![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have added Tsuji Takano of Japan, as he has just been added to the GRG list. XZT ( talk) 16:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
A minor point - with the split tables, is a reference to the GRG list necessary for every entry in the top table? If there's a GWR-verified entry at any stage in the future, a separate reference for that person might be an idea, but I think it's safe to just have one reference to the GRG list at the top of the table. Tevildo ( talk) 22:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Added Chikao Beppu of Japan, as she is on the GRG List. XZT ( talk) 01:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Today I have added Alta Moore of the USA to the unverified supercentenarians list, as I have found a news report of her 110th birthday and she is from the US, one of the 34 countries in the MEDC list. XZT ( talk) 22:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Haya Kurogi of Japan has died and I have removed her from the list accordingly. XZT ( talk) 00:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The GRG has verifiedhim as authentic. Plz change the citation. 74.140.136.51 ( talk) 05:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Renowned American pediatrician, scientist, author, Leila Alice Denmark, MD, birthdate 02/01/1898, will be 110 years old tomorrow. I'm assuming? that she will be in the process of being verified for inclusion? She would certainly be one of the most accomplished supercentenarians to date. TFBCT
I've found a report and put her on the list. XZT ( talk) 09:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I am a little confused by the requirement to be on the unverified list. Myrtle Jones was on the verified list before we introduced the new criteria. Can someone explain why she should not be entered on the unverified list? Many thanks. Alan Davidson ( talk) 02:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
someone add this to the unverified section, thanks... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7247679.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.65.245.47 ( talk) 07:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this enough to put her to the unverified section? [1] -- 217.87.170.166 ( talk) 17:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
It is August 5, 1897. She is the second oldest person in Germany. -- 217.87.170.166 ( talk) 17:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Due to the fact Marjorie Macgowan is in the living national longevity recordholders page [2], she should also be included in the unverified section of living supercentenarians. so i did just that! Webbmyster ( talk) 23:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
That makes no sense to use different sources on pages which cover the same topic! Webbmyster ( talk) 11:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The paragraph before the second table states in part: "The majority of these cases will in time be validated." However, I understand that some will never be validated - as they have been examined, and whilst not refuted, cannot be proved. I would like to know to which people this applies. If I am mistaken, please let me know. Can this be done? Alan Davidson ( talk) 05:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Daniel Guzman, # 7 of the not yet verified living SC lives in Colombia/South America, not in Spain. So the flag must be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.60.220.96 ( talk) 22:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The current wording in one section of the explanation of the unverified criteria reads "The following table presents a list of unverified living supercentenarians, who have not yet been officially recognized by an international body of gerontology, but have been recognized by international media from one of the 34 CIA recognised MEDC countries and who are awaiting validation." By this interpretation, the place of birth/residence of the individual is irrelevant so long as the media that reports it is from one of the 34 countries. It also excludes any claim from one of those 34 countries if they are not reported in international media (which would exclude a lot of the American cases listed in local newspapers). I think that it be reworded to read something like "The following table presents a list of unverified living supercentenarians, who have not yet been officially recognized by an international body of gerontology. These individuals reside in one of the 34 CIA recognised MEDC countries and have been reported on by local or national media agencies." Something like that, which emphasizes that it's the place that they live (and therefore meet the data-quality control requirement that is the spirit of this) rather than the reporting of news agencies. 71.42.216.100 ( talk) 21:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Lazare Ponticelli just passed away and this article was already updated. It's amazingly fast. This article has become everything I imagined when I created it and more. Useight ( talk) 20:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
How to handle the fact that the GRG list is not immediately updated for recent deaths? A current case is Tatsuno Ioda who was found to have died some time ago and who was then removed, but since she was still on the GRG list she was reinstated. While this without a doubt eventually will be resolved when the GRG list is updated, it seems it can produce some unnecessary updates in the meantime. Should a person be taken off the list when he/she has died, or not until the GRG list is updated? It seems to me that a person who has died simply shouldn't be on the list, even if those responsible at GRG have a vacation, but I also realise that it is not always possible to link to a death notice when doing the change (which is often true for the Japanese cases). ( Yubiquitoyama ( talk) 22:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC))
Here's an interesting case for this list. The next oldest person in Japan is an anonymous woman from Okinawa Prefecture. Through GRG original research, we know that she was born on May 10, 1895. The question is, do we add her to the "unverified living supercentenarians" list? We've skipped cases in the past because there was no claimed date of birth, should we do the same for no name? My inclination is to leave her off the list for now, since the DOB is technically original research, but I'm very open to being converted. Cheers, CP 05:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
An anon user added somebody to the unverified list. I deleted it because it was an anon and had no references. After I deleted it I realized the person they added was a female from Japan with the birthdate May 10, 1895 so it must be this claim. Anyway, I thought I would let you know. If the rest of you feel this person should be added to the unverified list It's fine with me. I could go either way. -- Npnunda ( talk) 02:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
What is this?!? I won't delete or edit it but 138? c'mon. I suppose it is posible. -- Npnunda ( talk) 01:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I edited my previous comment to take out the sarcasm. I didnt want to offend anybody. I'm not going to take the name off the list because I don't "own" the article. WP:OWN regards-- Npnunda ( talk) 02:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
German woman Franziska Maier turned 110 on April 23, 2008. Following a link with an article about her birthday: http://www.volksstimme.de/vsm/nachrichten/sachsen_anhalt/?&em_cnt=906821 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.61.65.62 ( talk) 18:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Hulda Karlsson has died, and once again the problem with sources come up. Since the yahoo-group of oldest people isn't considered a reliable source, there is no way to get a confirmation. She does no longer show up at birthday.se , which means she is no longer alive as far as official Swedish records are concerned, but even that is hardly a "reliable link" to pursue. Is really the only way to get this page up-to-date to wait until www.grg.org is updated? I understand why the yahoo-group can't always be considered reliable, but can't help but think that in a case such as this, where a death is reported by the same person who validated the inclusion in grg, there should be some way to use it anyway. ( Yubiquitoyama ( talk) 13:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC))
This page isn't supposed to be a clone of the grg. I say, as long as their is a reliable source, go ahead and make the change. When someone dies, they die. -- Npnunda ( talk) 23:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Maria de la O Soria has been validated. Here is the information:
BIRTH RECORD Issued in Úbeda on Apr. 12, 1898 Name: María de la O Soria Berbel Born: Apr. 09, 1898 at 4:00 pm Parents: Ignacio Soria Sánchez (30) and María Francisca Berbel Ortiz (25) Grandparents: Francisco Soria & María de la O Sánchez and Francisco Berbel & Juana Ortiz.
MARRIAGE RECORD Issued in Úbeda on Sep. 29, 1924 Names: Gaspar Ráez Martínez (27) and María de la O Soria Berbel (26) Married: Church of San Isidoro, Úbeda, Sep. 28, 1924 Parents: Luis Ráez Campos & Luisa Martínez Soler and Ignacio Soria Sánchez and Francisca Berbel Ortiz Margin note: They received a family book on Feb. 11, 1959
Therefore, we have: - Birth record. She was born on Apr. 09, 1898. - Marriage record. She was 26 on Sep. 1924 - Marriage record note. She was alive and married as of Feb. 1959. - Asociacion Cultural Ubetense. Interview in early 2000 stating she was 101 and expected to be 101 on Apr. 05. This interview provided me all the info (birth, marriage, etc.) which was confirmed by the official documents. This is the link
http://www.vbeda.com/Ibiut/v/centrale2.php?es=00001771&b=10
- Several articles at ages 103, 107, 108, 109 and 110. All of them stating that she was born on Apr. 05, 1898. She will be added to the GRG list shortly.
3 people I believe are still alive were deleted by an anon. I added them back. If I was wrong please correct. Thank you -- Npnunda ( talk) 23:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Two cases are missing in the unverified section section:
-Frieda Borchert, born 05.01.1897
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9525
-Lina von Veh, born 23.02.1898
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9985
--
Statistician (
talk)
18:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
First it's isn't Robert Young's group - we are hundreds on the list. And what ist for you a reliable source? I phoned with the doughter of Lina von Veh last week and she's still alive but we have problems to get all documents because she was born in St. Petersburg and was expelt after the Oktober Revolution...
Frieda Borchert was confirm alive as of 5.1.2008 via phone by an other german researcher.
--
Statistician (
talk)
09:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
That's so weird about wikipedia. False articels in the internet are prove enough, but only printed articels and a group about validating aren't...
Btw.: The grg-page with the reseacher Robert Young ist a resource for you, but not the mailingliste in which the must cases are valided... inconsequent.
--
Statistician (
talk)
23:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
The Age in days column is unnecessary. It is regarded as necessary on the List of Oldest Persons page because (for example) two people might be listed next to each other, but they may have been born in completely different years and have lived a different number of leap years, which (marginally) impacts the number of days when compared. (So A born 1 February 1896 died 20 January 2007 has lived one day longer than B born 1 February 1897 died 20 January 2008. This cannot happen on this page, as everyone is listed together and will be born in the same year or immediately the year before or after. There can be no anomaly. The age in days column adds nothing to this site and I suggest it be removed for that reason. Quite some time ago I suggested footnoting the differences, which I did to the List of Oldest People site (it has now been changed to a full column) - but as I found no such problems on this site, I proposed no footnotes. It was not necessary. Alan Davidson ( talk) 04:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I have added Tsuji Takano of Japan, as he has just been added to the GRG list. XZT ( talk) 16:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
A minor point - with the split tables, is a reference to the GRG list necessary for every entry in the top table? If there's a GWR-verified entry at any stage in the future, a separate reference for that person might be an idea, but I think it's safe to just have one reference to the GRG list at the top of the table. Tevildo ( talk) 22:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Added Chikao Beppu of Japan, as she is on the GRG List. XZT ( talk) 01:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Today I have added Alta Moore of the USA to the unverified supercentenarians list, as I have found a news report of her 110th birthday and she is from the US, one of the 34 countries in the MEDC list. XZT ( talk) 22:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Haya Kurogi of Japan has died and I have removed her from the list accordingly. XZT ( talk) 00:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The GRG has verifiedhim as authentic. Plz change the citation. 74.140.136.51 ( talk) 05:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Renowned American pediatrician, scientist, author, Leila Alice Denmark, MD, birthdate 02/01/1898, will be 110 years old tomorrow. I'm assuming? that she will be in the process of being verified for inclusion? She would certainly be one of the most accomplished supercentenarians to date. TFBCT
I've found a report and put her on the list. XZT ( talk) 09:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I am a little confused by the requirement to be on the unverified list. Myrtle Jones was on the verified list before we introduced the new criteria. Can someone explain why she should not be entered on the unverified list? Many thanks. Alan Davidson ( talk) 02:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
someone add this to the unverified section, thanks... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7247679.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.65.245.47 ( talk) 07:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Is this enough to put her to the unverified section? [1] -- 217.87.170.166 ( talk) 17:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
It is August 5, 1897. She is the second oldest person in Germany. -- 217.87.170.166 ( talk) 17:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Due to the fact Marjorie Macgowan is in the living national longevity recordholders page [2], she should also be included in the unverified section of living supercentenarians. so i did just that! Webbmyster ( talk) 23:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
That makes no sense to use different sources on pages which cover the same topic! Webbmyster ( talk) 11:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The paragraph before the second table states in part: "The majority of these cases will in time be validated." However, I understand that some will never be validated - as they have been examined, and whilst not refuted, cannot be proved. I would like to know to which people this applies. If I am mistaken, please let me know. Can this be done? Alan Davidson ( talk) 05:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Daniel Guzman, # 7 of the not yet verified living SC lives in Colombia/South America, not in Spain. So the flag must be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.60.220.96 ( talk) 22:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The current wording in one section of the explanation of the unverified criteria reads "The following table presents a list of unverified living supercentenarians, who have not yet been officially recognized by an international body of gerontology, but have been recognized by international media from one of the 34 CIA recognised MEDC countries and who are awaiting validation." By this interpretation, the place of birth/residence of the individual is irrelevant so long as the media that reports it is from one of the 34 countries. It also excludes any claim from one of those 34 countries if they are not reported in international media (which would exclude a lot of the American cases listed in local newspapers). I think that it be reworded to read something like "The following table presents a list of unverified living supercentenarians, who have not yet been officially recognized by an international body of gerontology. These individuals reside in one of the 34 CIA recognised MEDC countries and have been reported on by local or national media agencies." Something like that, which emphasizes that it's the place that they live (and therefore meet the data-quality control requirement that is the spirit of this) rather than the reporting of news agencies. 71.42.216.100 ( talk) 21:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Lazare Ponticelli just passed away and this article was already updated. It's amazingly fast. This article has become everything I imagined when I created it and more. Useight ( talk) 20:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
How to handle the fact that the GRG list is not immediately updated for recent deaths? A current case is Tatsuno Ioda who was found to have died some time ago and who was then removed, but since she was still on the GRG list she was reinstated. While this without a doubt eventually will be resolved when the GRG list is updated, it seems it can produce some unnecessary updates in the meantime. Should a person be taken off the list when he/she has died, or not until the GRG list is updated? It seems to me that a person who has died simply shouldn't be on the list, even if those responsible at GRG have a vacation, but I also realise that it is not always possible to link to a death notice when doing the change (which is often true for the Japanese cases). ( Yubiquitoyama ( talk) 22:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC))
