Talk:Certificate of life

UK procedures
Hi, did you see my removal reason? If so, could you please provide a good reason for undoing it?

Thanks, ! dave  12:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

The position is as follows: In 2016 following the incident with my local council (as I reported it in WikiTribune three days ago) I documented in Wikipedia the correct approach, the procedure and the legal reasons why and how a Certificate of Life could be obtained from a UK local authority. I wrote this from personal knowledge and through my understanding of the rules and laws surrounding the matter - I am a barrister who was in private practice for many decades with considerable experience and knowledge of the law and the practice of law. I wrote this up as information to help anyone else who ran into the problem and so that council official could approach the problem in the correct manner. I wrote this up as a neutral point of view.

In 2018, as a pilot contribution to the new WikiTribune I wrote an essay explaining how Wikipedia could be used to improve bureaucracy basing it upon this incident. This was submitted to the professional editors at WikiTribune who decided to publish it. As a result of it being published a editor on Wikipedia decided to remove my explanations to the Certificate of Life article on the grounds that the source of the information was not from a legal publication or other similar source. This has nulified what was a useful resource for the public, for pensioners who wish to obtain certificates of life and for local councils. There is no other source of valid information which can be cited.

But up until my article appeared in WikiTribune the "unsubstantied addition" had been up there and had been a useful resource for everyone for well over a year ! Its removal might well be considered an example of rule based myopia which can get in the way of the true aims and objectives of a trusted public encyclopedia contributed to by civil minded citizens.

As a result of the back and forth Peter Bale, the Launch Editor of WikiTribune has taken down the article "pending a further look at how it came to be and the interaction with Wikipedia." I support this action with the caveat that if WikiTribune is to counter “fake news” then we need some way of working co-operatively with Wikipedia and Wikipedia editors so that Wikipedia accepts content from WikiTribune as reliable and true. My take on this is that Wikipedia should treat an article on WikiTribune which has gone through its editorial processes in the same way as it treats an article from a mainstream broadsheet or magazine such as the Telegraph or the Spectator. To do that WikiTribune probably needs a hierarchy of contributors who are themselves rated for honesty, truth and reliability – a bit like an eBay rating system but operated by the WT professional editors. I edit and write under my own name. I maintain a public presence (www.alikelman.com). I am accountable for my actions and inactions. Just like professional journalists – except that they can write better than I can.AlistairKelman (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)


 * See WP:NOR. Also WP:USEFUL. Guy (Help!) 11:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

What does a certificate of life really do?
According to the first sentence of the article, a certificate of life is "a certificate produced by a trusted entity to confirm that an individual is still alive". But that's obviously impossible, the individual might have died after the certificate was created. I guess what it really does is confirm that they were alive when the certificate was endorsed. But whatever it is, the article ought to explain. An article that starts with a clearly false statement lacks credibility. Maproom (talk) 08:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I think this point can be corrected by amending the opening statement to say "a certificate produced by a trusted entity to confirm that an individual is still alive on the date the certificate was issued". In the light of the row that has been going on in respect of my contributions to this entry I would be grateful if someone else made this amendment. If that person then choose, on reflection to re-post my explanation on the law and UK practice on the reasonable grounds that it is both correct and helpful to UK citizens and local authorities that would solve a lot of problems.AlistairKelman (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Please provide a reliable independent secondary source to support your proposed text. Guy (Help!) 11:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * (...Sound of crickets...) --Guy Macon (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a big improvement on the previous text, which was clearly false. Maproom (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Then find a source and fix it. --Guy Macon (talk) 19:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

'Affidavit of Life' sovereign citizen scam
this wiki is used as evidence of 'affidavit of life,' which is a component of the sovereign citizen "all capital letters" birth certificate anti income tax common law 'trust' scam. https://www.uslegalforms.com/form-library/496729-affidavit-of-life Whitney Brooks (talk) 11:57, 5 February 2023 (UTC)