Talk:List of the verified oldest people

Talk:List of the verified oldest people/Archives

Nabi Tajima's place of residence should not have a hyperlink

Nabi Tajima's place of residence (Japan) should not be hyperlinked, as she is not the eldest (first) person on the list who has Japan as their place of residence.
--The above entry was added 25 August 2017‎ by DHLister (talk)

Elizabeth Gathoni Koinange

Is Elizabeth Gathoni Koinange's longevity verified?? Georgia guy (talk) 18:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

For clarification, User:Dcfc1988 claims that this is a verified longevity, not a rumor. I reverted their edit, but was reverted with an edit summary saying that it is confirmed. Georgia guy (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure why, in your edit summary, you referred to the sources as "a personal web site belonging to her great-granddaughter"? The sources provided are for the BBC and the newspaper Daily Nation. Dcfc1988 (talk) 19:01, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

As per the opening sentence of this article, it is a list of "supercentenarian claims validated by modern standards". This case has not been validated by modern standards. Notable issues:

1. The ID card showing 1900 as the year of birth was issued in 1996. It is well known in longevity research that the later the ID is issued the less likely it is to be accurate.
2. Apparently her 6 surviving children total "over 400 years" between them. That suggests an average age of around 70, meaning that at least 1 or were born when she was approaching 50.
3. She seems far more physically active than most other supercentenarians over 115.

In short while the citations pass WP:RS this claim does not meet the requirements for inclusion in this article and are extremely unlikely to meet the current criteria. Another one of the hundreds of claims to have lived to this age that will never be "validated by modern standards". DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:29, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Maria Emilia Queseda

This person may be another 117-year-old that could be eventually added to the Oldest Verified People list? She has an Identity Card showing a January 5, 1901 birth. http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?o=rn&id=22979&SEO=worlds-second-oldest-woman-is-cuban

Might want to watch and see if GRG ends up confirming her.

JasonPhelps (talk) 05:28, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Magdalena Oliver Gabarro

I see Magdalena Oliver Gabarro has been added to this list, but not on the grg list of the oldest living people. Is this a contested case? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.216.68.132 (talk) 15:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I think that she should not be included on this list until she is verified by the GRG. Mzimmerle (talk) 01:05, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Usually to be added to this list on Wikipedia, the person needed to be verified by GRG. At least that's the impression I'm under. There are other people with claims, such as a 117-year-old Cuban women Maria Emilia Quesada that I mentioned above on the talk page to watch and see if GRG confirms her. We wait until the GRG confirms them before adding them to this list. JasonPhelps (talk) 07:20, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

I addressed this on my own talk page when I added her. We have added several entries to the list of the verified oldest men before the GRG has validated them. In fact, we've been doing it on that list for 2 years. There is no reason to treat this list any differently. As long as it's a reliable source/country, which Spain is and Magdalena Oliver Gabarro has. I am adding her back to this list. For the other preposterous argument, Cuba has no validated supercentenarians, no less one who is in excess of 117 years, Spain has over 60.TFBCT1 (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

The current criteria for this page is that they are "validated by modern standards". Ignoring this, and going strictly by WP:RS would mean that all the entries at Longevity claims could be included, which would make this list meaningless. Pick and choosing who should be included on the basis that they might get validated is disruptive. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 00:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

And if you revert again without consensus I'll consider it edit warring. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 00:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't need your idle threats. I'm looking for some consistency. And how pray tell would you like to handle the 9+ entries that have been added to list of the verified oldest men that don't meet this criteria? There are several entries of individuals who have never been validated or have you not noticed? That's what the whole contention of is it a valid source? with a valid time frame has been for the past 2 years? If this is your contention: I will be removing Gustav Gerneth, Valerio Piroddi, Richard Arvin Overton, Toichi Sasaki, Clarence Matthews, George Feldman, Tsunahei Ogawa, Zhou Youguang, and Kameo Oya from this list. It is absurd to have one set of rules apply to one "verified' list and not apply it to the other. TFBCT1 (talk) 01:12, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Actually it is not absurd at all, WIki is full of such dichotomies and incongruities, some are due to strictly following Wiki guidelines, some to blatantly ignoring them, and some are mere common sense. As the GRG has seen fit to only announce newly validated supercentenarians once they've reached 112 years there is no knowing if/when those under 112 will be validated (perhaps someone in the GRG fanclub can answer?). Perhaps that is one reason why the Oldest Men article does not have the top paragraph as this one does, it says merely "verified oldest men" which could mean any man who passes WP:RS, although it would make no sense to include extreme claims. Perhaps whoever added the opening paragraph here but not oldest men, or List of the verified oldest women for that matter, could explain? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:37, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not the one who added that "opening paragraph here", but for the sake of consistency, I've just added that same "opening paragraph" (with improvements) to both List of the verified oldest men and List of the verified oldest women. - Ujongbakuto (talk) 07:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I think the reason they left it more open for verified oldest men was probably because less of the supercentenarian men get verified, simply because less of them make it past 112-113 years. They don't live as long, and so have less time to get verified by GRG. Out of the 8 living people that were on the verified oldest men list, there is only 1 living person on there now. There's just not enough that get verified by GRG. JasonPhelps (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree she should not be on here because this page uses the GRG as it's main source and putting her on is pick and choosing.--Dorglorg (talk) 00:50, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

• GRG has gotten absolutely weird in the last few years. They basically do what they want to, not particularly following any rigid rules. Williamb (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Sort by date of birth not working correctly

When the table is sorted by date of birth, Delphine Gibson and Tae Ito show up as being born before Maria Giuseppa Robucci and Iso Nakamura, which is the opposite of what should be happening. I have no idea how to go about fixing it, so it would be great if someone else who knows more about these things takes a shot at it. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.248.200.136 (talk) 04:56, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Falsified data ?

Have you looked that currently in the top eleven name there are 5 who died in the past two years or currently living, or more than half of the 11 if we see the past three years. I would say this statistical fact doesn't pass any chi-squared test. There could be multiple false data in these as we have seen this in the Japanese data some years ago. 213.197.78.83 (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

As stated at the top of this talk page: "This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject." DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Difference between 2 articles

In this article, a Cuban woman claimed to be the second oldest woman appears not to belong on this list. But she does belong in the List of oldest living people as if her longevity were verified. What difference is there between the 2 lists that makes it so that this list doesn't deserve her name but that one does?? Georgia guy (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I don't know.... I think we are relying too much on GRG which updates very slowly as opposed to other vetted reliable sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:22, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

The difference between the 2 articles is that "List of oldest living people" requires only a WP:RS (as long as the age is less than that of the oldest validated living person as per Guinness World Records. This article requires "validation by modern standards". The alternative, as pushed by many who have no interest in longevity, are more (overly) concerned with following WP:RS rigidly, and/or have become tired of the pro-GRG lobby, is to have a list solely based on WP:RS, in which case, if the restriction were limited to no-one older than Jeanne Calment, there would be maybe 10, certainly less than 20 validated cases and the rest would range from the realistically plausible to the highly unlikely. If the upper limit were raised to 130 years then more than likely the only validated entry on the list would be Jeanne Calment. I think most people, though surely not all, would agree that would make the list meaningless from an encyclopedic point of view. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Are we relying on GRG too much?

Are there are no other vetted sources out there that deal with age verification claims? We need to present this article in a WP:NPOV and as much I feel we rely on GRG too much. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Correct, there are no other sources which specialize in longevity validation which publish such information, unfortunately. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:07, 26 February 2018 (UTC)