Talk:Bernando LaPallo

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

No consensus, 2019 June 30, see discussion.
merge to Longevity claims, 28 August 2015, see discussion.

Notability

WP:1E does not apply to supercentenarians as their longevity alone typically makes them "subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." LaPallo unambiguously meets WP:BASIC criteria; the publication of his own book follows (rather than precedes) this. Taurus (talk) 11:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Public records state LaPallo born in 1910

According to this AP story, public records state he was born in 1910. --C S (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing new. http://www.grg.org/CalmentFraud.html Scroll down (ctrl+F) to read the GRG's take on LaPallo. Taurus (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, FWIW, https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/KQM9-2FJ Taurus (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So I think it may be time to edit the infobox and remove the unsourced birthdate (which is specific, but where does it come from?); I was going to add Template:Dubious, but I think it would be more appropriate to have multiple years listed. LaPallo claims 1901; the GRG claims 1910, and as of 1940, the US Census lists his "estimated" birth year as 1908. I can't find the protocol on multiple possible birth years... Unfortunately, this Category:Year of birth missing (living people) does not seem to apply; his year of birth is "unknown" or "unverified," not missing. In lieu of other options, I suggest the Template:Dubious template might be the best option. Taurus (talk) 11:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to multiple sources including Census record matching it does not show anything provable that he is older than age 105 at maximum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.253.155.86 (talk) 00:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]