Talk:Offence against the person

Battery
Battery is also sometimes called 'common battery' (see e.g. paragraph 10.9 of Card, Cross and Jones Criminal Law, 12th Edition, 1991, Butterworths, ISBN 0 406 00086 7) so I shall alter the article accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by James500 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Globalize tag
I think this article probably requires a country by country list. ABH and GBH, in particular are English concepts.James500 (talk) 20:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Other offences
I have not heard of 'assault inflicting grievous bodily harm' or 'assault inflicting actual bodily harm'. I imagine that they may be offences in some other common law jurisdiction; not necessarily the same one. I have changed the list so that it at least correctly states the laws of one jurisdiction - England.

Other jurisdictions will have to be added later.James500 (talk) 11:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Note to self
Need to mention threats - e.g threat to kill (s.16 OAPA 1861) - of injury or force; need also to mention detention/abduction/kidnapping/false imprisonment. James500 (talk) 11:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 5 May 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 19:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Offence against the person → ? – This article specifically talks about offenses against the person in the United Kingdom. I suggest changing the title to something else. I don't know which title to pick. 2601:183:101:58D0:14B:BBC0:133D:DB71 (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose a "just because" RM nomination isn't doing anyone any good. No reason, and no better title. Someone can probably just close this right away Ribbet32 (talk) 01:52, 6 May 2018 (UTC)


 * "crimes against the person" seems to be the equivalent phrase in the US, Australia, NZ, and elsewhere. Might be a good destination. Google Ngram for comparison. -- Netoholic @ 04:16, 6 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose – such a malformed proposal should not even be allowed. Dicklyon (talk) 05:50, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose This is the correct title for the crime in the UK, and as the article is only about that topic, it would make no sense to move it.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:12, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose per WP:SLOP. —  AjaxSmack  22:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 24 February 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Offence against the person → Crime against the person – More broad and general term, also consistency with the other entries in the criminal law navbox. Awesome Aasim 22:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE  03:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is the correct term. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? Awesome Aasim 19:52, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, I get it now. You think that it should be moved from the British terminology to the American terminology. WP:RETAIN. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Law has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE  03:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Mild oppose per WP:TITLEVAR. There is a problem here, but I think it's the kind of problem that would be better addressed by splitting / reorganizing our coverage of the relevant topics. This article seems to have started as being about the UK legal concept. Then a similar concept from a different legal system was tacked on in an effort to internationalize the article, despite going by a different name and also being a different legal concept because inextricably embedded in a different legal system. So we have an article with two distinct subjects (and potentially many more). I think ideally we'd split the existing article content into (1) Offence against the person (UK law) (or something like that) and (2) Crime against the person (US law), and also (3) if sources can support it, an article of whatever title on the nebulous underlying concept of "criminal offence/offense against the person", which could also link out to the national articles. This is, however, work. In the meantime, I don't see much point in bikeshedding by switching the title from one English variant to another.-- Visviva (talk) 03:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment applying WP:COMMONNAME ... "offense against the person" gets less than a million hits while "crime against the person" gets between one and two million hits. Wikipedia usually tries to avoid bracketed terms for disambiguation pages unless two titles truly and actually refer to the same thing according to WP:NATDIS. Is there anything else we should take into account before deciding? Jorahm (talk) 18:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.