Gerontology Wiki
 
Notifications
Clear all

Gerontology Wiki

14 Posts
10 Users
14 Reactions
656 Views
Admin
(@admin)
Administrator Admin
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 449
Topic starter  

Links to or discussion about the Gerontology Wiki can be held here.


   
Quote
Ale76
(@ale76)
Supercentenarian Fan
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 4449
 
Posted by: @josia9353

@ale76

....

But another reason I used it is that I couldn't find a "List of the verified oldest men" on GerontologyWikia. Would you know if it's there? I could only find the https://gerontology.wikia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_living_men

...

 

 

https://gerontology.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Validated_Male_Supercentenarians

http://www.supercentenariditalia.it/persone-viventi-piu-longeve-in-italia.
Persone viventi più longeve in Italia – Supercentenari d'Italia (supercentenariditalia.it)


   
Josia9353 reacted
ReplyQuote
Josia9353
(@josia9353)
Fan
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 117
 

@ale76 Thanks so much, I needed this one! ^^


   
ReplyQuote
AQ
 AQ
(@aq)
Fan
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 741
 

I noticed from the gerontology fandom site that Abilio Borges Moreira is no longer included among the living, and Josias de Oliveira is now listed as the oldest living man from Brazil. Has Abilio passed away?

|Male| 🎮Gamer🎮 > 👕Fashion Lover👕 > 🕶Chore Motivator🕶
Favorite Male SC: Juan Vicente Pérez Mora
Favorite Female SCs: Lucile Randon & Kane Tanaka
😁And the kind of guy that's always down to chat😁


   
ChrisR reacted
ReplyQuote
MrCatlord
(@mrcatlord)
Supercentenarian Fan
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 884
 

Posted by: @aq

I noticed from the gerontology fandom site that Abilio Borges Moreira is no longer included among the living, and Josias de Oliveira is now listed as the oldest living man from Brazil. Has Abilio passed away?

Looks like he got removed from the list on the 12th

This is the edit that got rid of him. It doesn't say anything about why and there were several other edits that were done so it might have been a mistake

 


   
ChrisR reacted
ReplyQuote
Dejan
(@dejan)
Centenarian
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 381
 

Posted by: @mrcatlord

Posted by: @aq

I noticed from the gerontology fandom site that Abilio Borges Moreira is no longer included among the living, and Josias de Oliveira is now listed as the oldest living man from Brazil. Has Abilio passed away?

Looks like he got removed from the list on the 12th

This is the edit that got rid of him. It doesn't say anything about why and there were several other edits that were done so it might have been a mistake

Private information that I can't reveal, I can't say that he died, but I can say that he went into limbo. The family has kindly requested that all information about him be deleted from the Gerontology Wiki. Since it appeared in public several times in publicly available articles, the request for total deletion does not apply, so I moved him to questionable cases, not deleted... They are not interested for validation and they are not sure in his year of birth...

 

This post was modified 6 months ago by Dejan

   
MrCatlord, diego and ChrisR reacted
ReplyQuote
(@billy-robinson)
Supercentenarian Fan
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 31
 

Is there also a reason for deleting Goncalino Norberto's page other than his age being Questionable


   
diego reacted
ReplyQuote
Dejan
(@dejan)
Centenarian
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 381
 

Posted by: @billy-robinson

Is there also a reason for deleting Goncalino Norberto's page other than his age being Questionable

He died in November 2023 at the alleged age of 112 years, 89 days. It wasn't deleted, it was added in questionable cases, someone wrote that he could be a decade younger, I don't know anything about him. You don't need to create articles about fake claims, there are already enough of them, any new article about fake or exaggerated claims from unreliable exports will be deleted. So far enough false information has been added, I have deleted a lot, and probably almost all articles about false claims will be deleted or redirected, pending the decision of the supreme headquarters. If one's age is questionable, it is enough to add him to the list of questionable supercentenarian claims and there is no need to create an article for such cases.

We will see what the new rigorous rules will be on the Gerontology Wiki and what can be used as a resource, it will be something like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

It is important to recognize what is a reliable and what is an unreliable source...

