Talk:Acceleration (law)

Remove Template as to citations
The template is removed because the citations given are of high quality, and are indisputable. Adding additional citations will only result in a needless and inappropriate number of citations, which are mere duplicates. USN007 (talk) 06:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

I would agree for the reasons given by USN007. The citations tag is inappropriate in the context in which it was used. 71.91.178.54 (talk) 06:10, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Striking sock agreeing with themself. DMacks (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Restoring template as the user who removed it has been banned for socking and pressing a viewpoint in contravention of WP:NPOV. 2001:8003:591D:2400:E199:C5C6:66BF:6035 (talk) 06:50, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Worldwide view
I don't think the worldwide view policy can really apply to this sort of article- as from what I've been able to find, the law field dosen't seem to make mention of the term "acceleration" anywhere outside the U.S. - and therefore, much like the coverage of a U.S. supreme court decision, is intrinsically bent on the use as accepted in the Untied States. I would therefore find the use of the template to be inappropriate in this setting. I'll give a chance for others to state their opinions on this, before I go ahead and remove. USN007 (talk) 06:15, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The concept of "constructive acceleration" seems to have a US legal connection, but is also discussed in connection with other nations (possibly as a spread of the US model, or looking for support of the concept from common-law or other existing legal frameworks). I don't know much about contract law, so I don't know the specific meaning in the US. And all I know for other places is what I can google. Maybe not so much "globalize" for the existing two meanings, as "there is another meaning missing, and that one is not as strictly US". DMacks (talk) 06:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)