Here's an interesting case for this list. The next oldest person in Japan is an anonymous woman from Okinawa Prefecture. Through GRG original research, we know that she was born on May 10, 1895. The question is, do we add her to the "unverified living supercentenarians" list? We've skipped cases in the past because there was no claimed date of birth, should we do the same for no name? My inclination is to leave her off the list for now, since the DOB is technically original research, but I'm very open to being converted. Cheers, CP 05:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
An anon user added somebody to the unverified list. I deleted it because it was an anon and had no references. After I deleted it I realized the person they added was a female from Japan with the birthdate May 10, 1895 so it must be this claim. Anyway, I thought I would let you know. If the rest of you feel this person should be added to the unverified list It's fine with me. I could go either way. -- Npnunda ( talk) 02:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
What is this?!? I won't delete or edit it but 138? c'mon. I suppose it is posible. -- Npnunda ( talk) 01:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC) I edited my previous comment to take out the sarcasm. I didnt want to offend anybody. I'm not going to take the name off the list because I don't "own" the article. WP:OWN regards-- Npnunda ( talk) 02:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
German woman Franziska Maier turned 110 on April 23, 2008. Following a link with an article about her birthday: http://www.volksstimme.de/vsm/nachrichten/sachsen_anhalt/?&em_cnt=906821 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.61.65.62 ( talk) 18:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Hulda Karlsson has died, and once again the problem with sources come up. Since the yahoo-group of oldest people isn't considered a reliable source, there is no way to get a confirmation. She does no longer show up at birthday.se , which means she is no longer alive as far as official Swedish records are concerned, but even that is hardly a "reliable link" to pursue. Is really the only way to get this page up-to-date to wait until www.grg.org is updated? I understand why the yahoo-group can't always be considered reliable, but can't help but think that in a case such as this, where a death is reported by the same person who validated the inclusion in grg, there should be some way to use it anyway. ( Yubiquitoyama ( talk) 13:33, 29 April 2008 (UTC))
This page isn't supposed to be a clone of the grg. I say, as long as their is a reliable source, go ahead and make the change. When someone dies, they die. -- Npnunda ( talk) 23:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
Maria de la O Soria has been validated. Here is the information:
BIRTH RECORD Issued in Úbeda on Apr. 12, 1898 Name: María de la O Soria Berbel Born: Apr. 09, 1898 at 4:00 pm Parents: Ignacio Soria Sánchez (30) and María Francisca Berbel Ortiz (25) Grandparents: Francisco Soria & María de la O Sánchez and Francisco Berbel & Juana Ortiz.
MARRIAGE RECORD Issued in Úbeda on Sep. 29, 1924 Names: Gaspar Ráez Martínez (27) and María de la O Soria Berbel (26) Married: Church of San Isidoro, Úbeda, Sep. 28, 1924 Parents: Luis Ráez Campos & Luisa Martínez Soler and Ignacio Soria Sánchez and Francisca Berbel Ortiz Margin note: They received a family book on Feb. 11, 1959
Therefore, we have: - Birth record. She was born on Apr. 09, 1898. - Marriage record. She was 26 on Sep. 1924 - Marriage record note. She was alive and married as of Feb. 1959. - Asociacion Cultural Ubetense. Interview in early 2000 stating she was 101 and expected to be 101 on Apr. 05. This interview provided me all the info (birth, marriage, etc.) which was confirmed by the official documents. This is the link
http://www.vbeda.com/Ibiut/v/centrale2.php?es=00001771&b=10
- Several articles at ages 103, 107, 108, 109 and 110. All of them stating that she was born on Apr. 05, 1898. She will be added to the GRG list shortly.
3 people I believe are still alive were deleted by an anon. I added them back. If I was wrong please correct. Thank you -- Npnunda ( talk) 23:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Two cases are missing in the unverified section section:
-Frieda Borchert, born 05.01.1897
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9525
-Lina von Veh, born 23.02.1898
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Worlds_Oldest_People/message/9985
--
Statistician (
talk)
18:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
First it's isn't Robert Young's group - we are hundreds on the list. And what ist for you a reliable source? I phoned with the doughter of Lina von Veh last week and she's still alive but we have problems to get all documents because she was born in St. Petersburg and was expelt after the Oktober Revolution...
Frieda Borchert was confirm alive as of 5.1.2008 via phone by an other german researcher.
--
Statistician (
talk)
09:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
That's so weird about wikipedia. False articels in the internet are prove enough, but only printed articels and a group about validating aren't...
Btw.: The grg-page with the reseacher Robert Young ist a resource for you, but not the mailingliste in which the must cases are valided... inconsequent.
--
Statistician (
talk)
23:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
The Age in days column is unnecessary. It is regarded as necessary on the List of Oldest Persons page because (for example) two people might be listed next to each other, but they may have been born in completely different years and have lived a different number of leap years, which (marginally) impacts the number of days when compared. (So A born 1 February 1896 died 20 January 2007 has lived one day longer than B born 1 February 1897 died 20 January 2008. This cannot happen on this page, as everyone is listed together and will be born in the same year or immediately the year before or after. There can be no anomaly. The age in days column adds nothing to this site and I suggest it be removed for that reason. Quite some time ago I suggested footnoting the differences, which I did to the List of Oldest People site (it has now been changed to a full column) - but as I found no such problems on this site, I proposed no footnotes. It was not necessary. Alan Davidson ( talk) 04:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)