Global Supercentenarian Forum
The Supercentenarian World
Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
11/06/2022 4:36 pm
I was just working on her article, and I noticed that her birthdate differs from place to place.
The GRG (more precisely GWR) validated her with the birthdate of 3 August 1856, and Japanese Wikipedia also uses that date ("1856年8月3日（安政3年7月3日）" - they even added Ansei period birthdate). However, Data Collection Site and the Japanese forum are using 1 September 1856 as her birthdate, and I have not seen an explanation for where this date came from. Japan was not using the Gregorian calendar when she was born, so I suppose the GWR validated her without properly adapting her birthdate to the new calendar, and the 1 September birthdate would be the correct one?
On the "old" Japanese forum however, I found her obituary that apparently gives the birthdate of 18 August instead (which, when adapted to Gregorian calendar, apparently gives the birthdate of 16 September 1856).
So which one is the correct one?
LAS Member/Administrator (since January 2020)
ESO Correspondent for Croatia (since 2 August 2021)
Record_116 reacted
11/06/2022 5:05 pm
On the "old" Japanese forum
I don't know about Mrs. Yoshigiku Ito but above "old" is not a forum site, technically. It called anonymous chat-like site, 2 channel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2channel
By 2016 2 channel was full of troll and spam post, that's why people needs and move to a new place...
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: 長寿者研究フォーラム (oldestpeopleforum.jp)
seto2001 reacted
12/06/2022 9:49 am
On the "old" Japanese forum however, I found her obituary that apparently gives the birthdate of 18 August instead (which, when adapted to Gregorian calendar, apparently gives the birthdate of 16 September 1856).
The Japanese Data Website also gives 16 September 1856 as a possible birth date, see here.
Overduidelijk misschien.
