Jump to content

Talk:Emma Morano/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Longevity milestones and appropriate citations

[edit]

See the discussion at Talk:Misao Okawa for the reasons for excluding milestones, and the appropriate citations for statements included in the text. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 00:04, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stating that Emma Morano is the last Italian person born in 1900 and then merely citing a list violates WP:SYNTH. There must be a citation that states explicitly that this is the case. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 00:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another Longevity milestone that Emma Morano has now obtained is oldest verified living person in the 21st century. No one has been verified living longer than 117 years, 27 days, since Sarah Knauss died December 30, 1999. So, Emma is now oldest verified person living in the 21st century. This is a very interesting statistic that should be added to the Emma Morano page. [Wikipedia:Signatures|Jason PhelpsJasonPhelps (talk) 01:33, 28 December 2016 (UTC)][reply]

Also, Emma Morano is now in the top 5 verified oldest people ever, since she passed 117 years, 27 days in age. The page mentions her in the top 10 verified ever, but this could be updated to mention that she has made it to the top 5 verified. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|Jason PhelpsJasonPhelps (talk) 01:33, 28 December 2016 (UTC)]] comment added by JasonPhelps (talk • contribs) 01:28, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's true, but the consensus is that we usually require a source external to Wikipedia to highlight facts like this - that way it establishes that the fact is notable. I'm sure there must be articles about Emma Morano which mention these things, try to find a source. Jdcooper (talk) 03:11, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • This source verifies that there has not been someone verified older than 117 years, 27 days by the GRG (Gerontology Research Group) since December 30, 1999: http://www.grg.org/SC/SCindex.html This source lists who the verified oldest person has been from 1955 to now, according to the GRG. It lists their birth/death dates and the years in which they held title of verified oldest living person in the world. From this table on the GRG website, it can be concluded that the GRG has not verified anyone older than 117 years, 27 days since Sarah Knauss died December 30, 1999. The last time this chart on the GRG website was updated was May 13, 2016 when Emma Morano was verified the new world's oldest living person upon the death of Susannah Mushatt Jones. This chart updates every time the GRG has a new verified oldest living person. 64.37.3.51 (talk) 05:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)JasonPhelps[reply]
      • By the way, the web link only goes to the main page even if I copy and paste the web link when having the chart up, so in order to see the chart that lists oldest verified person from 1955 to now, it is necessary to click Lists and Tables on the left hand side and click and view Table C (Chronological List of World's Oldest Persons (since 1955)). JasonPhelps (talk) 05:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)JasonPhelps[reply]
As mentioned in the discussion linked in the first line of this thread: linking to a table is insufficient for this purpose (i.e. "Morano is the fifth oldest") there MUST be a source which explicitly states this, anything else is WP:SYNTH and or WP:OR. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 06:16, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is appropriately encyclopedic content for longevity related biographies

[edit]

There is currently a discussion about what constitutes encyclopedia content on longevity related biographies at Talk:Gertrude Weaver#What is appropriately encyclopedic content for longevity related biographies please comment. I am One of Many (talk) 19:06, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

RE: She is the last surviving European person born in the 1800s.

[edit]

User:94.194.251.199 insists on readding this. As stated above on this talk page, this statement does not belong on this article unless a reliable source explicitly states she is the last surviving European born before 1900. CommanderLinx (talk) 14:12, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a reliable source? http://www.corriere.it/cronache/15_febbraio_16/emma-115-anni-ecco-piu-vecchia-d-europa-il-segreto-essere-single-31faa930-b5c7-11e4-bb5e-b90de9daadbe.shtml?refresh_ce-cp

The last living person born in the 1800s?

[edit]

Is it more appropriate to describe her as "the last Known living person born in the 1800s", as it's likely that the GRG criteria doesn't necessarily capture all those born prior to 1900? MarkTB (talk) 11:28, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If there is an appropriate citation which states that she is the last living person born in the 1800s (which there currently isn't in this article) then that information can be included until/unless there is a RS which states that she is not the last. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 11:38, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't really answer Mark's question. A source which describes her as the last living person is saying she is the only living person satisfying the GRG criteria. It's not OR to acknowledge that. I think describing her as "the last known living person born in the 1800s", as Mark suggests, has greater clarity and is more accurate. And it doesn't necessarily imply that any older person exists. Jdcooper (talk) 16:45, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We've been through this several times before. It is insufficient to look at any list, Wiki, GRG or otherwise, and state that a person is "the last born in the 1800s". there must be a citation from a RS explicitly stating this fact. For instance, there is a reference in Susannah Mushatt Jones that states she was the last American born in the 1800s and that " and there is currently only one more person in the world verified as having taken breath in the 19th century". The last statement is clearly incorrect as there are 3 such people. This again demonstrates the confusion of the 19th century with the 1800s (century); not to mention the further confusion of the 1800s referring to the period 1800-1899 rather than 1800-1809. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 22:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I completely agree with you re 1800s/19th century. I think Mark's (and my) point was about the word "known" in a description of "the last known living...". If a source says "John Smith is the last living person from this decade.." it is obviously taken as obvious that it's from the known cases. But I think it's better for clarity purposes that we include the word "known". Though I'm not sure why we're discussing this as the article clearly clarifies that Morano is the last known person from 1800s! Jdcooper (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The photograph that keeps getting added to the Infobox is the property of People magazine and can be viewed here [1]. It is the work of ALESSANDRO GRASSANI, and not the "own work" of the original uploader, Timo118. The fact that the image has made its way to Commons and on other Wikis is more WP:COPYVIO. Please don't reinsert this image back into the article. Thanks. --Seduisant (talk) 16:04, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Emma Morano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

No reason for why this visit should be all over the news, Emma was visited by lots of researchers, why does this particular visit have so much more importance than all the other visits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimney148 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:38, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just curious

[edit]

How often are these numbers updated? Does someone update the ages daily? It looks like Morano is moving into 8th place pretty soon for the longest living person.

Please let me know how this is done. This topic fascinates me. Thank you.

Sincerely, Nathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.99.62 (talk) 19:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What numbers are you referring to? If you mean Morano's age, it's kept current in this article by use of the template {{age in years and days}}. If you mean lists like List of the verified oldest people, then yes, someone (usually TFBCT1) updates the tables regularly. clpo13(talk) 20:45, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed in first paragraph

[edit]

A user recently tried to add links to the wikipedia pages of the lists of oldest people as citations for the [citation needed] tag in the first paragraph. I reverted it as wikipedia is not itself a source, but in this case why is an internal link to the relevant pages (eg. List of European supercentenarians) not sufficient. Assuming all the information on those pages is sourced and correct, it doesn't constitute original research to state what position something is in a list or an order, surely? Jdcooper (talk) 12:38, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The policy, by consensus, has been that claims to be "the xth oldest in yyy" should be supported by an appropriate citation for ma reliable source and that merely referring to a wiki article OR to a list such as that published by the GRG is insufficient/inappropriate. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Could you point me to a discussion where this consensus was established? It doesn't seem to make much sense so I would like to understand the rationale.. If all the information on the list article is appropriately sourced then what's the problem with indicating the facts on the pages of individual pages? On the page for Single by a band we don't need a separate source to say "this is the 4th single by the band in question" - it's an obvious and valid inference from the presented facts. Jdcooper (talk) 08:13, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Misao Okawa#Unnecessary Milestones! See in particular the first post by Canadian Paul (talk · contribs). DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 08:22, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So I agree with the points in that discussions about extraneous milestones, but ultimately the only reason these people are notable in the first place is their age, so without some kind of context for how their ages are notable, the articles don't make sense. I don't think saying that someone is one of the ten oldest people ever is "fanfluff" or extraneous - it is the entire point of this subject's notability. Have added a link, anyway. Jdcooper (talk) 14:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also, merly writing in plain text something that is represented in a table in another Wikipedia article isn't research. --Marbe166 (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date

[edit]

