Global Supercentenarian Forum
The Supercentenarian World
Notifications
Clear all
04/03/2024 8:27 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 26 January 2024:
Hazel Schultz, CAN/USA, 12 Jan 1913 - Present, 111+ years. (Previously validated by LQ.)
There is no publicly available information on her maiden name and parents' names, and they only validated her due to my research, which involved me scouring census records and newspaper articles to locate. It's hilarious to see Oliver take credit for "validating" her case when all he did was read my post to get the necessary information.
Β
The same can be said for Hazel Schultz as Angelica Tiscornia. It isn't hard to 'work backwards', as it were. Look at articles about them, find a DOB, name, place of birth,Β perhaps children's names. Put it into ancestry.com and find a census. Or sometimes find a family tree that gives clues. You find the marriage and then the maiden name and find the earliest documents. For instance, the article on Hazel from June 2023 gave childrens names, husbands names. So then finding the marriage you get the maiden name.Β
I would like to point out that I do my own research. Assuming I find everything from the Wiki is untrue. So not hilarious after all π
Β
Sounds like relying on guesswork some of the time then.
Aquanaut reacted
04/03/2024 8:38 pm
Angelica Tiscornia - I did this by working backwards. I looked at the main article about her - this gave her name, place of birth and date of birth. Putting these things into familysearch gave me what I needed - birth record, baptism, marriage etc. This all fitted with what was known about her from the article. No, I did not contact the home. And while I did not know her parents names, one of them had to have the surname Tiscornia. Looking at other records, I could find nobody else who came close to fitting the bill.
As for the GRG / LQ 'battle', I'd rather not discuss it to be honest. I'm not here for that.Β
Speaking from personal experience, you really need to confirm this information directly before you consider a case to be validated, which is why LAS researchers didn't even make her case pending until we managed to contact her nursing home and family to confirm the details. It might appear obvious that the records are a match, but there have been plenty of times when researchers have been confident in matching a case to documentation, only for it to turn out to be incorrect. Additionally, some surnames are more common in certain countries/cities/towns, so it might not even necessarily be a coincidence that someone else born in the same place happens to share the same name. Since we didn't publish any information that wasn't already found in the articles, you still can't be certain that the documents you used to validate her actually belong to her. Instead, you're just basing your validation off of the knowledge that another organization managed to confirm the match. This is, of course, not inherently a problem, but becomes an issue when you claim that you validated her case independently.
Most Argentinian records aren't online, and an even smaller amount of them are actually indexed, so the fact that you couldn't find any other potential matches for her doesn't mean anything (it's actually very lucky her documents happen to be indexed like this). Only a few countries in Latin America have near-complete online documentation for birth/baptismal (such as Costa Rica and El Salvador), but even then it's never 100% perfect, and widespread birth registration in a country can actually create potential issues with identity swapping.Β
Β
So, with this in mind, my main question is: would you have been confident in validating her if she wasn't already validated by LQ to begin with? You say that the documents are a perfect match to what she claims, but that isn't entirely true - articles and social media posts state her birthdate as 22 August 1911, meaning that the documents don't perfectly correspond to what she claims. This is another reason why we were so hesitant to validate her before getting in contact with her family.
Β
Profile picture: Marita Camacho QuirΓ³s (1911-Present)
Aquanaut reacted
04/03/2024 8:48 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 26 January 2024:
Hazel Schultz, CAN/USA, 12 Jan 1913 - Present, 111+ years. (Previously validated by LQ.)
There is no publicly available information on her maiden name and parents' names, and they only validated her due to my research, which involved me scouring census records and newspaper articles to locate. It's hilarious to see Oliver take credit for "validating" her case when all he did was read my post to get the necessary information.
