I don't think it would be a good idea. It would somewhat shift (or at least weaken) the focus from real supercentenarians, and attract some very unprofessional members who would stubbornly believe in outrageously false claims.

Thank you for your suggestion, ReZet, but I'm going to agree with 024Tomi on this one. This forum is meant to celebrate real people.

Yes, I also agree that false claims should not be made, because what is the point of quoting people aged 250 and the like...

Just list the cases that are believed to be really Supercentenarians Years, and fake ones are not necessary...

Oh, wait, I now see what you mean. You weren't talking about "fake" people, ReZet, but about claims that seem too suspicious to ever be considered true.

For now, I will put that idea on hold - let's focus on, indeed, first covering true claims and claims that are not too outrageous. Thank you for understanding. 🙂

Posted by: @admin

Oh, wait, I now see what you mean. You weren't talking about "fake" people, ReZet, but about claims that seem too suspicious to ever be considered true.

 

For now, I will put that idea on hold - let's focus on, indeed, first covering true claims and claims that are not too outrageous. Thank you for understanding. 🙂

No, ones made up by your mind, however this is...a bad idea

@12 All false cases are made up by someone's mind. Most often by the claimant themself, but also relatives or others who may have something to gain from the case, usually notoriety.

@930310 Occasionally, where false claims are only a year or two out, the claimant might have simply mixed up their birthdate or not known exactly when they were born. I don't think we can always apply malicious or deceptive intent to such claims.

@chris Neither have I claimed such. As research has shown, quite a few supercentenarians misremember their dates of birth. As society progresses, with better public registers and record keeping, this should get more uncommon as time passes.

@930310 Yes, most of them may not claim it out of bad intentions, but out of ignorance, and journalists or someone else uses it for media attention and nothing else, so I don't think there is a need to pay so much attention to such cases. Focus on potential cases whose age possible to prove ...

Sampling of identity was also represented, and now it is slowly disappearing, For example, a man who is 146 years old according to his ID card, must have stolen the identity of his father or older brother. So there is no need to discuss that...

The user here's mind. 

Now I have actually made a whole forum about this, maybe check it out but NO HATING.

@rich_villa I absolutely despise your wiki and forum. It is a really disgusting thing to use the pictures of real individuals as they were some imaginary people.

What do you think, how would György Puskás' (1877-1983) family feel if they discovered this page???

Keep your fantasies for yourself.

Posted by: @024tomi

@rich_villa I absolutely despise your wiki and forum. It is a really disgusting thing to use the pictures of real individuals as they were some imaginary people.

What do you think, how would György Puskás' (1877-1983) family feel if they discovered this page???

Keep your fantasies for yourself.

Hello, I will delete the photo.

@rich_villa Also, on every page, you should mark with big red letters that everything on the wiki is just the result of your daydreaming. What if someone googles "last man born in the 1700's", and gets the never-existed Orin Musta as a result? Or searches for "oldest living person born in India" and the imaginary Unyi Takiuin shows up?

Posted by: @024tomi

@rich_villa Also, on every page, you should mark with big red letters that everything on the wiki is just the result of your daydreaming. What if someone googles "last man born in the 1700's", and gets the never-existed Orin Musta as a result? Or searches for "oldest living person born in India" and the imaginary Unyi Takiuin shows up?

Same. I should definitely add that too.

Check the deletion log, I will try to delete all problematic pages, or at least edit them to make it not on search pages.

I have to say I agree with ReZet, since it can dispel these myths with a certain superiority here, to laypeople happening to chance on this website! The could be Googling these names hoping to find more confirmation, and instead find them here as "absolutely nonsense and we really know for sure after being preoccupied with gerontology for many, many hours" [I think maybe even 10 000 for the hardiest among us ;)] 

That wouldn't change many minds immediately, but it will at the very least plant the seed that """experts""" unanimously agree that claims over 150 are absolutely impossible. 

@josia9353 That forum is a terrible idea.

Look. I understand you all don't like the wiki and the forum. It is fine if you don't like it. But if you don't like it you don't have to see it. I hope you others still don't hate me after this. I just thought it would be a good idea...and it failed.

@rich_villa You can fight for a cause, or against a cause. Places such as that one are against the cause of making the public better informed about longevity and why research is needed to verify age claims.

@rich_villa It's not that "if we don't like it we don't have to see it". It's not us who are harmed because of these sites. It's the people new to extreme longevity, and other curious people searching for certain titles that are mislead without they knowing they are being mislead – this is the main problem. 

"Inventing" imaginary (super)centenarians is not a bad thing on its own. I confess, I also used to do it. But they should only exist in your own mind, or maybe in a World/Excel file for your own pleasure, but not on the Internet.

@024tomi I would like to disagree. Scientific organisations will be damaged by such websites. If there is one website saying that most of it's data is unvalidated (even if it's actually true) and another saying that most of it's data is validated (even if it's all made up), people and the media are going to be more likely to believe in the place claiming to have accurate data.

That is of course assuming that the two websites are of equal size and have the same amount of visitors.

@930310 Yes, this is an important factor too. I agree. (My post was just incomplete in this sense, it didn't state anything against your point).

Ok, so sure, I can just delete the wiki AND the forum, but the forum will be deleted INSTANTLY.

But for now, I won't advertise the wiki here and the forum's contents are all gone. How about we just talk about real centenarians instead.

@rich_villa Sounds wise.

Posted by: @024tomi

@rich_villa I absolutely despise your wiki and forum. It is a really disgusting thing to use the pictures of real individuals as they were some imaginary people.

What do you think, how would György Puskás' (1877-1983) family feel if they discovered this page???

Keep your fantasies for yourself.

So much for the "NO HATING"... 

Posted by: @930310

@josia9353 That forum is a terrible idea.

Which forum? I thought we were talking about a new section on this forum..?

Ah, maybe I've been getting this all wrong. I thought the ultimate agenda was to dispel wrong claims, am I wrong? If I'm not wrong, how can anyone here be against it?? (If it's not clear enough that these cases are indeed (very) wrong, that's a big problem obviously :p)