Talk:Gentlemen's agreement

message: Citations : | read first peragraph for facts
| citations | citations | citations |Citations
Hope this helps.
There is another page called "Gentlemen's *A*greement" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentlemen%27s_Agreement  Why the two pages?
:because that page is a specific agreement, this page is for the general sense. Mathmo Talk 08:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled section

message: Was Chamberlain's Munich Agreement with Hitler ever really described as a Gentleman's Agreement?  I am not aware that it was and even the appeasers did not tend to regard Hitler as a gentleman.
Also, does the glass ceiling really belong here?  Is it not the product of either deliberate or unconscious prejudice - not any sort of agreement in the sense of a Gentleman's Agreement?
Chelseaboy 20:09, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples

message: I know that the article states that a Gentleman's Agreement is different from a contract because of enforceability.  However, I am sometimes confused by the difference between a Gentleman's Agreement and a verbal contract.  Would the article benefit by drawing this distinction more clearly?216.201.119.71 21:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think one of the differences is that a gentlemen's agreement can have a negative connotation; that is, it can imply that the verbal agreement is on a topic sufficiently controversial that the parties would want to be able to deny that any agreement or contract exists. Rickterp (talk) 04:53, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Difference between this and verbal contract?

message: The introduction to the article states that a gentlemen's agreement can be oral or written. The concept of a written gentlemen's agreement seems contradictory. If an agreement is written (and presumably signed and dated in some fashion), it ceases to be a gentlemen's agreement and becomes a binding contract. PlaysInPeoria 01:15, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such definition. And yes, you can have written Gentlemen's Agreements. There are some rights that you cannot give up, e.g. copyright, which in Germany ("Urheberrecht") cannot be sold or transferred to another person by anything other than death of the creator of the works, but you can make a Gentleman's Agreement not to pursue those rights. Since you cannot give them up, such an agreement cannot be enforced in court, all partners to the agreement simply have to trust each other.134.247.251.246 (talk) 07:56, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gentlemen's Agreement Is, by Definition, an Oral Agreement 

message: Isn't there a difference. A gentlemen's agreement on German car speed limits or Japanese motorbike power is an agreement not to do something that is dangerous even if there is a temporary advatage to one maker in doing it.  The Boeing/airline deal is simply a (possibly illegal) monopoly - like MIcrosoft's forcing manufactureres to sell no other OS.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.70.209 (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: American Airlines

message: "German carmakers put a 250 km/h (155 mph) speed limit on their automobiles except sports cars."  This needs a description of how it is a gentleman's agreement.71.65.124.162 (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation needed

message: The uncited line about alcoholic beverages not being advertised in the UK until late 90s is complete piffle. Some of the most famous adverts in the UK are for them (follow the bear, a pint of Websters, bet he drinks Carling Black Label) and therefore I've removed it. VonBlade (talk) 23:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: good call - I thought that sounded off.MattLohkamp 14:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Alcoholic Beverages

message: It's retarded, lose it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.63.143 (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: I arrived at this page having performed a Google search for "gender neutral alternatives to gentlemen's agreement". I recently made such an agreement with somebody and wanted to reference it with him, without using gendered language that would undermine my own participation in it. My hope for this article would be that it describe the meaning of Gentlemen's Agreement, detail the true history etc, but also include a section that lists synonyms or modern alternatives. In my search I found a few suggestions that seem to fall short, for example a Microsoft programme that would auto-correct "Gentlemen's Agreement" to "Unspoken Agreement". I have decided that I will use "Good Faith Agreement" as my modern alternative. I am not a Wikipedia editor and apologise if I've broken any etiquette, but this section has a genuinely useful purpose. It is not "working to change people's choices of words", it is offering alternatives to those who need them. 2001:14BB:410:1740:9C03:B76B:D957:3AB3 (talk) 02:48, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Gosh I hope not. It's one thing to use Wikipedia to give people access to knowledge. But working to change people's choices of words a violation of Wikipedia policy. We describe how things are, not what we think they ought to be. If you have third party sources who have asserted that everyone should change the terminology, the by all means cite what they said and attribute it to them.<P>Keep in mind that "gentlemen's agreement" is a both a gendered and classed concept. It is based on the idea of a code of honor adhered to by gentleman, male members of a specific class of a specific society, or people who were aspiring to follow the code of that class. There's nothing informal about that; there were all sorts of forms and norms and expectations, based on the demands of honor. It's kind of like an oral contract, but oral contracts can be legally binding. The idea with an agreement among gentlemen was that you'd insult their honor if you involved legal remedies -- their reputation was far more important than any legal redress.<P>An informal agreement is something else; lacking in form, lacking in social norms, it raises the question of what could enforce it. Maybe nothing, maybe some other behavior rules.<P>I can see why we would want to evolve past the outdated idea of gentleman's honor, and create something more universal, but how we go about doing that is not as easy as changing one word. Describing (but not prescribing) the way that third parties go about doing that would be a wonderful subject to add to this article. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You make a good point about WP not taking sides in the movement towards gender neutrality.  It's just that I needed a gender-neutral word and stumbled upon this article.  I love writing teaching materials on Wikiversity because the links to Wikipedia help students with their vocabulary.  Go ahead and revert my edit if you want.  I will include the link to Gentleman's agreement, but so as to not offend anybody at my end, the gender-neutral phrase will appear in the text to that link.  I take it we have a gentleman's agreement you won't edit my page on Robert's Rules and substitute the phrase "Gentleman's agreement" into the Wikiversity article?  (BTW, the only online version of Robert's Rules of Order is the 1914 version ... talk about sexist language.  And they have an entirely different meaning for the word "minority".)--Guy vandegrift (talk) 02:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm baffled by the "self-reference". Why would anyone do that? The other reference makes me ask who Shawn Fawcett is. It appears to be some guy's website. See WP:RS. I like the idea, but if you haven't got good sources when it doesn't go anywhere. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:44, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Is anyone aware of any further developments in the use of a gender-neutral version of the term "gentlemen's agreement"? - BobKilcoyne (talk) 09:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender neutral alternative 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Gentlemen's agreement (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 23:03, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress