Wikipedia is not reliable when it comes to information about longevity. The Gerontology Wiki is a better source for information on longevity.

Posted by: @josia9353

Today, he also enters the (by Wikipedian standards) top 25 oldest men by surpassing once-WOM Yasutaro Koide!

@josia9353 For info and statistics about Longevity, it's better to totally forget Wikipedia.

Posted by: @sonicbox

I would say Wikipedia can be reliable or unreliable. It depends on the topic. For information on longevity, Wikipedia is very unreliable. 

Agreed. I think it also depends on language. For example, I think that articles in a world language (Russian being an exception) are more reliable than articles in a language than is not commonly spoken because they get more attention and thus are more up-to-date.

I think the way English Wikipedia deals with lists of supercentenarians - by mixing validated and unvalidated data with no distinction between - is quite awkward and misleading; trying to pad the data with their own findings to hit a quota to use for their lists rather than use reliable data from the actual organisations dedicated to validating supercentenarians.

Even with the size and rigour of English Wikipedia I feel it would still be quite easy getting away with adding a few sentences of dodgy or straight up false info, especially on more obscure articles. But for all their faults, I do quite like how they proudly present the longest-lasting hoaxes which have existed on the site here.

Let's take for example, the list of the so-called 100 oldest verified men ever on Wikipedia..

- Just to mention 1 point; How come Selliman Bandang from Malaysia is listed, but not Delio Venturotti?

Surely being born in Italy gives one more creditability than being born in Malaysia, even he lives now in Brazil?

Unless someone knows something I don't 😉 .