User:Linguist111 has found a reputable source in which Emma Morano herself cites her birthday as November 27th. [2] However, this conflicts with all other (also reliable) sources going back several years, including presumably research from Guinness World Records and the GRG. Surely in this situation we should cite both possibilities, until such a time as a definitive explanation emerges? Presumably in two days there will be a slew of "World's oldest woman turns 117" stories in the press which should clear things up. Jdcooper (talk) 19:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is entirely wrong, Mrs Morano did not have dementia and she knew she was born on the 29th of november. This should really be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chimney148 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suddenly Morano is quoted to have said to be born on 27 November according to an article in thelocal.it. However, the Guinness Book of World Record certificate (see reference no 21) clearly states that she was born on the 29th, which GRG also agrees on, and which hasn't been disputed until now. I find it more plausible that she was either misquoted or just wrong about her birth date. I will revert again and please keep it at the 29th unless you find another source for the 27th. --Marbe166 (talk) 19:21, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, surely Morano knew before now that everyone else in the world thought her birthday was 29 Nov, so why in that case is this the first such source? Jdcooper (talk) 19:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it may have been a misquote, but there are more sources that say she was born on the 27th: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] Linguist Moi? Moi. 19:28, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I think we should list both and explain the difference. No preference about which one should be listed first.. Jdcooper (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree. We should put something like "born 27 or 29 November 1899". I would have thought that the best source for a person's birth date is the person themselves. In the source from 20min.ch (the first one I listed), there was a video of Morano saying (in Italian) saying "I'm 116, but I'll be 117 on..." and this was dubbed in German as "I'm 116, but I'll be 117 on 27 November". It is plausible this may have been a mistranslation, but I'm not entirely sure. As Jdcooper said above, it is possible there will be "Morano turns 117" stories soon. So for now, I agree we should list both days. Linguist Moi? Moi. 19:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is difficult to hear what she actually said in the video, especially if you (like me) are not an Italian speaker. I agree, put 27 or 29 inte lead of th article, but keep 29 in all the lists since we have better sorces (GRG and Guinness) pointing to 29th. --Marbe166 (talk) 19:46, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
To me it seems more likely that Emma Morano got her own birthdate wrong than that all her previous birthdays were celebrated on the wrong day, also because she celebrated those birthdays herself. Moreover, to apply for the GRG, you need a birth certificate if the country where the claimant was born can provide it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.108.128.229 (talk) 21:33, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The person themselves (as indicated above) is not at all the best source for a person's correct birth date. Here are some examples of cases where there was confusion or uncertainty on the part of the individual: Lucy Hannah, Maggie Barnes, Susie Gibson, Ramona Trinidad Iglesias-Jordan, Eunice Sanborn, Delma Kollar, Maggie Renfro. The most likely scenario is that she was either misquoted, or just simply stated the wrong date. Subsequently this was misrepresented in several articles. All other years, the GRG, and the Guiness World Records should be the preponderance of evidence. TFBCT1 22:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe another age-cheater. Seeing the oldest people's list (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people) currently out of the 10 oldest people half of them is died within 2 years or still living. To tell the truth it has zero chance in the real world. Obngfs (talk) 00:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Can we include a link to her recent 117th birthday celebration? This is a pretty big milestone and I think it would add to the page.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38134004 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.99.62 (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 December 2016

[edit]

I would like to suggest some information about Emma Morano that could be added to the Emma Morano page. First thing that could be added is that Emma Morano is only the 6th person ever verified to have reached the age of 117 or older (The reason I am suggesting this addition to the page, is because on the page for Misao Okawa it states how Misao Okawa was the 5th verified person to reach age 117 and 10th to reach 116, so people might like to know that Emma Morano was only the 6th verified person ever to reach 117). This can be verified from Wikipedia at the following link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people. There is probably also a Guinness World Records site that shows this same thing.

If anything special was done for Emma Morano's 117th birthday, you might also add that to the page, given the page mentions things done on her 116th birthday.

Thanks! Hope this is helpful! JasonPhelps (talk) 00:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See the first 2 threads on this talk page. Trivia, such as birthday celebrations, are specifically excluded from articles such as this. We also do not use Wikipedia as a reference. If there is a reliable source which states explicitly that Emma Morano is the sixth person "verified" to have reached 117 then that can be included. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 03:20, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emma Morano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Morano

[edit]

Is Emma Morano deceased? There is an update on the Italian page from what looks to be Robert Young (GRG) showing that she died today 03/25/2017, aged 117 years, 116 days.TFBCT1 00:38, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Maybe, but Google has nothing on it yet. There will doubtless be plenty of reliable sources later if it's true. Jdcooper (talk) 00:48, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Young GRG 1974 to 2017 looks like a fake account. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 01:20, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Cause of death not yet known'

[edit]

She was 117. I really don't think it's of note that no official cause of death has been released. Smurfmeister (talk) 19:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that sentence does not belong in the article. No sources actually state "Cause of death not yet known". It's unsourced and should be removed. --I am One of Many (talk) 23:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oldest woman on earth

[edit]

The oldest woman on earth now is 121 year old woman in the Volta region of Ghana. She's still alive and very strong. For further info please contact Ghana movie actress Beverly Afaglo. Scontigh (talk) 09:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Along with all the other such claims. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 09:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1800s

[edit]

The term "1800s" is unencyclopedic. The more appropriate term is 19th century. Vs6507 17:13, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The terms do not mean the same, so that doesn't help much. Do you have a more encyclopedic term for 1800s? Gap9551 (talk) 17:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Opening sentence for 19th Century: "The 19th century (1 January 1801 – 31 December 1900) ..." Peaceray (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Last known person born in the 19th century

[edit]

This edit says Morano was not the last known person born in the 19th century. But doesn't the lead of this article say otherwise? Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:23, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, the lead of the article says (correctly) that she was the last living person born in the 1800s. There are still two persons alive (Violet Brown and Nabi Tajima) who were born in the 19th century. --Marbe166 (talk) 18:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Opening sentence for 19th Century: "The 19th century (1 January 1801 – 31 December 1900) ..." Peaceray (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emma Morano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:11, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emma_Morano/Archive_1&oldid=1146394737"