Talk:Good faith

message: Can someone who knows what this article is about re-write it in plain English!
I'll see what I can do.
Walex03. Talking, working, friending. 20:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: re-write it in plain English!

message: I've added the technical tag to this article as it is written in rather complex language Samwehli 20:34, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Technical Tag 

message: Is it really necessary to link Wikipedia:Assume good faith in the article? I'd say that for an ordinary reader (i.e. a reader who is not aware of wiki principles), it may be confusing. -- Sandius 21:13, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Its just that some people are adamant that assume good faith should redirect here - Jack (talk) 21:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to WP:FAITH 

message: I think bona fides only applies to the knowledge of facts, not to the knowledge of law; ignorantia juris non excusat, all over the world. I mean, according to Czech Law you can be in good faith about a specific right (e.g. you are absolutely certain that the Porsche in your garage belongs to you, and you don't know it belongs to your wife), but you cannot be in good faith about the law (e.g. you think that you can sell your house via a verbal contract, but the Civil Code says you cannot). 195.113.8.138 16:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  bona fides 

message: I've removed the unsourced statement on this.  If English law doesn't contain such a concept, how come there are entire books (e.g. ) devoted to the subject? JulesH 10:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Common Law & Good Faith 

message: The Latin for 'faith' is fides. I was taught to pronounce this like fee-days. 
See: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fides
The original UK English term is bona fides. The term bona fide (fie-dee) was a back-formation with the same meaning, that is probably standard in US English, and is finding its way into modern UK English. 
Bona fides is not the plural of bona fide. 
Readers of older documents should be aware that although they now tend to be used in different contexts as mentioned in the article, they originally had the same meaning.
I suggest that the article should be edited to reflect this. I hesitate to start it myself as it will no doubt open a can of worms, and I am short of time.  GilesW (talk) 12:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back-formation 

message: The Latin 'bonā fidē' (long a and long e - pronounced 'bon-ay fee-dey') is in the ablative and means "from good faith", "with good faith" or "by good faith", but I don't know if that's an actual legal term or not (not being a lawyer).
GermanicusCaesar (talk) 12:21, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Ablative

message: The Bad faith article needs help from available editors. HkFnsNGA (talk) 06:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The [[Bad faith]] article needs help from available editors 

message: Bona fides in wiki can be define as the marginal (last, next) addition to a wiki ny an author as being absolutely positive unconditionally against all possible users (and that is the author s intention). This is a first derivative required to be bigger than zero and never equal to zero, for all possible users of the wiki. It means the next author means no harm against any user so no user can claim any (of his) positive usage of the wiki was offset by the new addition to make his usage zero or a loss (less than zero), that is, diminished. The condition is hard to sustain for some historico-political themes and others, easy to sustain for others, in general difficult to assert (spoilers are ambiguous, patent exposure is possibly a loss, polemics are ambiguous, knowledge can lead to unexpected losses, etc.). Bona fides is hard to assert when considering the whole of all possible wiki users. djb.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.201.5 (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bona fides in wiki defined 

message: Instead of wikipedia ,why not use for general encyclopedias?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.219.229.158 (talk) 15:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good faith in Wikipedia? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Good faith. 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/20120325220239/http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2007/03/wikipedia_search_and_school_ho.html to http://weblogs.hitwise.com/bill-tancer/2007/03/wikipedia_search_and_school_ho.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) 03:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified