Talk:Jeanne Calment/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Photos

The recognition section is too crowded with photos, half of it is bare. One of the photos needs to be moved or deleted. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Can someone add a better photo than the one we currently have? Also, with Jeanne being the oldest verified human ever, wouldn't it be a good idea to show her at various life stages (i.e., age 20, 40, 112, etc)

→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 19:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I second this request. -- itistoday (Talk) 04:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't find any copyright/licensing information on these photos, so I'm not going to add any of them to Wikipedia, but http://www.grg.org/JCalmentGallery.htm has several photos, ranging from 20 years old to 122. — MSchmahl… 01:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if it would be OK to take one of those images, and claim it as public domain? We've just lost the image, so we need a replacement one. -- how do you turn this on 03:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you can do that, but I agree that we need a new image. Neptune5000 (talk) 04:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Le bon Dieu

I wonder, is "I have been forgotten by a good God" a mistranslation of le bon Dieu, which just means "God" in French? — Miguel 22:47, 2004 Mar 7 (UTC)

You are correct, the full quote is "J'ai été oubliée par le Bon Dieu." -- VV 23:18, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

For those who don't think "good God" makes sense, they don't know Jeanne Calment. She was a joker; she was joking that God had forgotten to come get her, so she had more time here on this earth (mischievous).

It's "I have been forgotten by the Good God" migo 19:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

First, the original translation came directly from the Jeanne Calment book by Jean-Marie Robine. It was written by French people, I would suppose they knew what they were saying. For you to presume to know more than the people who were with Jeanne Calment for 7+ years is the height of presumption. Also, calling a difference of opinion 'vandalism' smacks of personal attack.→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 01:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Still, "le Bon Dieu" is a regular expression, used as "God", as in "Il faut prier au Bon Dieu".

"un Bon Dieu" would translate to "A good God", whereas "le Bon Dieu" is "(the Good) God", as migo stated.-- megA 21:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

In English we say the Good Lord rather than the good God. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.69.184 (talk • contribs)

I can see what is meant by "reliably reported", but the claim of the oldest person in the world sounds a little to confident, since no one knows for sure in a world of billions of people. --65.73.0.137

Well, damn, she was 122. I think it's safe to say. Mike H 19:01, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

I like "confirmed" better than "reliably reported." "Reported" indicates second-hand "reports"--that is, we're believing something because someone reliable "vouched" for it. But that is not the case here. The documents for Jeanne Calment have been clearly listed and are available to researchers.

Also, considering that we have the "world's oldest person" currently at 114 years old, age 122 is in fact a very tough record to break--when we're talking about real people, not false and exaggerated claims which never can be proven and often falter under scrutiny. This is not to say that an age above 122 has "never" occurred but Jeanne Calment is the bar, the standard. Like a unified heavyweight crown, virtually all scientific and popular (i.e. Guinness Book) sources agree, something that can't be said for the "oldest man ever" Shigechiyo Izumi.

Statistics show that only 5% of people who celebrate their 90th birthday reach age 100. Of those who reach 100, only 1 in 1000 will reach 110. And of those who reach 110, only 1 in 5000 are expected to reach age 120. So we can say that even a person on their 100th birthday, given the present mortality rates in the most advanced countries, can expect a 1 in 5 million chance to live to age 120. And Jeanne Calment was 122. Ironically, she may have been a genetic mutant, resulting from the inbreeding of the Calment family line--a line which died out with her.

To the "no one knows for sure" man

Well, no one knows anything for sure, do they? Did the Wright brothers really invent the airplane? No. Did Columbus really discover America? No.

As for Jeanne Calment, I don't think you realize that it's "pretty damn certain." Consider that only 5% of 90-year-olds reach age 100; only 0.10% of 100-year-olds reach 110. Of those who reach 110, it is expected that 1 in 5,000 will reach 120. And yet Jeanne Calment was 122, and the best-proven case of all time.

So, we have her more than 3 years ahead of any other case, with the best proof, and the chances of it happening again for year very slim any time soon (1 in 10 billion, some estimate, which is greater than the world population currently).

Ok, so if we have a 114-year-old world's oldest person, we're not really sure, and we can never be 100% sure about "all-time" either, but why apply standards higher than those applied to other data?

I don't think anyone is disputing the claim that she lived to 122, but rather, that someone else has lived past the age of 122. I've heard of reports of people in africa who have lived past 140 but don't have papers to prove it since no one in Africa made birth certificates 140 years ago, and while I sincerely doubt the truth of these anecdotes, it is entirely possible that someone has lived past 122 and it is simply undocumented.

Well, until a such case is documented, Jeanne Calment will still hold the title as World's Oldest Ever Person. -- Super Sam 02:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

All this is essentially worthless semantic debate and would be OR if included. That's never stopped me before. It is safe to say that the oldest living person now is probably the oldest living person ever (unless you are a Biblical literalist, ). The average life-span in an industrialized nation now is somewhat higher than double that of "natural" lifestyles (pre-modern, let's say 16th century and previous, perhaps earlier). That means that the chances of someone around 1000 AD living to 90 would be similar to the chances of someone today living to 120 (again, shooting from the hip). By that token, the chances of someone living to 122 then would be exponentially tiny--like really, astronomically tiny. Like "a thousand times the number of people who have ever lived on the planet... to one" tiny. By that same line of reasoning, the chances are excellent that anyone living in a region that would not have birth certificates, a census, and so on, is also going to be living in a region where the average life-span isn't much better than it was a thousand years ago (40-60, at most). Ever seen a picture of the wizened, weathered aboriginal man? He might be younger than you (even as you're still paying off student loans). So even though the majority of the world's population might live out of sight from Guinness and such, environmental and lifestyle factors are going to weigh heavily against their living to 90 or 100, much less 122. Really heavily. Fearwig 17:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, even in the "Dark Ages" there were pretty well documented people over 100. Though I know no such early case of a person 110+, but the fact there were centenarians suggest longevity was always present. The AVERAGE age grows, but the longest possible lifespan remains always about the same - even in the stone age people could live up to 70-80 if not eaten by animals or died of some disease. around 70 seems to be human's natural lifespan, reachable even without modern progress. So it is entirely possible someone back then reached 110+, just the probability is much less then to reach 110+ today (because of the lower average lifespan earlier).--77.132.164.120 23:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The above reasoning is convincing: "The AVERAGE age grows, but the longest possible lifespan remains always about the same." The chances are that someone has lived longer than these ages but the certainty is that it is not going to have been documented in a way that the books of records would accept. Buyo (talk) 14:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

En viager?

