This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
There has been some troubling editing on this article. When I wrote the original article I used the phrase that the deceased went through a "ceremony of marriage" with his second wife, and inserted a footnote to the effect that the original claimants had argued originally that this second marraige was invalid under the lex loci celebrationis, although they had lost the point at first instance and had not appealed it. This appears in the case reports. However, this material has now been removed three times. I reverted it the first two time (each time from an anonymous IP address and without explanation), but I cannot revert it a third time without breaking the 3RR. Accordingly, I will allow some pause for thought and then put some alternative phraseology in (although the point is not central to the case). However, I find this sort of lightweight POV editing troubling, and I am guessing that there is a breach of the rules on WP:COI going on. --Legis (talk - contribs) 13:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
