Talk:Domingo Villa Avisencio/@comment-33034960-20191214153556

Jxu00,

1¸. The Gerontology Wiki has its own rules and I ask you to follow them. So please do not change my supplements in articles, which base on sources listed among References.

2. You say there are "tons of signs that 1910 was a mistake for the 2017 report" and that "the facebook posts from his family from the same year claim 1906/1907, and this has never changed", and that  "his caretaker even thought he was 114".

Why do you think that Facebook posts from Mr. Villa Avisencio's family members and his caretaker's opinion are more reliable than the information from the article? All this information is at the same level, if the article itself is not even more reliable. Especially, since in the article is written "quien oficialmente acaba de cumplir 107 años." I think that there must be a reason for a journalist to write a word "oficialmente" (officially). The article is listed among References, so this information should not be ignored. It is very interesting, that in the Gerontology Wiki article almost all informaiton are taken from this source but just this important detail was ignored.

2. You ask me if I know what age Mr. Villa Avisencio's original baptismal records, marriage record and census record support. I do not know and I also do not know if you know that too. At this point, it doesn't even matter. As it have been repeated so many times: Gerontology Wiki is not a place for original research and the articles should base on mentioned References. In one of the mentioned sources it is written that in 2017 Mr. Villa Avisencio claimed to have been 107 years old, If you agree or not. It is not about "correct/incorect ", it is about objectivity and correct summarization of information from the References. You cannot take from the sources only the information you like and/or you agree with.

3. I will re-add the information from the article in References and then ask admins to lock the article up.