What does 'en viager' mean? Is this the 'reverse mortgage' agreement described in the next sentence? This should be clarified - and perhaps a wikipedia page should be started that explains what this means.

http://www.sykesanderson.com/articles/french_en_viager.asp describes it well. someone who is more familiar about this should start a wikipedia page on it. (unsigned comment)

That link is dead. Linkskywalker 03:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

An apartment "en viagier" is a deal between two persons. One of them (usually much younger) agrees to pay the equivalent of the rent of an apartment/house of someone who continues to live there. In return, the person agrees to give the apartment or house to the person who paid him/her at his/her death.

This is a common way for elderly people (usually with small retirement incomes) to get money and improve his/her living, and this until his/her death. Depending on how much time this takes, one or the other may profit more of the deal. Ironically, here, the older person, Jeanne Calment, died after the younger one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.130.68.37 (talk • contribs)

"Unlucky deal for Raffray"

"Unlucky deal for Raffray" is rather casual wording for a dictionary. 138.243.228.52 01:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I removed it. --Jersey Devil 20:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced quotes

Please, note that these quotes have been removed due to lack of sourcing. In general, lists of quotes belong on Wikiquote unless they are placed within the context of the article. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, those quotes can be found in the sources listed in 'references.'→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 13:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I've read in a newspaper that she died at her 121th birthday. (unsigned comment)

I've reverted this change that you made to the 'oldest people' article as it's totally unsourced and goes against all other known reliable reports.--HisSpaceResearch 10:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

A well-known, unsourced but in-context quote is that on (I think) her 121st birthday, she was yet again interviewed by a news-hungry young reporter. To his parting remark: "Well, Mrs. Calment, do you think I will be seeing you again in a year's time?" she replied, "I don't see why not; you look pretty healthy to me".Koroke (talk) 02:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Titanic?

Maybe I'm way off base with this...but I could SWEAR that I've seen this woman (judging from the pic) in a documentary about the Titanic, aboard which she was supposedly a passenger. As I recall the documentary even noted that it was "before her death in 1997." Can anybody verify this or am I way off? Linkskywalker 03:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope, Titanic movie was made/released in 1997, the year she died. On her 122nd birthday, she had almost no public figure and was not allowed outside, as far as I know. Neal 14:58, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

As far as I remember, some pictures of her 122nd birthday got into TV. It was AFTER her 122nd birthday when she disappeared from the media.--77.132.164.120 23:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Contradiction

The French version says that she used to smoke until her death. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krazykenny (talk • contribs) 00:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

Ouch: then we definitely have a problem. Extremely sexy 20:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the smoking bit entirely until a citation is added. --Android Mouse 01:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh. I think there was at least one report which says that she picked up smoking AGAIN at 118, but I've forgotten long ago. Brendanology (talk) 13:59, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

How did she die?

The article doesn't say what her exact cause of death was. Does anyone know? And could we get that added to the article? --Android Mouse 01:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Well: she just died of old age in her sleep, "Android Mouse". Extremely sexy 19:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

One can't die of old age. One always dies of some disease, which has a high probability to occur at the old age, but never of age itself. So it's of interest WHICH disease killed her.--77.132.164.120 23:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

She died in her nursing home, rather than in a hospital, so, obviously, a doctor didn't give her an official death cause. We may never know what she died of, but she did smoke for 104 years and had a moderately weak heart. She died at 10:45 a.m. Neal 14:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the info. It was probably some form of heart failure then. --Android Mouse 20:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Or after a long bout of old age. Or is that no longer a medically recognized cause of death? --llywrch 20:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Death from old age is like death from AIDS or any secondary but nonetheless lethal and clear ultimate cause of death: the proximal cause, the thing that actually killed the person, is always something else. It does not for example appear in the list of causes of death by rate. In the case of AIDS the virus itself only affects a small population of cells whose functioning is not immediately necessary for life. A metastatic cancer on the other hand typically directly disrupts so much tissue that it can often be the direct cause of death. A heart failure, stroke or other immediate cause of death of a 122-year-old patient in 1997 would not have been thought to call for an autopsy and listing the cause as old age would generally everywhere be considered sufficient on the death certificate. Lycurgus 05:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

But why didn't one do an autopsy anyway though, just to be able to learn something from her 122 1/2 years old body: explain this? Extremely sexy 11:50, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I would imagine because her relatives or her will forbade it. Lycurgus 07:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

But she definitely had no relatives anymore, and I don't think she wrote a will in my honest opinion. Extremely sexy 20:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

That or the common decency of the authorities. A small DNA sample is all that would have been really required for science and I wouldn't be surprised if that was collected before she died. An autopsy to confirm the state of the internal organs of a 122 year old woman who smoked until she was 117 would not be without scientific value but there are other values too. Lycurgus 23:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

She probably died of natural causes. Peanut.pookie (talk) 19:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Based on some info that I was told by a Gerontology Research Group member, Calment died of heart failure. Futurist110 (talk) 02:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Age at death

According to TV show QI, Series 3 Episode 9, Stephen Fry said that she died aged 125. Who's right? Memassivbeast 18:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

He's in fact definitely wrong: she honestly died at 122 1/2. Extremely sexy 20:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

No, Calment died at age 122 years and 5 months, meaning 122 2/5 :b --Leoj83 (talk) 00:57, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

To be more precise, Calment died at age 122.45 years. Futurist110 (talk) 02:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Maiden name

What was her maiden name? Although as she married her second cousin, that could've been Calment too. EamonnPKeane 12:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC) I think it was. Extremely sexy 19:06, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

She married her 1st cousin. It couldn't have been on her mother's side. It was on her father's side. And it was her father's brother's son (as a father's sister would have married into another last name). Her middle name is Louise though. And her mother's maiden name is Gilles. I also have her mother's mother's maiden name somehow lost in my memory right now.. I can look that up, but my server is down. Neal 17:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC).

I remember now. Her grandmather on mother's side is Rosa Minaud. Neal 20:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC).