Β
The same can be said for Hazel Schultz as Angelica Tiscornia. It isn't hard to 'work backwards', as it were. Look at articles about them, find a DOB, name, place of birth,Β perhaps children's names. Put it into ancestry.com and find a census. Or sometimes find a family tree that gives clues. You find the marriage and then the maiden name and find the earliest documents. For instance, the article on Hazel from June 2023 gave childrens names, husbands names. So then finding the marriage you get the maiden name.Β
I would like to point out that I do my own research. Assuming I find everything from the Wiki is untrue. So not hilarious after all π
Β
I apologize for jumping to conclusions and assuming the worst here. I shouldn't have accused you of copying me, and I regret posting this, since as you said, there are ways to confirm matches without directly confirming the maiden name or the names of the parents. While I definitely wouldn't say that knowing her husband and children should be considered enough proof to directly connect her to the Hazel Mary Anthony born in Canada to parents Clarence and Dagmar, it's certainly fairly strong circumstantial evidence when you connect it to her marriage record.Β
Β
Profile picture: Marita Camacho QuirΓ³s (1911-Present)
04/03/2024 10:06 pm
@930310Β
Not at all. If I am not sure of something or if there is enough doubt, then I wouldn't put it up. At the end of the day, all supercentenarian cases are open to debate. I also contact families, usually via ancestry or facebook etc to validate the information I have found in documents.
04/03/2024 10:11 pm
Thank you for this. I appreciate you saying I didn't copy you π because I can assure you I didn't. There are ways to find or confirm information without relying on the wiki or LQ. And if I'm being completely honest, I hardly ever look at LQ's website. I don't find it easy to navigate anyway. Plus I prefer to do my own research π
04/03/2024 10:25 pm
Angelica Tiscornia - I did this by working backwards. I looked at the main article about her - this gave her name, place of birth and date of birth. Putting these things into familysearch gave me what I needed - birth record, baptism, marriage etc. This all fitted with what was known about her from the article. No, I did not contact the home. And while I did not know her parents names, one of them had to have the surname Tiscornia. Looking at other records, I could find nobody else who came close to fitting the bill.
As for the GRG / LQ 'battle', I'd rather not discuss it to be honest. I'm not here for that.Β
Speaking from personal experience, you really need to confirm this information directly before you consider a case to be validated, which is why LAS researchers didn't even make her case pending until we managed to contact her nursing home and family to confirm the details. It might appear obvious that the records are a match, but there have been plenty of times when researchers have been confident in matching a case to documentation, only for it to turn out to be incorrect. Additionally, some surnames are more common in certain countries/cities/towns, so it might not even necessarily be a coincidence that someone else born in the same place happens to share the same name. Since we didn't publish any information that wasn't already found in the articles, you still can't be certain that the documents you used to validate her actually belong to her. Instead, you're just basing your validation off of the knowledge that another organization managed to confirm the match. This is, of course, not inherently a problem, but becomes an issue when you claim that you validated her case independently.
Most Argentinian records aren't online, and an even smaller amount of them are actually indexed, so the fact that you couldn't find any other potential matches for her doesn't mean anything (it's actually very lucky her documents happen to be indexed like this). Only a few countries in Latin America have near-complete online documentation for birth/baptismal (such as Costa Rica and El Salvador), but even then it's never 100% perfect, and widespread birth registration in a country can actually create potential issues with identity swapping.Β
Β
So, with this in mind, my main question is: would you have been confident in validating her if she wasn't already validated by LQ to begin with? You say that the documents are a perfect match to what she claims, but that isn't entirely true - articles and social media posts state her birthdate as 22 August 1911, meaning that the documents don't perfectly correspond to what she claims. This is another reason why we were so hesitant to validate her before getting in contact with her family.Β
Fair point about the online documents for countries like Argentina. I suppose I hadn't thought about it like that. As for the DOB, I don't actually remember how I came to that when, as you say, the articles say 110 in 2021 - therefore 1911 claim. Maybe I did get that from the wiki? I can't remember honestly. But with the online records indicating August 22nd but the following year, this was also evidence really. Same month and day. So I will take on board what you've said here!
As for the question about LQ's validating this case - as I said in my previous post about Hazel, I extremely rarely visit LQ's site. I didn't know that this case was validated by them until someone informed me when I made the case pending. Obviously originally I had seen this ladies article on the wiki, but at that time I don't think there was any mention of LQ there.Β
Β
Mendocino reacted
05/03/2024 7:42 pm
Recent validations, accepted on 3, 4, and 5 March 2024:
Bernice Sebastian, KNA/USA, 21 Sept 1913 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
Julio Saldarriaga HernΓ‘ndez, COL, 3 Nov 1913 - Present, 110+ years.
Dollie Pedroza, USA, 29 Nov 1913 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.) Thanks, Ale.
Overduidelijk misschien.
Ale76 reacted
06/03/2024 10:19 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 6 March 2024:
Esther Groneman, USA, 18 Dec 1913 - 29 Feb 2024, 110 years and 73 days.
Overduidelijk misschien.
08/03/2024 3:48 pm
....
Dollie Pedroza, USA, 29 Nov 1913 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
I think she was not LQ-validated....
Β
http://www.supercentenariditalia.it/persone-viventi-piu-longeve-in-italia.
Persone viventi piΓΉ longeve in Italia β Supercentenari d'Italia (supercentenariditalia.it)
08/03/2024 10:59 pm
^ Good catch, Ale! I'll amend this.
Β
Recent validation, accepted on 8 March 2024:
Mary Lois Burkett, USA, 2 Jan 1914 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
09/03/2024 10:02 am
Recently announced validations, retroactively accepted in January and February 2017. Some of these cases are also ESO-validated:
Franziska Rau, GER, 9 Mar 1902 - 6 Dec 2012, 110 years and 272 days.
Elsa Peck, GER, 20 Apr 1902 - 28 Jan 2014, 111 years and 283 days.
Gisa Dollinger, AUT/USA, 20??? Aug 1902 - 10 Mar 2014, 111 years and 202??? days. [Not born on 20 Aug.]
Paul Veit, GER, 15 Jan 1903 - 21 Mar 2013, 110 years and 65 days.
Margarete Staack, GER, 24 Apr 1903 - 5 July??? 2013, 110 years and 72??? days. [Did not die on 5 July.]
Eva Grafunder, GER/CAN, 17 June 1903 - 14 July 2013, 110 years and 27 days.
Vera Schmitt, GER, 28 Dec 1903 - 26 Apr 2014, 110 years and 119 days.
Also, two validations occurred on 13 February 2017. That's an interesting occurence...
Overduidelijk misschien.
09/03/2024 11:06 am
Dollinger was corrected this morning when I noticed it. Staack - numbers round the wrong way 🙄 . I don't much like the date formula this way round, I'm not used to it. But this has been corrected now.ΒRecently announced validations, retroactively accepted in January and February 2017. Some of these cases are also ESO-validated:
Franziska Rau, GER, 9 Mar 1902 - 6 Dec 2012, 110 years and 272 days.
Elsa Peck, GER, 20 Apr 1902 - 28 Jan 2014, 111 years and 283 days.
Gisa Dollinger, AUT/USA, 20??? Aug 1902 - 10 Mar 2014, 111 years and 202??? days. [Not born on 20 Aug.]
Paul Veit, GER, 15 Jan 1903 - 21 Mar 2013, 110 years and 65 days.
Margarete Staack, GER, 24 Apr 1903 - 5 July??? 2013, 110 years and 72??? days. [Did not die on 5 July.]
Eva Grafunder, GER/CAN, 17 June 1903 - 14 July 2013, 110 years and 27 days.
Vera Schmitt, GER, 28 Dec 1903 - 26 Apr 2014, 110 years and 119 days.
Also, two validations occurred on 13 February 2017. That's an interesting occurence...
Please clarify what you mean by two validations on Feb 13th?
