Talk:Presumption of death

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

merge from Presumption of Death[edit]

I suggest a merger of the content of this the Presumption of Death article into death in absentia, and redirecting this page to that article.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 07:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agree to merge one way or the other. In the meanwhile, Im specifying the category of law. Bearian 22:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree per above--wpktsfs (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree per above Biofoundationsoflanguage 18:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it seems everyone agrees with this (as do I), I will carry out this merger. Terraxos (talk) 02:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete (didn't take long - the other page has virtually no content worth keeping). Terraxos (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John List[edit]

As far as I can see John List was never declared dead in absentia...? Pennywisepeter 11:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edward V of England[edit]

"Princes in the Tower" anyone? I suppose they never have been presumed dead on a certain date? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.101.13.74 (talk) 18:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as “death in absentia.”[edit]

The term “death in absentia” is completely bogus. In the USA, for example, there is not a single reported case in any state that uses the phrase “death in absentia” or “dead in absentia” in this sense. (There are cases where a person was sentenced to “death in absentia,” but that is not the same thing.) More to the point, there is not a single citation in this article that includes either phrase. The term has no conventional existence outside of this article, articles based on it, and the 2011 low-budget horror film "Absentia" (a film about trolls) which is probably also influenced by this article. Apparently someone just made it up and put it on Wikipedia. How unusual! In any event, there is no reliable source to show any acceptance of such a phrase. It has had a reference flag since 2009. The article should be given a non-bogus name. Criticality (talk) 20:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm imagining a Discworld story in which Death comes for someone who's not there ...
Presumption of death does make more sense. —Tamfang (talk) 03:47, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have searched the Lexis Nexis and Westlaw legal databases and agree "death in absentia" is not the correct term for "presumption of death". A trial in absentia means a trial where the accused is absent. Death in absentia would therefore mean someone being absent at his or her own death, which is impossible. Everyone is present at his or her death and absent afterwards. Use of "in absentia" here is therefore nonsensical. Someone couldn't be declared dead in his or her presence, any more than she or he could countersign his or her death certificate.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • For example: the United States Code uses the term "presumption of death", not "death in absentia" [1]. The UK Government Gazette also uses the term "presumption of death" [2].--Jack Upland (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In fact, as far as I can tell, none of the sources use the term "death in absentia" or even the word "absentia". (I wasn't able to check the books on Sean Flynn and Dana Stone, but they aren't very important to this issue.) It seems as though an editor created this page in 2005 and somehow came up with the title "death in absentia". Then the page "presumption of death" was redirected here, as if "death in absentia" is the common name. This is terrible.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:35, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Famous cases"[edit]

Is there any need to have a section for famous cases here, when a reader can simply be pointed to the (far more comprehensive) article List of people who disappeared mysteriously? I'd think the list in section could be removed and replaced with a {{seemain}}. Grutness...wha? 10:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Declared death in absentia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cestui que vie Act 1666[edit]

The above title redirects to this article. However, this article does not mention "Cestui que vie" or any Cestui que vie Act.

There are two other Wikipedia articles relating to Cestui que vie Acts: Cestui que vie Act 1540, and Cestui que Vie Act 1707

Both these articles are stubs.

The UK statute Law database contains entries for both "Cestui que Vie Act 1666", and "The Cestui que Vie Act 1707", but none (that I can find) on Cestui que Vie Act 1540

On this basis, I believe that "Cestui que Vie Act 1666" deserves a freestanding article of its own - even if it is only a stub to begin with similar to those for the 1540 and 1707 Acts.

I have added "see also" links in this article referring/linking to both the Wikipedia "Cestui que Vie Act" articles. Hedles (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested rename to "Death in absentia"[edit]

It seems unnecessary to have the "declared" in there. It feels clunky and less like an encyclopedia title and more like a name better for a redirect. Führerstand (talk) 05:56, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Death in absentia" is not the correct legal term - see above.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 May 2020[edit]

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: Moved per consensus. (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 23:59, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Declared death in absentia → Presumption of death – "Presumption of death" is the common term, as seen in the United States Code[3]and the Presumption of Death Act 2013 in the UK[4]. As far as I can see, none of the sources used in the article use the term "death in absentia". As discussed previously, there is reason to believe that the term is nonsense and the examples of its use are citogenesis. The Law.com Dictionary has a definition, but that dictionary is not reliable as it invites readers to add their own definitions. The current Black's Law Dictionary does not use the term. I have also searched the Lexis Nexis and Westlaw databases and can find no evidence that it is commonly used. Jack Upland (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. The current title is a garden path that can either be read as a noun phrase or a verb phrase (which would give readers unease per WP:NOUN, even if the former was intended). Searching Google pre-2005, it appears that all the hits for "death in absentia" are of people being sentenced to death. Hence the proposed title appears to be the best option here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:25, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The googling and searching I've done hasn't found any pre-internet uses of the term. It could very well be a Wikipedia neologism, but even if not, it doesn't appear to be in official use. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 11:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Per nominator; a legal nonsense term which quite possibly originated on Wikipedia in the first place. --Jack Frost (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: There is also a category: "People declared dead in absentia".--Jack Upland (talk) 03:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.

The first queen of the record[edit]

Was she i n a parliament office 💬💬 169.255.185.23 (talk) 13:38, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

disappearance in China[edit]

In terms of the declaration of disappearance, where a natural person has disappeared for two years, an interested party may apply to a people's court for a declaration of absence of the natural person. (emphasis added)

In terms of this sentence (how I hate such lazy phrasing!), is a declaration of disappearance the same thing as a declaration of absence? or is the latter (nowhere else mentioned) a prerequisite of the former?

Would anything be lost by deleting up to the first comma? —Tamfang (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Presumption_of_death&oldid=1201877636"