Talk:Dishonesty

Crime and Criminal Biography Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

is dishonesty necessary in any relationship?

can complete honesty hurt a relationship?

is it dishonest if it is to protect the person?

is honesty considered a major priority in a relationship?

== Theft from whom?

Just out of interest, whom is theft from a bin theft from? Or is it not necessary to be able to answer that question (i.e. the offence exists without specification of the "other" to whom the property belongs)? The article reads like the person placing the item in the bin retains ownership until the expected other arrives to empty it, but I'm pretty sure that most people putting a newspaper in a bin would be quite happy for an unexpected other to take it out again. On the other hand, the emptying authority may have an interest in claiming ownership of valuables in the bin, such as recyclable aluminium cans. The question may be one of contract. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.108.87 (talk) 23:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

James500 commented- (Put POV tag back. That stuff about Robin Hood appears to be someone's opinion rather than settled law. It has been seriously suggested that the effect of R v Feely and R v Ghosh is that Robin Hood could be aquitted.)

So the POV problem is just that one paragraph? Why not tag the paragraph or delete it?Bhny (talk) 16:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the previous tag with an inline tag, because I can't remember if there are any other problems with the article. James500 (talk) 17:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Robin Hood' issue was referred to in the judgments in the cases of Ghosh and Ivey.DavidwinchUK (talk) 12:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Dishonesty.webp

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]