Β
09/03/2024 12:30 pm
Dollinger was corrected this morning when I noticed it. Staack - numbers round the wrong way 🙄 . I don't much like the date formula this way round, I'm not used to it. But this has been corrected now.
Good!
Β
Please clarify what you mean by two validations on Feb 13th?
Vera Schmitt is the second person who was validated on 13 February 2017. Another supercentenarian was already previously validated on this day (by the GRG).
Β
Overduidelijk misschien.
09/03/2024 12:30 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 9 March 2024:
Germaine Fuzeau, FRA, 16 Feb 1914 - Present, 110+ years.
Overduidelijk misschien.
09/03/2024 1:41 pm
I have been back to check the old grg website and there is nobody on Table E that was validated with that date, that I can see. When moving across the already validated cases for 2017 to the new website, this is where I was to get them from. Who are you referring to?Dollinger was corrected this morning when I noticed it. Staack - numbers round the wrong way 🙄 . I don't much like the date formula this way round, I'm not used to it. But this has been corrected now.
Good!
Β
Please clarify what you mean by two validations on Feb 13th?Vera Schmitt is the second person who was validated on 13 February 2017. Another supercentenarian was already previously validated on this day (by the GRG).
Β
Β
09/03/2024 1:52 pm
| Etsu Nishiura | Japan | Japan (Osaka) | 2/19/1905 | 119 yr, 19 days | F | EA | MHLW, Japan/Stefan Maglov | 2/13/2017 | 10/2/2015 | Y |
Ignore the age as she is featured on the limbo section
09/03/2024 5:46 pm
Recently announced validations, retroactively accepted in February and March 2017:
Lorraine Coops, USA, 18 Jan 1904 - 19 Nov 2014, 110 years and 305 days.
Helen Woods, USA, 25 Jan 1904 - 19 June 2014, 110 years and 145 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Gallai RezsΕ, HUN, 29 Jan 1904 - 25 Sept 2014, 110 years and 239 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Alline Robideaux, USA, 5 Feb 1904 - 13 May 2015, 111 years and 97 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
10/03/2024 12:27 am
Dollinger was corrected this morning when I noticed it. Staack - numbers round the wrong way 🙄 . I don't much like the date formula this way round, I'm not used to it. But this has been corrected now.Β
Β
Β
Please clarify what you mean by two validations on Feb 13th?
I have been back to check the old grg website and there is nobody on Table E that was validated with that date, that I can see. When moving across the already validated cases for 2017 to the new website, this is where I was to get them from. Who are you referring to?
You could have found this very easily by simply navigating to the old Table E, clicking CTRL+F, type the date into the pop-up box, press Enter.
This post was modified 2 months ago by Chris
ESO Co-Founder and Administrator (since 1 January 2020)
OllieGRG reacted
10/03/2024 11:51 am
I had wrongly assumed that all cases, even limbo ones, were included in the old table E. I will know to check from now on.Dollinger was corrected this morning when I noticed it. Staack - numbers round the wrong way 🙄 . I don't much like the date formula this way round, I'm not used to it. But this has been corrected now.Β
Β
Β
Please clarify what you mean by two validations on Feb 13th?
I have been back to check the old grg website and there is nobody on Table E that was validated with that date, that I can see. When moving across the already validated cases for 2017 to the new website, this is where I was to get them from. Who are you referring to?You could have found this very easily by simply navigating to the old Table E, clicking CTRL+F, type the date into the pop-up box, press Enter.
The illustration is interesting. So we use Japanese logic! It makes the tables sortable, which is something.
Β
10/03/2024 6:02 pm
Recently announced validations, all retroactively accepted in March 2017:
Gladys Cole, USA, 13 Feb 1903 - 2 July 2014, 111 years and 139 days.
Iris Branch, USA, 14 May 1903 - 26 May 2014, 111 years and 12 days.
