Talk:Birth certificate

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Birth certificate article.
Article policies
Birth certificate is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
June 28, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted

Contents

[edit] How to change a birth certificate

Does anyone know how to go about changing a legal parent on a birth certificate who is not the biological father? Dawn

You would be better off asking Wikipedia:Reference_desk than in this article's talk page. Be sure to specify the country to which your question applies. --CIreland 12:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Explanation of revisions 12:03, 13 October 2007

Removed "Getting official copies of such records is a cumbersome and time-consuming process, although it doesn't usually take a person to physically travel to the birthplace." This is not only opinion but entirely false, because a birth certificate can be ordered in minutes on vitalchek.com.

Removed segment on statutory rape/California laws. These have little to do with birth certificates and should be on the Statutory rape page or perhaps a new page such as Statutory rape laws in California.

Removed segment on Condolezza Rice. This is very irrelevant to the article and should be in the Condolezza Rice article, not here.

Removed many links; we do not need six examples of what a birth certificate should look like, particularly considering that there are already three images in the article itself. In addition, we don't need to post links on how to order birth certificates; this is explained in the article.

72.185.216.247 12:03, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's the penalty, then?

It says 'Births must be registered within 42 days". Okay, what happens if it's not? Can someone actually live without an official birth certificate if they were sucessfully hidden? Kind of a bit lacking on the answer to this, really... Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The case where the father is deceased in the UK

It says that if the parents are not married then both must go to the register office or the father provide some statement, what about the circumstance where the father dies before the child is born, is the name of the father allowed to go on the certificate or must it still be put down as "Father Unknown" I believe such a case happened during the Falklands conflict in 1982

Stickings90 23 January 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stickings90 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image of this alleged birth certificate shouldn't be in article

It hasn't been determined if the document in the image actually is what the file name claims it to be, i.e., its provenance or accuracy has not been verified. The matter of making the determination is in process. Until it's verified it shouldn't be in the article. Even then, the article deals only with American and British birth certificates so far. Additional text regarding other countries' birth certificates, citing reliable sources, would be needed to warrant inclusion of this image.--72.76.82.110 (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image should be in artice

Your campaign clearly knows no bounds. You haven't been able to convince editors at ANI [1], the BLP noticeboard, the help desk, nor anywhere else that I have found. Please stop. Reverting. . .R. Baley (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Michael L. -Birth certificate discussion, links to archived discussion:
  • discussion at help desk [4]
  • BLP Noticeboard [5]
  • Conflict of Interest noticeboard [6]

Just placed here for the record, given the tendentious nature of this campaign, the links will probably be needed somewhere. Sadly, I don't even know if this list is comprehensive, if anyone knows any other boards where this was discussed, feel free to add another link. R. Baley (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)


Honey, honey, honey...sit down and catch your breath. Breathe in, breathe out. Again, in, and out...in, and out. Are you OK now? Well, listen anyway. In your haste to put together your own campaign, above, you have made several boo-boo's:
  • under "discussion at ANI" you linked to a post made by editor Rythmnation2004 -- that's not me, hon.
  • under "discussion at help desk" you linked to Shankbone's numerous BLP violations, not the photo specifically, hon.
  • under "BLP Noticeboard" you linked to a post by editor Nil Einne -- that's not me, hon.
  • under "Conflict of Interest noticeboard" you linked to a post with references to Shankbone's prostitution/escorting edits at Michael Lucas (porn star), nothing about this photo, hon.
Honey, I suspect you have too much time on your hands, though looking at your campaign statement above, you don't devote enough time to your own causes. Hugs & Kisses, Love, --72.76.99.139 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
*yawn* R. Baley (talk) 22:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Just get up from your nap, hon?--72.76.99.139 (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image should not be in article

for the following reasons:

It hasn't been determined if the document in the image actually is what the file name claims it to be, i.e., its provenance or accuracy has not been verified. The matter of making the determination is in process. Until it's verified it shouldn't be in the article. Supposedly Lucas is sending in new photos of his documents through OTRS [7], but they have not yet been received. Even then, the article deals only with American and British birth certificates so far. Additional text regarding other countries' birth certificates, citing reliable sources, would be needed to warrant inclusion of this image.

Luck you. --72.76.99.139 (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I happen to agree that the Soviet image should not be in the article. But this has sparked controversy, so I will not remove it myself. Bearian (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moved image

The image of the Soviet birth certificate has been moved into a small section regarding Russian birth certificates. This was done for the sake of ending this ridiculous edit war. I personally have no knowledge of Russian birth registration or certificates thereof, and encourage someone who knows something about it to add information to that section. Rhythmnation2004 (talk) 17:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you know nothing about a subject is no reason to move one of the few free images of a birth certificate to a less prominent part of the article. I have moved it back. Black Kite 18:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
The image was moved to that section because it simply did not belong at the top. It does not clearly illustrate a birth certificate as it is written in a language that most readers of the English language Wikipedia will not understand. I moved it to a section on Russian birth certificates with the hopes that someone with knowledge in that area will expand on it. Since you seem to be knowledgeable in this area, I encourage you to contribute. Rhythmnation2004 (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Content of birth certificate

Black Kite seems to be under the impression that most birth certificates include some or all of the following information:

  • Birth name
  • Date and time of birth
  • Sex of the child
  • Place and/or location of birth
  • Names of the parents of the child
  • Occupations of parents of the child
  • Birth weight and length
  • Name of informant registering the birth
  • Date of registration of birth
  • A birth registration number or file number

While some certificates do, this is not by any means the "usual" or "typical" content of the birth certificate, particularly those issued in the present time. As the article explains, the "long form" birth certificate usually includes the above information, but "short forms", which are far more common these days, do not. This is a superfluous amount of information for the opening paragraph of the article. Other sections of the article go into further detail on the actual particulars included on the birth certificate, but these can vary from state-to-state and country-to-country. Also, like mentioned above, most birth certificates issued today are "short forms" and do not include all of this information. Rhythmnation2004 (talk) 17:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Yes, which is exactly why it says "Some or all". You can't just excise information which does appear on many certificates. Again, I have restored the information. Just because American birth certificates are usually short-form these days does not mean you can remove other information. This is not the American Wikipedia. Black Kite 17:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Agree with BK, "some or all" indicates the information that could be there. R. Baley (talk) 18:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "UK" certificates

As is usual on Wikipedia, the details given about "UK" birth certification actually apply only to England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate arrangements. NRPanikker (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the system used in Scotland and Northern Island almost identical to the system used in England and Wales? The certificates certainly look the same, and are maintained in "registers", which is indeed a British system. Rhythmnation2004 (talk) 00:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)