that this isn't possible on Scions - but I don't know either way.  Have you tried calling around other Scion dealerships to see if they'll do it for less?  SteveBaker (talk) 02:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * And I thought €95 to replace a key of a Renault was daylight robbery! Astronaut (talk) 05:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Do you have the master key? There are sometimes arcane procedures that allow a new key to be programmed by the owner.  See this thread for example.--Frumpo (talk) 18:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * That thread also says that a locksmith may be able to make you a duplicate key from a master key. However, none of these things will help if you don't have a working the master key.  The entire point of car security is to make the car impossible to steal without the key - and only the dealership will be able to fix that (which is how they can get away with charging such a crazy amount of money for such a quick and easy service).  Incidentally - if you bought this car used with just one key - you might have a careful look around underneath the car and inside the wheel wells just in case the previous owner put a spare key in one of those "Hide A Key" things...you might get lucky. SteveBaker (talk) 04:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"No part of this publication may be reproduced" - question about quoting and paraphrasing
If a book says "No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the written permission of [publisher]" does this mean I'm not allowed to quote or paraphrase at all in a university essay? I've wondered this before but since I am in my third year, I should probably ask - I really wouldn't want to have any plagiarism offences. If it's not allowed, I imagine this happens a lot as not every student or even tutors would "pay attention" to this sort of thing...plus they've never mentioned anything about it; only how to reference properly and how to avoid plagiarising. Stacey talk to me
 * We can't give legal advice. You may find out article on fair use interesting, though. --Tango (talk) 19:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You should also be careful of the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement. Algebraist 19:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You may also want to have a look at our article on copyfraud. decltype (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Sigh &mdash; we really aren't supposed to give legal advice, for the ethical reasons: suppose we say "It's fine, do it" and then you get sued for US$200 million? But I, too, recommend the topics recommended by Tango, Algebraist, and Decltype.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not uncommon for copyright holders to make claims about what a third party "can't do" that in fact have no basis in law. If you are American, familiarize yourself with fair use. If not American, then fair dealing is probably more relevant, but you should look up your local statutes. As far as I know, every jurisdiction provides for limited exceptions to copyright in the case of teaching and academic scholarship. Also, as Algebraist notes, plagiarism is different from copyright infringement. In order to avoid plagiarism you also need to identify when you are using other people's thoughts and ideas even if you aren't copying their words directly. Dragons flight (talk) 20:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Your university library probably has a handout on fair use if you ask them about it. The general rule of thumb in the U.S. is that short quotes are perfectly fine for the purpose of papers written for university assignments. If you are going to publish it more widely, then sometimes more detailed legal advice is necessary, but even then, if it is just for academic use, and the length of material used is small relative to the total body of the work, is not really a problem. The problem here is not plagiarism, but copyright infringement. (You can easily avoid plagiarism by just citing whatever you are using. Copyright infringement is the more problematic area, because good citation doesn't get you out of it.) I say this as someone who works in a university context, but not as a lawyer. The warnings put inside the front jackets are usually far more expansive than copyright law actually permits them to be (they claim more rights than they have). --Mr.98 (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's only plagiarism if you make it seem like you wrote it. If you put it in quotation marks - perhaps indent it, maybe put it italics - and give a clear attribution as to who wrote or said this - then that's definitely not plagiarism.  However, depending on the (complicated, vague, ikky) "fair use" law, this might (or might not) still be a copyright violation.  We aren't allowed to give legal advice - so check the fair use laws, and if possible get guidance on this point from your tutor or some other authority at the university. SteveBaker (talk) 02:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's of note that if you are in the U.S., the only country that has "fair use" per se, there are not clear "fair use laws," just a very vague law and a contradictory set of case law. Nevertheless there is a lot written about good guidelines for academics and copyright law. Most university libraries these days seem to have tried to communicate what they think are "safe" guidelines—which are necessarily conservative. E.g.  . The general gist of all of these is, "don't copy too much (as measured by a used percentage of a total work) and you'll be OK as long as you aren't trying to make money off of it. If you are trying to make money off of it, then you probably need to consult someone who knows more about this. Even if you aren't trying to make money off of it there are specific situations in which you might run into trouble, but if you are just writing a term paper that nobody but you and the professor will see, then it is unlikely to be a problem." --Mr.98 (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

You can show that you are paraphrasing and not just copying by breaking text with elipses like this example:
 * "Nevertheless...university libraries...tried to communicate...guidelines." from Wikipedia Mr.98.

that I hope won't bring me a complaint from Mr.98's copyright lawyer. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I'm going to sue you for a billion trillion dollars. But you can make it a lot easier on yourself and we can settle for $20, under the table. Sound good? Consider how much you'll save in time and legal fees this way. It's win-win, really. --Mr.98 (talk) 05:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

reliable source
Can someone point to me where it says a reliable source has to be neutral and not biased? 199.8.158.111 (talk) 21:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't believe that's true. A Wikipedia article should be neutral and not biased, but often times that requires presenting multiple points of view, each of which may be (or more likely have to be) sourced individually.  In any event, it sounds like you may be bringing us into the middle of a content disagreement, and this really isn't the place for that.  -- LarryMac  | Talk  21:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with LarryMac. (If the original poster's posited rule were correct, we couldn't use any US government sources for our articles on, say, the Vietnam War.)  That said, WP:RELIABLE is the guideline page on how to identify reliable sources.  Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)


 * And note as well that neutral and objective are not the same thing. You can be perfectly objective and come to a definite conclusion on something. For many topics, the most reliable sources are not going to be neutral in their conclusions. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Indeed - we should maintain a neutral stance - but that doesn't mean that we can't refer to reliable-but-biassed sources from all sides of an issue. I'm not sure why this question is being asked - but I can't help noticing that the IP account being used by our OP has twice been used to vandalize articles - and the IP address that was used by this user to post an earlier question (199.8.158.109) has also been used for putting garbage into an article.  In all three cases, on the same day as questions were asked here.  Perhaps our questioner would like to explain this extremely antisocial behavior? SteveBaker (talk) 01:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

He's either bipolar or the IP address is shared. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 04:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to point out that questions about Wikipedia policy don't belong here. Help desk or Village pump would probably be better. DJ Clayworth (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Although, just to point out, the OP never mentioned Wikipedia at all. ;) FiggyBee (talk) 14:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Touche. DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:25, 24 February 2010 (UTC)