Ada Cooper Miller, UK/USA, 12 Dec 1903 - 16 Feb 2015, 111 years and 66 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Conrad Johnson, SWE/USA, 19 Jan 1904 - 23 Dec 2014, 110 years and 338 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Marie Jensen, DNK, 5 June 1904 - 30 Jan 2015, 110 years and 239 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Helma Graham, USA, 28 June 1904 - 6 Oct 2015, 111 years and 100 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Jeanne Martin, FRA, 13 Sept 1904 - 9 Nov 2014, 110 years and 57 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
10/03/2024 6:02 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 10 March 2024:
Margaret Cameron, CAN, 9 Feb 1914 - Present, 110+ years.
Overduidelijk misschien.
10/03/2024 8:04 pm
Recently announced validations, all retroactively accepted in April 2017:
RenΓ©e Rousselot, FRA, 27 May 1904 - 26 Mar 2015, 110 years and 303 days. (Previously ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Sally Mitchell, USA, 25 Nov 1904 - 11 July 2015, 110 years and 228 days. (Previously LQ-validated.)
Emily Tremonti, USA, 6 Dec 1904 - 25 Feb 2015, 110 years and 81 days. (Previously LQ-validated.)
Vera Price, UK, 16 Dec 1904 - 9 May 2015, 110 years and 144 days. (Previously ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
ChrisR reacted
10/03/2024 9:34 pm
Without going too far off topic does anyone know why Kroczek (21 Feb) and Young (25 Feb) havenβt been turning up on the World Supercentenarian site for some time now?
No announcements, nor even respect for the incredible milestone of Maria Branyas Morera.
Β
11/03/2024 11:01 am
May be best to ask them directlyWithout going too far off topic does anyone know why Kroczek (21 Feb) and Young (25 Feb) havenβt been turning up on the World Supercentenarian site for some time now?
No announcements, nor even respect for the incredible milestone of Maria Branyas Morera.
Β
Β
Β
11/03/2024 7:48 pm
Recent validation, accepted on 11 March 2024:
Primo Oliveiri, BRA, 7 Mar 1914 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
Β
Recently announced validation, retroactively accepted on 26 April 2017:
Agnes Steenstrup, DNK, 24 Nov 1903 - 1 Mar 2014, 110 years and 97 days.
Overduidelijk misschien.
diego reacted
12/03/2024 4:45 pm
Recently announced validations, all retroactively accepted in March 2017:
Gladys Cole, USA, 13 Feb 1903 - 2 July 2014, 111 years and 139 days.
Iris Branch, USA, 14 May 1903 - 26 May 2014, 111 years and 12 days.
Ada Cooper Miller, UK/USA, 12 Dec 1903 - 16 Feb 2015, 111 years and 66 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Conrad Johnson, SWE/USA, 19 Jan 1904 - 23 Dec 2014, 110 years and 338 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Marie Jensen, DNK, 5 June 1904 - 30 Jan 2015, 110 years and 239 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Helma Graham, USA, 28 June 1904 - 6 Oct 2015, 111 years and 100 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Jeanne Martin, FRA, 13 Sept 1904 - 9 Nov 2014, 110 years and 57 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Conrad Johnson was male, so using a blue color is good.
The recent GRG tables tends not to display a gender (M/F) section. So it's easily confused. I requested they to add it. I hope it will come true someday. Thank you for daily updating, Marco.
Β
Born 3 Feburuary 1999. Founder of 5ch anonymous message board about longevity (1 January 2012) / Founder and chief administrator, the oldest people research forum in Japan founded in 1 January 2017. Link: ι·ε―Ώθ η η©Άγγ©γΌγ©γ (oldestpeopleforum.jp)
13/03/2024 3:18 pm
^ Thanks, I've adjusted it.
Β
Recent validation, accepted on 12 March 2024:
Betty Werrenrath, USA, 28 Jan 1914 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
Β
Recently announced validations, retroactively accepted in April, May, and June 2017:
Anna Swenson, NOR/USA, 5 Oct 1860 - 18 June 1971, 110 years and 256 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Anna Rohling, CZE/USA, 12 July 1875 - 15 Aug 1985, 110 years and 34 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Ida Reaver, USA, 7 Dec 1878 - 2 Mar 1989, 110 years and 85 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Bertha Edwards, GER/USA, 22 Apr 1881 - 27 Nov 1991, 110 years and 219 days.
