Talk:Community property

message: Strictly speaking, Wisconsin is not a "Community Property" state but a (and the only) "Uniform Marital Property Act" state. In many respects it's the same thing, and after all, every CP state has its own version of CP. But there are historical and technical distinctions.
Here's an article that explains what happened after court decisions allowing income splitting in CP jurisdictions led separate-property states to enact CP laws, and how these laws were repealed after Congress allowed income splitting (joint federal income tax returns) by couples in all states: http://www.scribd.com/doc/30036669/50-Columbia-Law-Review-332-1950 
Andygx (talk) 08:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wisconsin 

message: In the aftermath of moving community property (marriage) back to community property, community property (marriage) became a redirect to community property.  In the interim since the original move and its reversion, a number of articles had been updated to point to community property (marriage) (usually, but not always, by SasiSasi).  I've undone or rolled back those edits. TJRC (talk) 19:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Terrific. Thanks! --Coolcaesar (talk) 01:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath of page move reversion 

message: Is a legal settlement such as compensation for injuries in a motor vehicle accident considered Community Property? If so, should this page mention that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.245.60.10 (talk) 06:34, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal settlements? 

message: The article talks about Louisiana making a "rare departure from the Napoleonic Code."  The Code Napoleon was codified in 1804.  Louisiana became one of the United States in 1803.  Precisely speaking, Louisiana was never subject to le code Napoleon; rather, Louisiana law is an amalgam of les cotumes de paris (French law prior to the Code Napoleon) and Las Siete Partidas (the Spanish civil code).  This is perhaps one of the greatest misconceptions about Louisiana law.  Davisbi (talk) 17:04, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Louisiana was never subject to the Napoleonic Code, but the Digest of 1808 is based heavily on the Nap. Code, while borrowing some elements from Spanish law (not just the Siete Partidas). The Custom of Paris was abolished under Spanish rule and had only indirect influence on Louisiana law through the codal provisions that were borrowed from the Nap. Code which had in turn borrowed from the Custom of Paris (e.g. servitudes). The decision by the drafters to adopt the Spanish sociedad de gananciales (ganancial community) instead of the Napoleonic communauté de meubles et acquêts (which added pre-marital personal property into the community) was purely practical: everyone was married under the Spanish system, so importing the French system and making it apply retroactively would have been too burdensome. Torvalu4 (talk) 22:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Louisiana and the Napoleonic Code 

message: In the body text, Alaska is listed as a community property state. However, on the map, Alaska is not highlighted as a community property state. Which is correct? (I think it's the text, but I'm not absolutely certain.) Either way, the one or the other should be corrected. DBowie (talk) 16:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Alaska allows for community property, but property is treated as separate property unless the couple opts-in to community property.  I presume that the mapmaker did not consider this strong enough to say it is a "community property state".  A couple approaches would be to color Alaska pink (i.e., halfway to red) or explain it in a caption.  For now, I'll add a caption. TJRC (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alaska: Text vs. map 

message: In keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia, why not translate this into Spanish and Arabic and delete all English words? Similar to many other Wikipedia articles. I agree with you; nothing should have an American (USA) perspective. There should be absolutely no reference to USA anywhere. The English version of Wikipedia should be deleted. Swahili, Spanish, and Arabic only.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.218.81.69 (talk) 01:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, for heaven's sake. I assume you're complaining sarcastically about the banner at the top of the article. At the moment, the article only has information about community property in the US, even though community property is a system that comes up in continental Europe as well as many former European colonies with civil law. This hyperbole about removing all references to the USA is bullshit; no-one thinks information about the US should be entirely removed, but the article does need to include information about other countries. - htonl (talk) 07:56, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, barring that, the article should be changed to a discussion of American law only.  For example, it could begin: "In American law, community property is ..." --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 19:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  You are Correct, USA is Evil. Needs to be foreign to USA. 

message: Hi,
can this be expanded with community property in other countries? I know that in Hungary the default is that all property acquired by married people from the date of their marriage or cohabitation (whichever comes first) is common property, except for gifts and inheritance (or anything that was bought for money that one got after selling things received by gift or inheritance). Couples can have a marriage contract which stipulates separate property but it's not very common. I can look for sources but am afraid there will be none in English. I'd be interested in other countries' laws too.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.98.44.165 (talk) 20:29, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other countries 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Community property. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722063200/http://www.csmb.unimore.it/on-line/Home/Prova/documento36005534.html to http://www.csmb.unimore.it/on-line/Home/Prova/documento36005534.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:39, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified