Talk:Signature

message: Hello all.  I've noted that most signatures—and most signature lines—appear at the end of a document, signaling that one consents to whatever may have been specified above.  What do you think?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.19.44.242 (talk) 02:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Signature Location

message: Something should be made for the subject of forum signatures. They are not only common, but are very popular in the graphics comunity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.1.27.217 (talk • contribs).
:This is already covered in Signature block. Geoff Riley 07:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Natasha Wong 2601:8C:4981:86F0:FCBC:9A3C:F89D:953D (talk) 05:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Forum Signature

message: I looked in this article to find information on the meaning of little crosses (x's) under a signature. This information should, IMHO, be provided somewhere on Wikipedia, possibly in this article. Also, there's probably geographical variations of the meaning of these crosses. Marc K 23:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In (very) informal letters in the USA, X means a kiss and O means a hug. These are most often used in letters to or from children. If you meant something else, perhaps you could provide a picture. --Gerry Ashton
Jonathan Billings Jbillings11 (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crosses under signatures 

message: what about signature history?
do you know how old is this "thing"?
mx
I'm wondering the same thing.  Signatures are an integral part of almost all Western culture and law.  What is the legal foundation of the use of signature to create binding agreements?  I found only one site that even seens to discuss it at all, and it refers to a thing called the "Prescription of Fontainebleau"? --SpeedBump
Kira Resari: I would also be interested in the history and origins of signatures, but I would have no idea where to start researching this. When did signatures become commonplace? I figure it must have beens somewhere around the renaissance when literacy started to become more common among ordinary people. I know of seal rings and wax being used in the medieval in place of signatures, but what about earlier times, like the Roman Empire or Ancient Egypt?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sehremis (talk • contribs) 01:11, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Your legal signature is whatever you make it. You can literally draw a big X and call that your signature, and it becomes so. In fact, you can change your legal signature just by switching to a new one. I, for example, switched from my full name to simply "KAZ", in stylized caps with shared lines. It's on my driver's license, all legal documents I've signed since that time, et cetera. --Kaz 18:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I could see them asking you to print your name, under your signature, but to me it always seems odd when I see the instructions, "Please sign your name legibly." Like you said, it's not my signature, that way. --142.242.2.248 23:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: i for one was wondering the origin of using the two lines to mark the underlining "scribble" after your name...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.21.15.75 (talk) 00:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  history 

message: "I understand" there are a number of occasions when these continued operating after the "owner's" unexpected death. What would the legality of the document/signature be? Jackiespeel 17:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Autopens

message: I think the recent addition of the phrase "effectively preventing the threat of signature fraud" is too optimistic a phrase to use at this time. I've not heard of any reliable studies that demonstrates this technology is contributing to a reduction in signature fraud in the real world. --Gerry Ashton 19:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Biometric signatures

message: User:Anakata recently changed the Mechanically produced signatures section as follows:  "In Japanese Asian culture, people typically use name-seals or inkan with the name written in tensho script (seal script) in lieu of a handwritten signature (also see Calligraphy)." Are these name-seals known as inkan in countries other than Japan? Also, is the same script used in all the Asian countries, and if so, is it called tensho in all the Asian countries?
Ideally a reference would be added to this passage, because even if the Wikipedia articles that are cross-referenced have good references now, that might not be true in the future. --Gerry Ashton 22:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Asian seals

message: The following sentence was recently added: "The 'X' was sometimes added to the end of a name already written on the paper, thus why many surnames in Louisiana of French descent are French names with an added 'x' on the end, i.e., Boudreaux." I have moved the sentence here because no source was provided for the information. --Gerry Ashton 15:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: X in Louisiana names

message: user: Gamepr0 as there are so much things wich are called signatures (and now i think by example a signature is also an image (normally produced in Adobe photshop)to use in signature blocks on forums, and several other meaningfull things called signature, why should'nt the page you get when you search for signatures be a page with links to all things called signatures with their own page instead of a page about one of them with a small page with a link to another page with links to other pages about other types of signatures?
Silas dunn Silas dunn (talk) 23:39, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Signatures start page

message: Does anyone know if there are any general rules regarding signatures and copyright? Could for example an image of Winston Churchill's be considered copyrighted? /Slarre 02:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Signatures and copyright

message: In the US, signatures are often one's name handwritten in the usual script that one uses for writing.  In India, they are often small and underlined.  Anyone notice this?  Any references? Congolese 05:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: discussion of styles?

message: Way to remove the dozens of signatures that were on this page and drive the quality of this article into the ground, you idiots.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.39.245 (talk) 23:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal 

message: This page is unfocussed.  The study of signing is one of study of the function that is being performed, in contrast, a signature is any mark that might give evidence of the intent of the participant.  The intent is primary, the signature is secondary and even optional.  Without an understanding and focus on the purpose and function being performed, talk about signatures is without foundation.  Talking about signatures is like talking about baseball cards;  it is for people who weren't at the ballgame and never will be.
The open question then is whether to rewrite this page to concentrate on signing, or start another much fuller page on signing, and leave this as a gallery of tokens for signing, only?
Iangfc (talk) 20:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Function not Form

message: Answer.com and a website relation to a conversation about how 1 queried X and looked around? Where does this quantify as WP:RS? Why not cite Cliff Clavin while we're at it? Lihaas (talk) 07:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  sources for John Hancock 

message: I have see many signature of westener are not recognizable by anyone other than himself. But in China, I think the signature should be recognizable by others.--刻意(Kèyì) 00:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Recognizable, or legible?  Signatures in the west are recognizable for the specific signer, even if they are illegible.jonathon (talk) 16:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Should the signature be recognizable?

