Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-44816-20170119014806/@comment-258494-20170126035729

930310JL wrote: Ryoung122 wrote: 930310JL wrote: Since the lists are based on the GRG data (at least the validated/verified cases) it only seems logical that the same term (verified) exists in the Wikia-lists as on the GRG lists. The GRG also uses "validated".

Is there any reason that you are arguing this? Please explain how making this easier for everyone (using one term consistently instead of two) is not helpful?Ryoung122 (talk) 02:56, January 23, 2017 (UTC) Some of the most cited GRG tables use the term "Verified".

http://www.grg.org/Adams/A.HTM "Table A - Verified Supercentenarians (Listed Chronologically By Birth Date)

http://www.grg.org/Adams/B.HTM "Table B - Verified Supercentenarians (Ranked By Age)"

It's really amazing that you still don't (choose to?) understand after all this time and repeated explanations.

Aside from the fact that the above tables are "as of" Jan 1 2015 (which predates my Feb 12 2015 promotion to Director of the GRG Supercentenarian Research and Database Division), what the GRG does isn't the issue here: the issue is what the Gerontology Wiki does. And, even though both terms are used interchangeably, they really do not mean the same thing.

As I have pointed out, repeatedly: "validated" is a subset of "verified". "Verified" is a broader term. As I pointed out, I could say that "I verified that the validated supercentenarian Meta Dishman passed away January 20, 2017". In that example, "verified" isn't about the validation status, but about the fact that the person's death date has been checked--a subcomponent of validation, but also a broader use of the term. Hence, it's similar, but it's not the same.Ryoung122 (talk) 03:57, January 26, 2017 (UTC)