LQ and GRG do not publish articles on false claims, why would Gerontology Wiki have special articles on false claims from unreliable sources, not necessary, for false articles you have this: https://longevity-myths.fandom.com/f

Links to or discussion about the Gerontology Wiki can be held here:

https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/fans-discussion/gerontology-wiki/#post-1533

This post was modified 6 months ago 3 times by Dejan

   
ReplyQuote
(@billy-robinson)
Supercentenarian Fan
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 31
 

Posted by: @dejan

Posted by: @billy-robinson

Is there also a reason for deleting Goncalino Norberto's page other than his age being Questionable

He died in November 2023 at the alleged age of 112 years, 89 days. It wasn't deleted, it was added in questionable cases, someone wrote that he could be a decade younger, I don't know anything about him. You don't need to create articles about fake claims, there are already enough of them, any new article about fake or exaggerated claims from unreliable exports will be deleted. So far enough false information has been added, I have deleted a lot, and probably almost all articles about false claims will be deleted or redirected, pending the decision of the supreme headquarters. If one's age is questionable, it is enough to add him to the list of questionable supercentenarian claims and there is no need to create an article for such cases.

We will see what the new rigorous rules will be on the Gerontology Wiki and what can be used as a resource, it will be something like this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

It is important to recognize what is a reliable and what is an unreliable source...

LQ and GRG do not publish articles on false claims, why would Gerontology Wiki have special articles on false claims from unreliable sources, not necessary, for false articles you have this: https://longevity-myths.fandom.com/f

Links to or discussion about the Gerontology Wiki can be held here:

https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/fans-discussion/gerontology-wiki/#post-1533

I'm sorry that I created those articles but I didn't actually create Goncalinos one though. I know his age was Questionable but there are other Questionable supercentenarians on the wiki who haven't been deleted and I know the sources I put for them haven't been really reliable. I'm not trying to get blocked for creating articles that are apparently false. I say that we give everyone under 130 a chance unless there are evidence supporting them being younger. That's all I have to say, all I could say is sorry for creating those articles. 

 


   
ChrisR reacted
ReplyQuote
930310
(@930310)
Gerontology student
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 648
 

Still, isn't the wiki supposed to serve as an encyclopedia of gerontology? Including notes about longevity claimants and myths is necessary in order to showcase the need of actual age validation. 

I am saying that it must therefore be noted in those individual articles that those claims are unvalidated/undocumented.

Still, seeing that there are many cases that the GRG haven’t "validated" and that LQ isn't viewed as a reliable source for some bizarre reason, how can a person writing and editing these articles pass judgement on the veracity of a claim without it being "original research?"


   
diego and 024Tomi reacted
ReplyQuote
Dejan
(@dejan)
Centenarian
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 381
 

@930310 For me, LQ is a reliable source. I see no reason why Gerontology Wiki would not recognize LQ validations as well, however Waclaw says that Gerontology Wiki was founded to serve science and therefore recognizes only scientific GWR and GRG validations, that is, to serve as a scientific encyclopedia...

I'm just a regular editor, so I've never had an editors war, I've never deleted LQ validations with GW, nor have I participated in making decisions about it. I am completely neutral...


   
diego reacted
ReplyQuote
024Tomi
(@024tomi)
Fan and researcher
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 385
 

Posted by: @dejan

scientific GWR

?🤣

 

ESO Correspondent for Hungary (since 2020)
GRG Correspondent for Hungary (2020-2023)
Tracker and researcher of Hungarian and other Central European (super)centenarians (since 2016)
Enthusiast of extreme longevity (since childhood)


   
AQ reacted
ReplyQuote
Dejan
(@dejan)
Centenarian
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 381
 

Posted by: @024tomi

Posted by: @dejan

scientific GWR

?🤣

Yes, I meant to say that Gerontology Wiki currently only recognizes GRG and GWR, that is categorized as scientific validation of age as GRG is the consultant for Guinness World Records...

Given that the founder of Gerontology Wiki agrees with Waclaw that things will stay as they are, they probably will, there's nothing we can do about it. Gerontology Wiki remains a scientific encyclopedia controlled by GRG.

The 110 Club is no longer under the control of GRG, it was taken over by LQ and is now under LQ control. I have never written negative comments on The 110 Club, and my account was recently blocked for unknown reasons.

 

This post was modified 6 months ago by Dejan

   
diego reacted
ReplyQuote
ChrisR
(@chrisr)
Fan
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 1187
 

It reflects their own efforts to try and remain relevant.

There are bigger, better, more efficient and competent entities than them. They cling to their flawed logic as quoited above, so that they supposedly have a meaningful place in the world or supercentenarians.

Gerontology Wiki is a key tool for them in this regard.


   
024Tomi reacted
ReplyQuote
Share: