Talk: Duct tape

I am unsure of the 'fair use' for this great photo: Screen shot from Apollo 13 footage showing Jim Lovell with duct tape. from: http://www.universetoday.com/63673/13-things-that-saved-apollo-13-part-10-duct-tape/
That article also has interview quotes, including this great one:

NASA engineer Jerry Woodfill: “...Of course ... the solution to every conceivable knotty problem has got to be duct tape! And so it was.”

(Duct tape is attributed to saving Apollo 13).

I don't know how to attribute this type of article. This is something like a blog by Nancy Atkinson on April 26, 2010; Senior Editor, Universe Today. ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 02:44, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done per WP:BOLD Also: Woodfill said that duct tape had been stowed on board every mission since early in the Gemini days. ~E 184.76.225.106 (talk) 05:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Since that isn't a direct quote, would it be cited to the engineer, with ref to article? -- or cited to article with ref to engineer? I would DIY, but this is currently beyond my WP skill-set.'~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 06:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I added According to NASA engineer Jerry Woodfill, duct tape had been stowed on board every mission since early in the Gemini days. -- but somebody who knows how to cite this should do so (Thanks!) ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 07:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I would guess that there would be no issue with using the photo as it seems fairly obvious that it was taken by an employee of the US gov't during their regular duties (no matter how irregular the circumstances were) and would therefore be in the public domain. Dismas|^(talk) 04:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Duck Products is listed in See also; and "duct" vs. "duck" is discussed in this article. Shouldn't there be some mention of ShurTech and their trademark? Perhaps in the etymology section? Trademark: "...property of ShurTech or other members of The ShurTech Group, LLC" ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 06:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

 Done I added it to the following sentence, which seems like an appropriate place, since it mentions "Duck brand duct tape":

Duck Products, the manufacturer of Duck brand duct tape (Duck Tape®), annually sponsors a competition that offers a college scholarship to the person who creates the most stylishprom formal wear made from Duck Tape.

Should there be a footnote? ... property of ShurTech or other members of The ShurTech Group, LLC ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 06:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Problem with: The tape is named so because it was used during the Vietnam War... -- the term was used prior to that, especially in auto racing circles and Bonneville racing in particular. I doubt there is mention in publications since it was essentially 'common knowledge' back then. Following WW 2, GIs, especially mechanics, returned with an appreciation for the wonders of duct tape (and its variants) and many veterans went into racing. ~Eric F[edit) ~Eric F184.76.225.106 (talk) 13:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The following might be a misinterpretation from the cited article: The tape is named so because it was used during the Vietnam War to repair helicopter rotor blades, thus earning the name 100-MPH tape.^[1]

I don't have a copy of 'Vietnam Stories, Army Times (September 1993)', but it might say something more like: ...they called it "100-MPH tape" because... -- which is not the same thing, (implying that was the origin of the term). ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 13:35, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It's also a satirical allusion to the military's penchant for acronyms and numbers. ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 15:13, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Seek consensus here and stop edit warring.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:38, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Duck tape is a trademarked brand name, and otherwise a mispronunciation and an urban legend. I see that it has been included in the header now, and the actual etymology has been removed from the etymology section so that only the urban legend remains. I don't think that does the article any good. The article survived just fine for a long time with duct tape as the only name of the product, and then an etymology section that acknowledged the sourced urban legend about it being originally called "duck tape" while also explaining the traditional etymology.The Yar (talk) 11:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

This article was first written in March 2002. If you look for sources that predate Wikipedia's article, you'll find some books and websites. The Jumbo Duct Tape Book published in 2000 says "The first name for duct tape was "duck". During World War II, the U.S. military needed waterproof tape to keep moisture out of ammunition cases. They enlisted the Johnson & Johnson Permacel Division to manufacture the tape. Because it was waterproof, everyone referred to it as duck tape (like water off a duck's back)." The 2003 Encyclopedia of Modern Everyday Inventions quotes the previous book, adding to its authority. The names 'duck' and 'duct' are both valid. With publishing dates of 2000 and 2003, these sources are free from the worry that the sources took their information from this article which first appeared without any mention of J&J Permacel. The original March 2002 version gave this URL as the reference, another website which describes the WWII J&J beginnings, with both terms explained.

The Duck Brand history page gives this basic version as well. We don't trust it as much (because it is presumed biased) but it repeats what is found in the books: "It was World War II and there was a need for a strong, flexible, durable, waterproof tape that could seal canisters, repair cracked windows, repair trucks and help the war effort in general. Permacell, a division of the Johnson and Johnson Company, stepped up to this challenge. Using medical tape as a base, they applied two new technologies. Polycoat adhesives gave the tape its unshakable stick and polyethylene coating allowed them to laminate the tape to a cloth backing, making it extremely strong and flexible. The resulting tape was nicknamed "Duck Tape" for its ability to repel water, while ripping easily into strips for fast convenient use. After the war the tape was put to the more civilian use of holding ducts together. So the product changed from a nameless army green tape to the familiar gray duct tape. Thirty years later, Jack Kahl, former CEO of Manco, Inc., changed the name of the product to Duck Tape® and put ‘Manco T. Duck’ on the Duck Tape® logo, giving personality to a commodity product."

