Talk:Lucile Randon

Mismatched information

The year of birth in the infobox is incorrect. TheMaster3dit0r6969 (talk) 03:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Fourth oldest human being

This article used to say she was the fourth ever oldest human being, but does not say this now. Why has this information been removed? Rollo August (talk) 11:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@DerbyCountyinNZ: removed the information which I just restored here: [1]. I will note though that it appears GRG dropped Sarah Knauss from their rankings since 2015. [2] - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

And I've removed it again per WP:BLP. Unless there is a WP:RS (and, per previous consensus, being on the GRG list is insufficient) which states specifically that she is the fourth oldest then such a statement is WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 20:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@DerbyCountyinNZ: The problem is that would make the entire List of the verified oldest people list WP:OR/WP:SYNTH as well. It even says at the top under 100 Oldest Women "The list including known and validated supercentenarians who died before 2015 was compiled by the Gerontology Research Group (GRG). Later cases are included in more recent GRG data, with administrative reports or press coverage as supplementary sources, as indicated in the table." Most of the top 10 names are sourced solely by GRG. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

If you feel there should be additional sourcing then I propose a markup of List of the verified oldest people as the given information is contradictory to your claim here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:07, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Longevity#Lists. If necessary, I'll clarify/elaborate in a couple of hours when I'm back online. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 21:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Used a wheelchair vs. Confined to a wheelchair

@Firefangledfeathers, Tempelz, and Meredithslota: All of you have reverted edits saying Randon has been "wheelchair-bound/confined to a wheelchair", and I'd like to ask why. I am aware that some consider the phrase ableist, but I also know that there has been no Wikipedia discussion saying these terms are not allowed. 🇺🇦 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Chicdat, "used a wheelchair" was first introduced on June 2, and you first changed it to "wheelchair-bound" on June 13, citing MOS:EUPH. "wheelchair-bound" was removed again on July 4, and there's been a slow-motion (with flare-ups) edit war ever since with no talk page discussion. Let me know if that history is incorrect.

Assuming I'm correct, "used a wheelchair" is preferable here for three reasons:

• "wheelchair-bound" is not supported by the source, which just says "in a wheelchair"
• since the RfC you alluded to, both styles have been acceptable (or at least, there's no consensus against their use), and in such situations, the original style should be retained per MOS:VAR
• some editors and readers do consider "wheelchair-bound" to be ableist, so there should be some affirmative, compelling reason to use it here.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

No substantive response for a few days now. I was responding mainly to "wheelchair-bound", but would say the same things about "confined to a wheelchair". Pending some new participation in the next couple days, I plan to revert per the above, mainly the WP:NOCON of it all. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

If the source says "in a wheelchair", then shouldn't it be changed to that rather than "used a wheelchair"? 🇺🇦 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:46, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

All right then, I've changed it. 🇺🇦 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why I've been tagged into this. I only changed her image description and that's it. Tempelz (talk) 01:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

• Good to see you anyway, Tempelz! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)