message: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2275180/Does-boss-sign-flourish-CEOs-big-signatures-likely-narcissists-study-reveals.html#ixzz2KFLZSKBN
--Penbat (talk) 08:09, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If anyone was thinking of putting this in the article, they would want to read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine), which advises that the popular press is a poor source of medical information. Also review articles rather than the first article by researchers introducing a new idea are preferred for medical claims. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  study linking big signatures with narcissism 

message: This article doesn't really talk about how signatures should be unique and hard to forge. Otherwise Westerners could just write in block letters and not worry about it. SharkD  Talk  03:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: True, the article does not describe how well the individual variations in signatures help authenticate documents. Keep in mind, though, that not all documents require resistance to forgery; just an indication of assent from the signer is enough in some situations. Also, many schools in the USA and some other English-speaking countries are giving up on the teaching of cursive writing, so those becoming adults now may have never learned anything other than block letters. Signatures in block letters are perfectly valid, even if they might be less secure than cursive signatures. Jc3s5h (talk) 11:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uniqueness and forgeries 

message: The opening sentence is 
:A signature (shwetha; from Latin: signare, "to sign")
I can't seem to figure out what a "shwetha" is, other than a given name in India.  Is this a typo, or a technical word I'm not familiar with, or is it simply wrong/vandalism?  I'd rather not simply remove it out of ignorance, but I can't figure this one out. Fieari (talk) 00:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to proceed under the theory that it was either added as a mistake or as subtle vandalism.  Fieari (talk) 05:14, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, looks like someone replaced the IPA with this in September, with an edit comment that was just 'shwetha'.  I've put the IPA back. TSP (talk) 11:40, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence 

message: :/s/ links to this article but I don't see it mentioned here.  I've seen it used before a name as a signature on electronically completed legal documents (like PDFs with fillable fields).  It'd be nice to know what exactly makes this legal, when it is required, if it has a name, etc.  --Pascal666 22:57, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  /s/ 

message: 1.145.85.170 (talk) 07:18, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Y.ssk 07:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2021 

message: 1.145.85.170 (talk) 07:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Y.ssk 07:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2021 (2) 

message: 103.99.180.23 (talk) 05:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — IVORK Talk 06:49, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2021 

message: Custom 105.112.150.246 (talk) 07:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Custom 

message: Please change the 9th citation: the title to "Computational Methods for Handwritten Questioned Document Examination" and the link to https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/doc_view/pid/90f88cb0691749d47d3f96a25aae49d6cd280a61. The current link doesn't work anymore, and the current title contains a reference to a footnote (1) and additional text. Szatmári Norbert Péter (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I used a URL to the National Institute of Justice website which published the report in December 2010. Thanks! Ovinus (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request for source link 

message: Kalid Ahmed 2405:201:E036:C039:D122:53C7:7CC7:8AF5 (talk) 19:57, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kalid Ahmed 

message: Readers might be interested to know how the law recognizes different types of signature. If the editors of this page think it will be of interest to readers, this is the reference:
Stephen Mason, The Signature in Law  From the Thirteenth Century to the Facsimile (Institute of Advanced Legal Studies for the SAS Humanities Digital Library, School of Advanced Study, University of London, 2022)
This book is free and open source at https://ials.sas.ac.uk/publications/signature-law 146.90.74.114 (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added your suggested source to the top of this page –small jars tc 15:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2023 

message: on 3/20/2023 deleted 2 paragraphs about robots without explanation, so I'm looking for explanation here. The source seemed reliable. Kim9988 (talk) 05:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact I did explain in the edit summary. I was reverting a recent addition of citation spam by an academic COI editor, who has been systematically adding mentions of themself across Wikipedia. - MrOllie (talk) 12:19, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, I didn't understand the edit summary. I appreciate the explanation here, and your work to remove citation spam. I'll check the article, with which I have no conflict of interest, and make a neutral decision if anything is worth citing. My interest is in checking signatures for postal ballots, so different ways of forging and checking signatures matter, to keep problems down. Kim9988 (talk) 20:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a paper in an open access journal that has zero incoming citations, I would suggest that it is probably not worth your time. MrOllie (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent revert 

message: Yes, I was presented with an envelope that had a whole stack of postage stamps, opposes sticky stamps, equal the weight of the 2.5 g weight of gold. Can you fit in one of the details? 2604:2D80:B406:2E00:8DE4:1BC5:C94B:E670 (talk) 12:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never received my 2.5 g bar back