Harriet Palmer, USA, 4 July 1881 - 1 Mar 1992, 110 years and 241 days.
Wanda Wierzchleyska, POL, 3 Mar 1900 - 14 Jan 2012, 111 years and 317 days.
Magnolia Mitchell, USA, 21 Jan 1903 - 30 Oct 2015, 112 years and 282 days.
Lorna Best, CAN, 4 July 1903 - 1 Aug 2014, 111 years and 28 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Marguerite Wabano, CAN, 28 Jan 1904 - 13 Nov 2015, 111 years and 289 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Marthe Teyssier, FRA, 13 Feb 1904 - 11 Apr 2014, 110 years and 57 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Reine Goix, FRA, 27 Feb 1904 - 31 Mar 2014, 110 years and 32 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Marcelle Fatou, FRA, 27 Mar 1904 - 6 May 2014, 110 years and 40 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Jennie Ramey, USA, 19 Apr 1904 - 30 Apr 2014, 110 years and 11 days.
Doris Punchard, UK, 19 July 1904 - 12 Aug 2015, 111 years and 24 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Henrine Lee, USA, 27 July 1904 - 12 May 2015, 110 years and 289 days.
Hermina Wahlin, USA, 26 Nov 1904 - 18 June 2015, 110 years and 204 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Mary Morrissey, CAN, 4 Dec 1904 - 8 Apr 2015, 110 years and 125 days.
Vera Rostron, UK, 24 Dec 1904 - 23 Feb 2015, 110 years and 61 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
15/03/2024 11:41 pm
Recent validations, accepted on 13, 14, and 15 March 2024:
Georgie Jordan, USA, 18 Sept 1880 - 9 Feb 1995, 114 years and 144 days.
Margaret Hoyle, USA, 29 Jan 1914 - Present, 110+ years. (Already LQ-validated.)
Hilda Luck, UK, 19 Feb 1914 - Present, 110+ years. (Already ESO-validated.)
Β
Recently announced validations, retroactively accepted in July and September 2017:
Carrie Wood, USA, 22 July 1863 - 27 June 1974, 110 years and 340 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Jeanie Oliver, UK/USA, 17 July 1880 - 1 Mar 1992, 111 years and 197 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Mary Sorenson, USA, 26 Nov 1881 - 27 July 1995, 113 years and 243 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Norma Pratt, CAN/USA, 15 Apr 1891 - 11 May 2002, 111 years and 26 days.
Beulah Elchert, USA, 22 July 1897 - 1 July 2008, 110 years and 345 days. (Already LQ-validated.)
Liberalino Ferreira Leite, BRA, 6 Feb 1899 - 15 June 2009, 110 years and 129 days. (Already LAS/LQ-validated.)
Emma Lang, UK/USA, 16 Aug 1900 - 23 Aug 2010, 110 years and 7 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Amanda McClenahan, USA, 6 Aug 1901 - 7 Feb 2013, 111 years and 185 days.
Belle Garfinkel, LVA/USA, 26 Apr 1902 - 8 Mar 2013, 110 years and 316 days.
Lorene Evans, USA, 23 Oct 1902 - 16 Apr 2013, 110 years and 175 days.
Eva Patterson, USA, 28 Nov 1902 - 4 May 2014, 111 years and 157 days.
Karin Larsson, SWE, 17 May 1904 - 24 May 2014, 110 years and 7 days. (Already ESO-validated and LQ-recognised.)
Overduidelijk misschien.
16/03/2024 10:49 pm
it appears Georgie Jordan would have been up at number 13 on the all time oldest list, at the time of her death in Feb 1995.
She was 6 days older than Sarah Knauss.
diego reacted
