Talk:Surety

I think you might be a bit confused...
Suretyship is a way of referring to the industry of surety bonds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.53.231 (talk) 16:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Guarantee
Previously the English form "Guarantee" was redirecting to Warranty which is not correct. I have redirected it here instead in the hope that it can help to move this article away from the heavy US bias. Dick G (talk) 23:05, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge with surety bond
It is just the same thing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.25.12.214 (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I will go ahead and merge these. II  | (t - c) 01:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Guarantee#Notability/separate article
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Guarantee. -- Trevj (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2013 (UTC) -- Trevj (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Merge and duplication
Hi, were you planning on opening a talk page discussion elaborating on your reasoning for reverting the merge and restoring all the content which duplicates surety bond and inaccurately suggests that surety is synonymous with surety bond? The problem of the disambig template can be fixed by simply removing that template. There was a merge suggestion here since 2012, a merge template on top of surety bond since March 2013, and you didn't explain why we shouldn't merge the two, which all points to consensus. We can iterate on the specifics of how this article looks but the first step is removing all the junk. The concept is guarantee, although that article is overly wordy, and the two children are surety bond and loan guarantee; my revision corrected the inaccuracy by pointing to and describing all three. II | (t - c) 15:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * A merge would result in this title redirecting to the merge target. Perhaps that is the primary topic of the term. If not, then surely "surety" is a concept that can be discussed in an article of its own. bd2412  T 15:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , It's better if we don't talk in terms of abstractions. "I don't see consensus", especially when there's just two people in a rarely touched article, is less helpful than "I have a problem because of X and Y is how we could fix it". So maybe it wasn't a complete merge; you can call it a de-duplicate if you'd like. Basically 90% of the content on this page is duplicated on surety bond where it is explained better. Once the duplication is gone, we can iterate on what this page should look like and whether or not it should be merged with guarantee, which duplicates the concept of surety (you'll see that article says the guarantor is a "surety"). I would not be OK with redirecting this page to surety bond. II  | (t - c) 03:41, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Then what is really needed here is an article on the concept of suretyship. bd2412  T 03:53, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The concept is pretty simple, and was described in my edit, while pointing to more detail at guarantee, which is the same thing (perhaps some jurisdictions have some subtle differences between the two). See for example this book Law of Guarantees, whose first sentence in the Preface is "the old joke among Wall Street lawyers, that the definition of a surety is a 'schmuck with pen', holds perhaps as true today ... it is a particular feature of the guarantee as an instrument that anybody who signs it is taking a very serious financial risk". What's your opinion on the best approach? One way forward is that we go back to my deduplication and removal of misleading content of this page. From there we need to figure out whether this or guarantee is the best parent, while ensuring that lay people who are looking for information on surety bonds don't confusingly find themselves reading about loan guarantees. II  | (t - c) 03:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Given the little daylight between a surety and a guarantee (or, at least, a guarantor), "surety" should redirect to "guarantee", with a prominent early link to Surety bond and an explanation of any distinction. bd2412  T 12:13, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Surety bond be merged into Surety. I think that the content in the Surety bond article can easily be explained in the context of Surety, and the Surety article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Surety bond will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Most of interwiki did the same. Shmurak (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
 * At first glance, i say: absolutely. Well, almost, because i think that the merge should be the other way around, that is, this article be merged into Surety bond. I found myself here while looking for an article about the company Surety LLC. --Jerome Potts (talk) 07:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Support, with this article being the merge target, since a surety bond is a bond in furtherance of surety. bd2412  T 12:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. Came here while researching on sureties. P31?P40? (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. Surety bond should be merged into Surety. Surety is the broader concept and therefore deserves the encyclopedic page, since WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 16:44, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 19:05, 3 January 2020 (UTC)