Hour, family, offense

At which hour did she was born and at which hour did she died? Anyone knows? Her daughter's son had his father's surname? Which were his surnames? Finally, whoever vandalized the talk page claiming there's a chance she managed to get that old thanks to "the inbreeding of the Calment family"... Learn to read better, her husband was her cousin QUITE removed, not exactly "in breeding"; But it says nothing about her parents sharing some blood relation, if ya want to learn to read better. Undead Herle King (talk) 20:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Jeanne Calment was born around 7 a.m. and died on a 10:45 a.m., spanning 122 years 164 days ~45 minutes. Don't most children inherit their father's last name? Neal (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC).

I meant this Jeanne Calment had a daughter with Jeanne Calment's husband's surname yet the son of this duo had the surname of Jeanne Calment's father... Which doesn't sounds correct. Furthermore, the data you give adds like 3 hours to the total (talk) 05:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Jeanne Calment's husband was a couson on her father's side, not mother's. Neal (talk) 18:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC).

Watfa Ghanem

Someone should create an article about Watfa Ghanem, a 128-year old Syrian woman, born in 1880. She has long passed the age of Jeanne Calment, who reached the longest confirmed lifespan at 122. 1 2 3. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.42.180.104 (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

You speak as if her age is 128. Do you think this paragraphs:

Watfa Al Ghanem gestures as she speaks in her home in the village of Al Sheirat in the Syrian city of Homs on Friday, February 29. Al Ghanem, 128, who married once and has four children, said that she has farmed for more than 100 years. Al Ghanem also explained that her eye injury was caused by an accident with a tree branch.

Is worthy of its own Wikipedia article? Looks more like a stub to me. She could be in longevity myths if she isn't, especially if we know when in 1880 she claims to be born. Neal (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Smoking verification

I've removed the smoking bit entirely until a citation is added. --Android Mouse 01:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

It is said that it was removed, but there is still the comment saying she smoked. I checked the source but it doesn't have any mention of her smoking.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Firesoul2x (talk • contribs)

Nonsense. There's plenty of evidence that Jeanne Calment smoked, even a photo. Here's an article in the NY Times:

Jeanne Calment, World's Elder, Dies at 122 - New York TimesJeanne Calment, born a year before Alexander Graham Bell patented his telephone ... rode a bicycle until she was 100, and only quit smoking five years ago. ... query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E7D7113DF936A3575BC0A961958260 - 36k - Cached - Similar pages Ryoung122 03:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Removing date-links crusade

Greetings,

The current crusade to remove links to years of birth has been disenguous at best. False accusations that the only reason links were made was for some arcane computer reason don't hold water. The purpose of links on Wikipedia is to allow the user to quickly link to and find background information on a related field of interest.

Given that Calment's claim to fame is as the "Mistress of Time," it seems quite unreasonable to expect that no links to the year 1875, the year of her birth, be allowed. Note the current proposals are guidelines/suggestions, not rules.

Ryoung122 03:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

A short future

I seem to recall that on the day she became the world's oldest person she was interviewed and asked, in the light of her extensive experience of history, words to the effect: "And how do you see the future?" To which she most wittily replied "Very short..." It would be great if someone could track that down and add it... a highly functioning intellect at >120 is just as remarkable as the age itself. Julian I Do Stuff (talk) 20:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what happened to it, but I'm fairly sure it used to be on here (along with the "I only have one wrinkle, and I'm sitting on it"). I think there used to be a quotes section on here - possibly removed because it was trivia. SiameseTurtle (talk) 14:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Uhm, can someone double check the sources on dietary needs etc.?

It's a circus of "She smoked till her death, she ate chocolate and wine". I mean, that reads like the fat bastard's guide to continue his terrible lifestyle. I suspect biased half-truth hiding part of the truth here. Unless she was a total joker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AaThinker (talk • contribs) 14:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Old people say these sorts of things. Big winners at casinos are usually not the people who study the chances on the wheel. Buyo (talk) 14:57, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! :D

Whoever added the new photos recently, you rock! :D Where did you find them, anyway? Jeanne in a 1897 and in 1935 --RyanTee82 (talk) 07:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Smoking

In the sources provided for the smoking bit, i only found that she 'quit smoking 5 years before her death', yet the page says she had been smoking for 100 years. How do they know she has been smoking all her life? 70.176.139.139 (talk) 03:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

The claim appears in this article,[1] who should probably be included. DavidOaks (talk) 03:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Video of her in 1956

See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbVnovXxPNk&feature=related Read the description. --Nick Ornstein (talk) 01:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You can't always trust YouTube descriptions, since the people who upload them usually have about as much of a clue of the true history of the video as the people watching them do, and therefore cannot be verified as reliable sources. I saw that very trailer on TCM, and the old lady in it says she's 75 and a half. Lust For Life was released in 1956, and since this video was documenting the making of the film, I'd say it couldn't have been earlier than '55 or '54. Which would have made Calment between the ages of 79-81. Not 75, as that woman talking to Kirk Douglas claimed she was. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 04:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

It probably was authentic, it's been pulled so don't bother. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 16:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

No heirs, but 216 direct descendants?

From Biography section: "In 1965, aged 90 years and with no heirs", but later, "Calment had 216 direct descendants living at the time of her death". Am I obtuse, or is this inconsistent? The latter assertion is correctly footnoted from the book Living to 100 and Beyond. However, her only child and grandchild predeceased her. Although she may have had nieces and nephews, would they be considered direct descendants? 24.128.188.152 (talk) 23:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The claim seems dubious, even if the outward form of citation is there. I think it should be deleted, or at least, someone needs to go check the ref. DavidOaks (talk) 23:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Calment didn't have any direct descendants when she died, since there was no one alive when she died who had her as an ancestor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.210.87 (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Vincent van Gogh

The information regarding her meeting Vincent van Gough is mentioned in two different spots, once under the Biography section and then again under the Recognition section. These two spots say almost the same thing regarding her description of him "dirty, badly dressed, and disagreeable" yet also contradict each other at the same time - in the Biography section it says he was at her uncle's shop to buy paint and in the Recognition section it says he was there to buy canvas. I think one of these references should be taken out as well as the contradiction corrected. 69.41.192.218 (talk) 17:37, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Disproving the Bible

Does Jeanne's age of 122 1/2 reflect evidence that the bible is a work of fiction by demonstrating that someone has in fact lived beyond 120 years of age? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.101.9.1 (talk)

Not at all. Lifespans gradually dropped to that level over a period of at least 900 years after the Deluge, at which time Moses' two older siblings also lived beyond 120 years. The actual reference was to God's giving notice that he would remove wickedness in 120 years time. This would allow Noah, who was childless at the time of the pronouncement, to father three sons to (along with their mother and three wives) help Noah build the ark before the end of the 120-year period. — Glenn L (talk) 20:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

No, since the Bible never limited man's lifespan to 120 years. As for that Bible quote, if it was hypothetically talking about lifespan, it was talking about man's lifespan, not woman's. We have yet to see a man come within 5 years of reaching age 121. Granted to say, a man will probably reach ages 121 or more in several decades or so, but it will be a very long wait. And LOL at the statement that man lived for 900 years in the past. Just because a religious book says something does not mean that it is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.210.87 (talk) 08:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Glenn L's explanation is correct. As for your statement, man living over 900 years in the past is not so hard to believe. The world has not always been the same way it is now. Jay72091 (talk) 9:35 AM, 19 September 2012 CST —Preceding undated comment added 14:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Lifespans hundreds / thousands of years ago were much shorter due to them not having the medical advancements that we have now. If anyone has ever lived longer than Calment it would only be slightly longer and would have been quite recent. To blindly believe such nonsense as that people lived for hundreds of years and that two of every species of animal could have fitted on one boat is ludicrous. It would need to have been miles long. How would anyone have found polar bears and penguins in the Middle East? How could the animals killing each other have been prevented? Don't believe what you know is impossible because it says so in the Bible. Science proves many things stated in the Bible are untrue. Don't let religious brainwashing make you believe what cannot be true. From the late 19th century onwards, human lifespans have increased by more than double. Prior to that, a person was very lucky to have lived for half Calment's lifespan. Jim Michael (talk) 12:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Biography section

This is for a change that needs to be made: I found this in the biography section, "Frédéric became a doctor, and she outlived him as well, as he died in 1963 in a motorcycle accident, also at the age of 36.[7]" The problem is that 2 of the other references state that he died in 1960, one does this by deduction. Reference 1 states, "He became a medical doctor and died before her, in an automobile accident in 1960." and Reference 9 states, "She went on to outlive all of her immediate family, her husband by 55 years, Yvonne by 63 years and Frédéric by 37 years." For the second reference, 1997 minus "37 years" would equate to 1960. Also, Reference 7 does not state that he died in a motocycle accident so I have no idea where this information came from, while Reference 1 clearly states that he died in an automobile accident. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 21:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Updated section. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 12:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Li Ching-Yuen

Why isn't there any mention of Li Ching-Yuen in this article? He was way before any forms of verification, so I can understand why he wouldn't be the oldest verified person like Calment is, but shouldn't he at least be made a note of? I don't think his existence should go unnoticed, after all - his lifespan viciously exceeds Calment's! Cybersteel8 (talk) 02:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

If we have to mention Li Ching-Yuen, we also have to mention every single person who have claimed to be extremely old, and that would be hundres. Many of these people have not been recorded and/or have not been able to put forward enough evidence to back their claims. (In fact most of them had nothing but their word) There is no reason to belive any of them because of that - lack of evidence. It is probable that some of them are true, but we don't know. However we now have one example of disputed cases under the 'Recognition' section, wich is enough, and it also mentions the two living cases. I guess we could also put in a link to the article Longevity myths. --Leoj83 (talk) 16:40, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Why should we include a man who is an obvious fraud in this article? (really? 256 years?) Futurist110 (talk) 02:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect statement

This is what the wiki page says:

She ascribed her longevity and relatively youthful appearance for her age to olive oil, which she said she poured on all her food and rubbed onto her skin, as well as a diet of port wine,she ate nearly one kilo of chocolate every week and 1 million kilos of acai berries with whip cream on every Thursday for Taco Night..[10]

And when I click on the link, this is what was actually written:

The French had their own theories about why she lived so long, noting that she used to eat more than two pounds of chocolate a week, treat her skin with olive oil, drank port wine and rode a bicycle until she was 100.

I don't really think any of this should be included because I don't know if any of it is truth. --Brian Earl Haines (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

From what date do Calment really hold the record as the oldest undisputed recorded person ever?

At the bottom of the article, in the "Records box", it sais Calment have been the oldest undisputed recorded person ever since 17 sep. 1989 to present day - right? The thing is, however, a few persons has since past that record of 114 years and 209 days Calment broke in sep 1989. The second-oldest person ever was Sarah Knauss who died at age 119 years and 97 days in 1999. That means, in the case of Calment, we should not count from sep 1989 - instead from the date when Calment was 119 years and 98 days: 30 may 1994 The person/s who once wrote the date sep 1989, I know how they are thinking, but it is not correct. What do you think? --Leoj83 (talk) 00:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Knauss was younger than Calment, though. Right now, Calment broke the previous longevity record in the late 1980s, since no one before the late 1980s has been verified to live past 113. Once Calment reached Anna Eliza Williams's milestone, then she became the oldest verified person to have ever lived. This occurred in the late 1980s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.30.197 (talk) 02:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Date of birth of father

I think the date of birth of Nicolas Calment (father) is wrong, in this article [2] says he died at the age of 93 years and also he had the same age as his wife when all his children were born. He could have been born between January 28, 1838 and January 27, 1839. In the French version of this article appears he was born in 1838.--Hcxangel (talk) 07:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Please, someone edit this...

"She weighed 45 kilograms (99 lb) in 1994" is what should appear, instead, the article reads "she weighed in 1994". I am not confirmed user, yet.Mattholomew (talk) 12:32, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

It looks right to me. What are you using to read it? —Tamfang (talk) 00:30, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 December 2012

This is a lie the Bible says that no one shall live past 120 years,

74.124.161.182 (talk) 04:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done: I'm afraid the Bible doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources. See also the above discussion. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 05:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

AB's condition

This article has a great lack of references to be good. I think it should be reassessed.--Nhriber (talk) 02:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome to follow the procedure described at WP:GAR, but it's surely more productive to just find and add more references yourself. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 08:45, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Birth certificate

In the 19th century there were a lot of children who died very young and there was a tradition to name younger brothers like the died one. Maybe Jeanne Louise had an older sister with the same name who died before the real one did born, maybe 10 years before. A sister have same birth certificate (same parens, same place...) just change the day and year. The others document (marriage, etc) maybe right...just a possibility... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.59.207.246 (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

This was a possibility, but her age was fully verified by the Guiness Records. -- Hazhk ^{Talk to me} 20:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

"Oldest person ever to appear in a motion picture" claim

I removed the claim that Calment was the oldest person ever to appear in a motion picture. There was no source given for this claim, but even if it had been true, she has been superseded at least by Jiroemon Kimura when he appeared on Japanese news on his 116th birthday: World's oldest man ever turns 116 (Zoomin.TV UK) -- Cimbalom (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok. She was the oldest actress to appear in a film, according to Guinness World Records. -- Cimbalom (talk) 03:54, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jeanne Calment/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Seems to be fairly complete, I think it just needs a few more references and info on the documentation used to verify her age. — Feezo (Talk) 01:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 15:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

At what dates did she become oldest living, and oldest confirmed ever?

This is relevant to the intro chapter. Not what date the other 1870's guy died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.230.20.13 (talk) 09:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

What is appropriately encyclopedic content for longevity related biographies

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) 18:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Oldest verified person ever

See Talk:Oldest_people#Oldest_verified_person_ever.Alekksandr (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2015

182.69.70.43 (talk) 10:52, 29 April 2015 (UTC) please do that she is still alive and the age is 140 and more

Source? Mattythewhite (talk) 10:57, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Good article?

Someone may want to reassess this one, I see numerous tags around including one orange. At this point I feel this article regretfully does not meet our GA standards. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:01, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Why bad sight? Could they have just removed cataract surgically?

Smoking increases cataract risk. Maybe she did not wear eyeglasses or sunglasses, so she maybe got a lot of UVB radiation.

ee1518 (talk) 13:06, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Done. Both your questions are now answered in the current revision. 86.154.102.130 (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Can one buy the documentary or watch it online?

"A documentary film about her life, entitled Beyond 120 Years with Jeanne Calment, was released in 1995". I tried Google search and Youtube search, no luck. ee1518 (talk) 13:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Jeanne Calment - timezone change in 1940

Hi ThomasW. You have reverted my edit for Jeanne Calment, saying it is unreferenced and/or original research.

It is obvious that if you change French clocks in 1940 by one hour to Central European Time, then French people start their daily routines one hour earlier relative to solar time. It is just like introducing Daylght Savings Time. Can you therefore please accept my edit? Thanks. The deeper reason behind my edit is that sleeping habits and sleep-wake cycles have an impact on health/longevity, and thus some readers may find this information useful. 109.158.189.132 (talk) 19:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• You must provide a reliable source that supports your claims, period. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 19:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

• • All right. What precisely is, in your view, the "claim" that you would like me to source? (Presumably that GMT is one hour later than CET?). 109.158.189.132 (talk) 19:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
    • I suggest you start by going to the talk page of the article and explaining to other editors why what you want to add to the article is of any relevance whatsoever to the article, providing a link to a reliable source that says that it is of relevance, and not just a bright idea you yourself came up with one day. Jeanne Calment was born in 1875, spent her first 16 years doing her daily routines according to local solar time, then spent the next 49 years of her life (that is until age 65) doing her daily routines according to GMT, and then the final 57 years doing her daily routines according to CET, and neither you nor anyone else has any idea about whether she was referring to 8AM in a relative sense, i.e about that time in the morning, or in an absolute "solar time sense" like in her own youth, i.e. "get out of bed when the sun is x degrees above the horizon". In my opinion what you want to add is just totally irrelevant trivia, so I don't intend to take part in a discussion on the article talk page, but I'm also not going to let you add your own original research and speculations to the article... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 20:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Calm down please. So in a nutshell, your problem is that Jeanne Calment, when speaking to the doctors in the 1990s interviews, may have remembered to convert her childhood time (hence 7am local solar time/GMT, in your conversion scenario) into 1940 time (hence 8am CET in your conversion scenario). Since you have a strong view on the matter, I will not fight it out. Perhaps someone else will. So I will copy this discussion to the Talk page as per your advice. Good luck and good night.109.158.189.132 (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Use of French words

I don't see that the occasional French translations interjected into the text are necessary. The only use I can envisage for them is as an aid when looking at those sources that are in French, which in any case would be difficult without good knowledge of French. I propose these are removed and shall do so myself if there are no objections. 131.111.184.81 (talk) 13:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Objection, Your Honour. I find the French helpful, especially when television interviews (YouTube etc) are cited, so we can listen to what Jeanne Calment herself said (rather than relying on headline-grabbing media reports which misrepresent her). Another problem is accuracy of translation: most of the literature on Mme Calment naturally is in French, so the translations here are provided mainly by Wikipedians. And Wikipedians then have to decide whether they should translate French dessert as "dessert" (British and American English), or as "sweet" (British English "sweet" is ambiguous - it can mean either American English "candy" or "dessert", potentially confusing to the American reader) or as "pudding" (British English only, it means something else to Americans, i.e. "custard" in British English). And this is just one French word. There will be endless misunderstandings and arguments if we do not have Jeanne Calment's original wording wherever there is scope for such confusion. Golden rule: Never trust a translation, unless it is available in two or three different languages which you understand. Au revoir. 86.170.121.172 (talk) 09:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Incongruent information about height

In one part of the article it says her height was 1.50 m and in another it says it was 1.37. I wonder if someone can lose almost 6 inches (13 cm) of height in a few years. Can someone verify the information?

Dunno if that is so extraordinary; osteoporosis or muscle weakening leading to dowager's hump is depressingly common still. Anmccaff (talk) 14:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

PS: that's over 11 years, which, at least in comaprison to the more usual 3 and 10 isn't really a short number of years, and includes breakage of a major leg bone. It's also quite possible that the curiously even 1.5 metre height was a generous approximation. &cet. Anmccaff (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Revert in Jeanne Calment article

How are you telling that is a comment herself did? There is nothing saying that she made the comment. Although I checked on other websites so I can now say that apparently it is not a comment by the wiki editor. But it still can be a comment by someone else besides her. I tried checking on the referenced source but the ebook is not available. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinker78 (talk • contribs) 20:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there is. Parenthetical sections, in quotes like that, are meant to convey that the subject said them. Whether that was entirely accurate, I'm not sure, but that is a very, very common convention in English writing. Anmccaff (talk) 02:45, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Can you provide a link with information of that convention? I was not aware of that use. I don't know where it is very, very common because I don't remember stumbling on it before. Thinker78 (talk) 03:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Asked and answered, @Thinker78:. I'd already written, on my talk page where you originally posted this, I have doubts whether this could be a productive conversation anywhere, but I am certain it can not be here. Why not copy it over to the article, or some other appropriate place where more than one set of eyes will see it?, right? Anmccaff (talk) 05:33, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid you are not making a very strong case for your revert. You didn't answer my question if you could provide a link with information of the convention you mentioned. You know that original research is not usually accepted in Wikipedia, so I cannot just accept your claim that "it is a very, very common convention". I would need a link to a reputable website with that information.Thinker78 (talk) 05:44, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't need a case for my revert; you've already stated that your reason for changing the article was wrong. Here you removed content because... (deleted commentary because it seems to be a personal commentary from a wiki editor.) In your second sentence above in this section, you concede that isn't true, although I kinda doubt your reasoning for doing so. Anmccaff (talk) 06:05, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Here's where this info was added, by an IP with one edit on other matters, but mostly on Calment. It lists the sources added, in about 3-4 weeks I should be near a library which can readily ILL it for me, but perhaps someone else could grab it in the meantime. Anmccaff (talk) 06:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

You are right, I did say that. But now I wonder if the quotation is a comment by herself, by the writer of the original article or by someone else (did "odd invention" referred to her using the flannel as I thought originally or does it refer to the shower, argument that I read in another website?). Sorry that I'm not familiar with the convention you mentioned. You may be right but understand my wanting to read by myself in a style guide about it, not only to verify the information but also to learn. Thinker78 (talk) 15:50, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Obviously, it was not, in one sense a comment by her herself; in her old age, at least, she didn't even speak Parisian, never mind English. She spoke Arlesian, so much so that it, and her deafness, originally convinced her caretakers that she had gone demented. That said, no one of her time would see washing with a cloth as "odd" or an "invention;" if anything, it was the default. Anmccaff (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I tried to find out if there is an Arlesian language or dialect but I didn't find it. The closest I found was that in Arles there is a subdialect of the Provencal dialect called Rodanenc.Thinker78 (talk) 02:43, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Btw I came to the conclusion it was not a comment by a wiki editor after the revert, when I was trying to find out other websites with the information. Thinker78 (talk) 02:51, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I have been following this discussion. In context it seems obvious that the phrase (odd invention) is a quotation from her, not an editor's opinion. There is no citation given immediately after the quote, which strictly speaking allows for removal, but there are two citations (6)(25) at the end of that sub article ('Her daily...'). Is the citation there? I cannot find it but a lot of it is in French so it may be there somewhere. Has not an earlier editor simply put the citations at the end of a paragraph to cover all quotations made by her that are inserted earlier. If so, all that is needed is to move the citations closer to the actual quotes, or just leave it because it should be pretty clear what has happened if read in context. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

If "an odd invention" is a quote by her, that should be clarified in the article, since the current format has already been shown to be ambiguous in the discussion above. For example, use (which she called "an odd invention"). A source is also necessary, ideally within the parentheses. Gap9551 (talk) 20:46, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I think my original reason to delete the comment is no longer valid (although I still think it is not clear who the comment belongs to) so I will open up a new section to discuss if we should remove the comments. Thinker78 (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments under the heading "Daily routine at ages 111–114" should be removed

The comments "a distinguished woman must have beautiful hands" and "an odd invention" should be removed not only because they don't have citation and are unclear who is saying them but also because I don't think those comments have anything to do with the heading of the section. According to the policy Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, "when you wonder what should or should not be in an article, ask yourself what a reader would expect to find under the same heading in an encyclopedia". I think some random commentary about having beautiful hands or an odd invention would not be expected in an encyclopedia listing the daily routines of a person. Thinker78 (talk) 03:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

First, it appears reasonably clear whose words these are, at least to most people, and it is also rather clear that they do, in fact, have a citation, just not one immediately close. Finally, why wouldn't the subject of the article's personal thoughts about the topic literally at hand be relevant? Anmccaff (talk) 04:35, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I wonder how do you come to your conclusion that it appears reasonably clear to most people. How do you know most people find it clear? And I think it is not clear that the comments have a citation. I see a citation at the end of the section but according to Wikipedia:Inline citation, "inline citations are often placed at the end of a sentence or paragraph". And to be honest I'm confused sometimes with citations in general, even those placed in the same paragraph or, even, same sentence, because I don't know what text they are exactly citing, specially with citations that I cannot verify, as is this case, because there is no ebook available. So it is not clear that they have a citation. The personal thoughts of the subject of the article (I don't know if they are her thoughts) in this case are not relevant because they are not addressing the topic at hand but seems to be a mere chitchat type of thoughts. For me it is not relevant at all to the daily routines list someone commenting that washing herself with flannels is an odd invention or that a shower is an odd invention. I'm really just interested in her daily routines. Thinker78 (talk) 06:11, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Anmccaff. IMO removing the quotes now would be inappropriate. I suggest placing a cn tag after the words. Somebody reading this might what to find the source now. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 05:44, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

What do you think about their relevancy to the heading? Thinker78 (talk) 06:13, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Question from 2015 about the Succession Box

Way back in 2015 there was a succession box near the bottom of Jeanne Calment's page and then it got removed like a lot of other succession boxes did on other supercentenarian articles. As far as I could tell, the reason given for removal was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Succession_Box_Standardization/Guidelines#Awards_and_achievements_(s-ach) . I still don't understand how it justifies removal of it. Could someone please help me understand the logic behind the removal of the succession box? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.248.200.136 (talk) 22:53, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

A succession box must be appropriate for Oldest Living Person, because someone must have taken over that distinction when she died. This would not apply to the other two distinctions - Oldest Living French person/Frenchwoman (not notable enough) and Oldest Person Ever (because that might not have changed.) Valetude (talk) 23:49, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

'Unnecessary bits'

SaucyJimmy has seen fit to remove my reference to the sale of the property as 'unnecessary'. I seem to remember it as the most interesting part of the story at the time of the death, and it is covered at suitable length in the article. Valetude (talk) 00:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

I have added Talkback to his talk page for you. MutchyMan112 (talk) 13:03, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Valetude. I didn't mean that the information is unnecessary or uninteresting altogether, rather that it is unnecessary in the introduction, which should be kept concise, only containing the most pertinent information to the article's subject. Obviously my opinion on this specific case is not objective; if most disagree with my judgement, that's fine. SaucyJimmy (talk) 12:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Given the recent piece of info...

...can we move the article to Jeanne and Yvonne Calment?? If not, please explain if anyone can try to show that the recent info is wrong. Georgia guy (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

We probably should not until the allegations are more than allegations. Surtsicna (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

The "true believers" are not convinced yet [3] one person is claiming one of the researchers has been banned from the forum. This research is not going to be popular as one person said essentially "if you toss out her claim you have to toss out every claim above 110" Legacypac (talk) 21:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Besides, even if it was actually Yvonne, officially it was still Jeanne. We would treat Jeanne Calment as the notable alter ego of an otherwise unknown Yvonne. Surtsicna (talk) 22:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

But we would have to update the info as "Jeanne Calment, born Yvonne Calment..." Georgia guy (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Uh, all of this would be unprecedented, methinks. Instead of moving the article, we would be changing its scope/subject. Surtsicna (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

And we would have to title the article to make sure it matches the actual subject. Georgia guy (talk) 23:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

But surely the subject would still be Jeanne Calment. A different Jeanne Calment perhaps, but unless reliable sources suddenly start referring to her as Yvonne, Jeanne Calment would remain the common name. Surtsicna (talk) 23:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

We will not need to change the page name, only update the content. Legacypac (talk) 23:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

This is only educated speculation so far. If/when a majority of RS end up reporting that Yvonne impersonated her mother over decades, we'll be able to change the article contents accordingly. I don't think the title would change, because the subject's notability has always been under Jeanne's name. The lede might simply become: Jeanne Calment (1875–1934) was a French woman from Arles who was considered the oldest person in the world over several decades. It later emerged that her daughter Yvonne (1898–1997) had lived under her dead mother's identity from 1934 until her own death in 1997, aged 99; she was then believed to be 122 years old. For now, the short sentence about this allegation is fully sufficient. — JFG ^talk 23:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Exactly. Let's spend no further time on this until there's more -- way more. It's a tantalizing theory but for now it's just that -- tantalizing and a theory. Maybe too tantalizing. EEng 00:33, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

The french insurance book quoted would be a good RS as well. I expect this will get some traction in other RS in time. Legacypac (talk) 00:37, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I concur that fraud is the right word. [4] Identity theft would be a crime against the dead mother, this would be a crime against the government, the guy who bought her apartment, and fooling the researchers. After so many years and with a life annuity to lose she would be stuck in the deception (assuming the new info bears out) Legacypac (talk) 00:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Please consider replacing the word Allegation with the word Hypothesis in the section telling about Valery Novoselov's interview. In the interview itself the possibility that Jeanne is Yvonne is called a hypothesis, and it is called a hypothesis by Valery himself. I think it would be more accurate this way as there are no CLAIMS. Citation from the article of how Valery describes it: "After looking at all the data that Nikolay has managed to collect, including the known intentional destruction of the family archive on Jeanna’s orders, we developed a hypothesis that is now being checked. In 1934, there was a death in the Calment family. The official story is that in 1934, Jeanne had lost her only daughter, Yvonne. We think that in reality it was Jeanne who had died, aged almost 59, and her daughter took her name and personality." ElenaMilova (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

References

@ElenaMilova: Thank you for pointing out this important nuance. The article has been updated accordingly. — JFG ^talk 12:04, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I have also corrected the phrasing in other articles where the study is mentioned: List of French supercentenarians, List of supercentenarians by continent, Oldest people, and List of the verified oldest people. — JFG ^talk 12:13, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Rewrite that Jeanne was not the oldest person ever?

There is one line in this article which deals with the recent study indicating that Jeanne was really her daughter who took the original Jeanne's place, and only lived to 99. The study seems to be gaining a lot of recognition, so should the article be rewritten to make it clear that she did not necessarily (if anything I would say, almost certainly didn't) live to age 122? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.215.220.235 (talk) 22:37, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm waiting to see how this study gains traction. So far we have just one source and in there a ref to an insurance book as a second source. If you have more sources post them please. Legacypac (talk) 22:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

• It's WAY too early to do more than note that this question has been raised. EEng 02:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Can't resist adding that https://www DOT google.com/amp/s/the110club.com/viewtopic.php%3ft=3663&amp=1 shows what goofball amateurs these longevity fans are. EEng 10:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I can't get that link to work even with replacing the dot, but I did find they banned the member that brought tried to discuss the new article suggesting she was not 122. [5] Not much science amd a whole lot of fan club over there. Legacypac (talk) 11:34, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Following the link asks for a login now. I think the first time I got in via some other path. Anyway, try googling Jeanne Calment fraud and if you see a header partway down reading "Did Jeanne Calment really reach 122? - The 110 Club" try that. They keep saying over and over how there's a birth record and baptismal record and identity papers throughout the years, which has nothing to do with the actual question: is this the same person? EEng 12:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

You are invited to help build Draft:Verification of supercentenarians. — JFG ^talk 16:47, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

I got in some way but some parts of the forum are indead locked down. They blocked the user posting links to the source disputing the claim - which says a lot.

• https://medium.com/@yurideigin/jaccuse-why-122-year-longevity-record-may-be-fake-af87fc0c3133 very interesting read with many pictures.
• russian presentation https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=41B8120C989594F7!180323&ithint=file%2cdocx&app=Word&wdo=2&authkey=!AKRAZiUa0ZxPDkI

Legacypac (talk) 02:26, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

"indead"? Your humor is so disrespectful! EEng 05:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

• I undid any mention until this can be proven as right now we have a hypothesis supported by a singe source. If that is guaranteed inclusion then why not include everyone claiming to be over the age of 122 on List of the verified oldest people? I don't see how this would pass WP:N without third party coverage. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

  I restored it. A hypothesis doesn't have to be "proven as right" for us to report it on its face. EEng 05:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

We have 4 sources now. Two articles in English, a presentation in Russian and a completely separate book about insurance. Indead was strickly a typo (typing with my thumbs on mobile). I'll leave it though, as it's pretty funny. Legacypac (talk) 08:34, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

"strickly a typo", huh? You're a sly one, Legacypac. EEng 14:40, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Agree with the restoration. This hypothesis is not presented as fact, and is now supported by several sources It is not a wacko theory: it's plausible on its face. As encyclopedists, we are not in the business of deciding the truth of any fact, only to duly report credible hypotheses as such (see WP:VNT). We are not giving undue weight to this hypothesis, by isolating it to a single 4-line section. A brief mention in the lede is in my opinion warranted, due to the potential impact of the alternative story. All in all, the article looks well-balanced given the current state of knowledge and sources. — JFG ^talk 13:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Searching for the picture of Jeanne and Yvonne Calment together in 1925

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Jeanne_Calment#V%C3%A9racit%C3%A9_?_Voici_une_hypoth%C3%A8se_..._qui_semble_m%C3%A9riter_une_enqu%C3%AAte_approfondie

"Une photo de Jeanne Calment avec sa mère, vers 1925 avait été publiée. On ne le trouve pas sur internet. Sur cette photo, la personne de gauche ressemblait à la première photo, c'était une femme de 50 ans, solide, aux grands yeux, la vraie Jeanne Calment. A sa droite, Yvonne Calment, environ 27 ans, brune, mince, plus petite que sa mère, les yeux bien enfoncés dans les orbites, cernés. Et Sans aucun doute la "Jeanne" Calment que nous avons connue ressemblait à la seconde."

Translation: A photo of Jeanne Calment with her mother, around 1925 had been published. We do not find it on the internet. In this picture, the person on the left looked like the first picture, it was a woman of 50 years, solid, with big eyes, the real Jeanne Calment. On his right, Yvonne Calment, about 27 years old, dark, slender, smaller than his mother, eyes deep in the orbits, surrounded. And without a doubt the "Jeanne" Calment we knew was like the second.

"La photo que vous reliez n'est pas celle que j'ai vu, mais elle y ressemble. " Translation: The photo you are connecting is not the one I saw, but it looks like it.

In Jeanne Calment's French page, a French Wikipedia user (hbourj) mentioned and described about a picture of Jeanne with her daughter which is not available on the Internet. Hbourj also said that it is not really the one on the Internet although it looks liked it. Does anyone have it? What's the source? Is it from a book/article/etc.? Can someone scan/take a picture of it and upload it to the Internet (imgur.com)? I'm curious to know what it looks like according to his description about the facial characteristics. I think it would be interesting to see the picture to understand his explanation regrading facial characteristics differences and will help in providing more clues to the current fraud hypothesis being carried out.

I tried to contact hbourj by emailing and leaving a message on his user discussion page and haven't receive any reply yet. Hopefully I can get some answers here just in case he is inactive.

Or is it this one? If yes, can anyone provide the full image? This was from the investigation research slideshow. https://imgur.com/a/I8eV4rO --YHL532 (talk) 15:14, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi YHL532. I think the image hbourj is referring to is this one. It is unfortunately the only such image which has survived to the destruction of the family records on "Jeanne"'s orders. It is included in the Medium article [6]. Citizen Canine (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Then why did hbourj say that is not the one he is referring to when another Wikipedia user asked him? He said it's not the one he saw but looks similar to it. Anyone thinks there's some other photo not available online? Did "Jeanne" order to destroy the family records too? I thought "Jeanne" only ordered to burn photos.

Une photographie de Jeanne avec sa fille est disponible sur internet [2] (s'agit-il de celle-ci ?). Translation: A photograph of Jeanne with her daughter is available on the internet [2] (is it this one?).

"La photo que vous reliez n'est pas celle que j'ai vu, mais elle y ressemble. " Translation: The photo you are connecting is not the one I saw, but it looks like it. --YHL532 (talk) 15:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't know. He didn't say where he saw the original photo. It could be he somehow has privileged access to it. More likely though it is in one of the print sources and simply hasn't been made available online, at least not anywhere that's highly visible. Citizen Canine (talk) 15:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

• Several places I've read that the old lady had family records destroyed. Very strange behaviour for someone with nothing to hide. The height and eye color are another smoking gun. I'm not convinced eye color fades and changes with age, or that some women don't get shorter with extreme age. At some point we will need to decide when the weight of evidence on one side outweighs the weight of evidence on older sources. Legacypac (talk) 16:51, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
• No, we won't decide when the weight of the evidence on one side outweighs [etc etc]. We will wait to see what new reliable sources say, and it will be a long time before they take a definite stand. In the meantime, we can only report this as (at first) a new hypothesis, then (maybe for an intermediate period) as a controversy, and then (eventually) as a decided point one way or another. But that last stage will likely (and I'm not kidding about this) only come 10 to 20 years from now, because that's how long it takes for considered published opinion to become settled on something like this.

For a very similar situation that took about 18 years to resolve, see Talk:Eubie_Blake#Blake's_Correct_Birth_Year_-_1883_-_is_Provided_by_Blake_Himself_on_"The_Tonight_Show_with_Johnny_Carson". In brief, for much of his life pioneering jazzist Eubie Blake said he was born in 1883; he died in 1983 at "100 years old". About 2000 evidence began to emerge that he had actually been born in 1887, and this evidence became stronger over the next few years. But it took a further ten years for authoritative sources to publish new papers, issue revised editions, and so on so that we (Wikipedia) could simply state the 1887 date as fact, not controversy. That's probably the kind of time it will take in this case as well – though at this point we don't know in which direction the chips will eventually fall, of course. EEng 18:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

It should not take 18 years to solve this. Age was not the defining characteristic in the Blake case where here it is the only part of her life that is notable. Legacypac (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

You're right, it shouldn't take 18 years, but it may very well. We can't control how fast sources get to work on this. EEng 06:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)