That places the "Duck Brand" origin at about 1975. The book Guerrilla Marketing says about Manco, ""Manco decided to play on the fact that people often refer to duct tape as 'duck tape'." Market share in 1979 was just about zero, then it grew to dominate the segment because of strong marketing. These assertions are correct, the ones saying that people were using the term 'duck tape' prior to 1975. In the 1972 book Creative Candlemaking, author Thelma R. Newman describes using adhesive "duck tape" to hold a candle mold together. The same year, the magazine Insulation/Circuits published a glossary saying "Duck Tape" was a sticky adhesive tape made of heavy cotton fabric, called cotton duck. The grandpappy of these instances is the 1945 National Directory of Commodity Specifications which specifies insulation quoted from a 1936 guide: "Primarily for direct earth Installation, Includes lead covered metallic armored, lead and Jute covered, lead and duck tape covered, and nonmetalllc armored cables; general description, conductors, stranding, rubber Insulation thickness..." (Bolding added). This pre-WWII duck tape would have been simply a long strip of duck cloth produced without Permacel's adhesive coating which was not yet invented. ("Tape" is an archaic word for long fabric strips such as ribbon.) So there is established usage for the term "duck tape" prior to the product made by the J&J Permacel division. And the Duck Brand people say that the WWII tape was unnamed, that it picked up the name "duct tape" from post-war usage. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

That is all good information, but it was covered fairly well in earlier versions of the article, and now the "history and etymology" section is thick with misleading and inaccurate information. Duck is a thick interwoven fabric, and anything rolled into a long thin strip may be referred to as tape, e.g., "ticker tape." Any thin, coiled strip can be called a tape, which is why adhesive tape is called tape, and it's why cotton woven into a thick fabric and then cut into a long strip is called "cotton duck tape." This fabric strip is the material being referred to in citations from 1900 - 1945, and it is a material that still exists today. It has never been an ingredient in duct tape and doesn't have anything to do with duct tape. The story about WWII soldiers and "water off of a duck's back" has no original source citations to back it up, and it conflicts with the "cotton duck" story, too. All of the sources are "so the story goes" sources, and they all seem to point back to the Duck Brand web site, whereas actual first-hand citations referring to the product called it "duct tape" long before the Duck Brand cam around and spread the story about it being duck tape. As etymologist Dr. Brown explained, the "duck" version makes a good story, but it is quack etymology. The Yar (talk) 19:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see what you're seeing. The thin cotton duck tape used in 1942 to make military tape was easily torn by hand; it was not your usual thick, sturdy canvas duck fabric but something much flimsier, purposely made with tearing in mind. Nevertheless it was known as cotton duck tape.

The "water off a duck's back" connection is conjecture that I removed.

Which Dr. Brown are you referring to? Binksternet (talk) 20:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

My mistake, I meant Dr. Freeman. I properly cited her Boston Globe article previously, but the citation and information has been removed. As she states, there is no primary source to back up the claim that it was first called duck tape. There are no primary sources regarding what it was called in WWII. All sources telling the duck tape story are reciting the same story from the Duct Tape guys book (or likely, in many cases, this WP article, a circular citation phenomenon I encounter frequently). In turn, the Duct Tape guys book references a supposed conversation with a Johnson & Johnson rep, but otherwise isn't substantiated. The Yar (talk) 20:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Here it is, Jan Freeman's article "Tale of the tape" from March 2010. She expresses her doubt but cannot find evidence to prove her point, that the term "duck tape" was probably not used in the 1940s and '50s. Freeman's idea goes against William Safire's whose opinion is somewhat more significant, and against the other books and magazine articles in the article's reference section. Others assert that there is a significant connection between old-fashioned plain duck tape and the WWII stuff formulated by J&J's Revolite division. Freeman's doubt, delivered without proof, is not enough to trump those other sources. Binksternet (talk) 21:24, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

"All of those other sources" are all just retelling the hearsay story from the Duct Tape Guys book. There are no primary sources at all that back up the belief that duct tape was ever called duck tape. That's the point. Unless someone has an early primary reference to duct tape being called duck tape, this is all make-believe. I'm not saying it should be censored out, but the previous treatement was better. It acknowledged the folklore etymology as a possibility but one without any clear proof. I also don't see any sources backing up that duct tape is made from duck fabric, despite that now be listed as fact in the article. It's a nice story, but there are no clear sources for it, and the sources we do have contradict one another. Was it because of water off a duck's back, or because of cotton duck fabric? The earliest primary-source documented references to this product referred to it as "duct tape." That is traditionally how etymology works, and not by retelling folktales. I'm not going to edit-war, but i'd at least appreciate that the completely incorrect information and citations be removed. One source says that it "may not have been made from duck fabric" and this articles cites that source for a claim that it was made from duck fabric. That's a problem. The Yar (talk) 22:22, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

William Safire does not tell the "hearsay" story from the Duct Tape Guys. Safire is the guy who you have to conquer in order to eviscerate the article's "duck tape" basis. Generally when I tackle a topic, I look to the most prominent sources to see what they say. In this case, Safire wins. Binksternet (talk) 08:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Maybe section on inappropriate uses would be appropriate. Here's one:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/07/school-workers-on-leave-after-girl-with-downs-syndrome-has-shoes-duct-taped-to/

No doubt there are many more. 72.34.80.28 (talk) 06:25, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

This would make for a long section of no encyclopedic value, IMO. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:07, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I do not want the encyclopedia to offer suggestions to any copycat vandals or criminals. Binksternet (talk) 14:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)