| Revision as of 03:10, 8 March 2012 editFoetusized (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,401 edits →Fanboy fluff: response← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:22, 8 March 2012 edit undoBaseball Bugs (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers126,910 edits →Fanboy fluffNext edit → | ||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
| :In the very small world of supercentenarians, any move up the ladder is significant. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 02:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | :In the very small world of supercentenarians, any move up the ladder is significant. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 02:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::Any move? Then where's the entry for her moving up to 14th on the list a few days ago? -- ] (]) 03:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | ::Any move? Then where's the entry for her moving up to 14th on the list a few days ago? -- ] (]) 03:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::It's waiting to be posted. ←] <sup>'']''</sup> ]→ 12:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:22, 8 March 2012
 | Biography Start‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Longevity Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Became oldest living Georgian
She couldn't have become the "oldest living Georgian" in 2007 if someone else was older:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-01-21-beatrice-farve_N.htm
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2008/03/27/met_192432.shtml
Duh.Ryoung122 01:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- "Duh" indeed. There's certainly a ref that says she was...how about using a little WP:AGF? Ref says she was...your edit said she wasn't with no competing citation...what's an editor to do? Frank | talk 02:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Robert knows what hes doing, hes the one who studies them and therefore has all the information. 65.0.30.118 (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think there's any disagreement on that point. Alas, that's not how Misplaced Pages works. Frank | talk 12:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- We should still let the gerontologists do their job, they know what their doing. 67.33.127.117 (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Of course; nobody is stopping them from doing their jobs. But we still have policies here, which we still must follow. Frank | talk 03:31, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Incumbent
If there's anything in the wikipedia or wiktionary entries for "Incumbent" that suggests the use of that word in a succession box about longevity, it's exceedingly well-hidden. This is all of a piece with the deeply unencyclopedic view that old age is a contest, whose "winners," "record-holders," and "record-breakers" are inherently notable. David in DC (talk) 23:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
"Incumbent" shares its root with "encumber," offering the sense that an incumbent encumbers other aspiring office holders from holding a given office by occupying it. If used conversationally, referring to the "incumbent" oldest living Georgian (for example) most literate Americans would understand the phrase, and not argue the usage. If there is a guideline indicating that all syntax must be endorsed in the wiki, it's equally well-hidden.
Every one of us endeavors to live another day; the party who has done so for the longest period of time is therefore a person of note, though not in the traditionally "encyclopedic" sense; the Wiki, though often drawing its guidelines around the traditionally "encyclopedic" standards and norms, cannot and will not ever be a traditional encyclopedia.
I have missed where anyone has named any "winners," "record-holders," or "record-breakers" among those who gained notice (in reliable sources like newspapers and magazines) for their longevity. 67.236.29.150 (talk) 00:05, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Washington Post article
The article which is the first ref on the page no longer seems to be on Washington Post site. Other news sites have post posted it though I note with the Washington Post byline or it's possibly archived somewhere, if someone wants to fix it appropriately. It is "Japan’s oldest person, 115-year-old Chiyono Hasegawa, dies". Washington Post, December 2, 2011.Number36 (talk) 21:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Please Conform to Encyclopedic Standards
Encyclopedic standards should write about a topic, even if relatively recent, as if it is not a current event, but as an encyclopedia entry. It therefore follows that writing about Ms. Cooper becoming the last verified person left from 1896 on December 2, 2011 is more encyclopedic (the date will always be the same, unless a surprise case emerges) than stating that she "is" the last person left from 1896. No need to write in the present tense.69.15.219.71 (talk) 16:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Fanboy fluff
In what universe is making the top 15 of anything a "Milestone"? No-one makes Top-15 lists of anything. Such lists are usually an order of magnitude (10, 100) and occasionally double/half of that (5, 20, 50). There is no justification for including this sort of non-notable. DerbyCountyinNZ 02:09, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- In the very small world of supercentenarians, any move up the ladder is significant. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 02:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Any move? Then where's the entry for her moving up to 14th on the list a few days ago? -- Foetusized (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- It's waiting to be posted. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 12:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Any move? Then where's the entry for her moving up to 14th on the list a few days ago? -- Foetusized (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)