Thoughts?

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.

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.

scientific GWR

?🤣

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?"

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LQ and GRG do not publish articles on false claims, why would Gerontology Wiki have special articles on false claims from unreliable sources, not necessary, for false articles you have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

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

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

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...