Talk:Oldest Validated supercentenarians All-Time/@comment-26393720-20160730194205/@comment-258494-20160808180629

Greetings,

I think that there are two points of view here.

From the demographic viewpoint, "validated data" is a subset of all true cases; it only includes cases that are "validated"--those that meet the requirements of case validation, which are normally proof of birth, proof of death, and an intervening document that clearly connects the two. If someone is 110+ and still living, then proof of recent ID or recently being alive can substitute for proof of death. If a case that was validated while living goes to "limbo", then it really is no longer "validated" because, by definition, it's not a complete case: we don't have proof of death, AND the case is not eligible for "proof of life" substitution since the proof is beyond the time frame permitted, and/or there's reason to doubt whether the person is still alive.

The other viewpoint, the "records" viewpoint, holds that "but the person made it to at least age XYZ". But this viewpoint is problematic from the start: do we include cases that were "at least" once validated? "At least" it looks validated, though not officially? "At least" quickly becomes problematic.

I suggest, as a compromise, that we can remove limbo cases from the main lists but move them to footnotes on the same pages.Ryoung122 (talk) 18:06, August 8, 2016 (UTC)