Talk:List of American supercentenarians

Amy Barnard born in North Carolina in 1750 is listed on the North Carolina census for slaves over 100 years of age. She is 110 in 1860. She is listed under her owner Joseph Barnard of Buncombe County, North Carolina. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnorman16 (talk • contribs) 12:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

117 year old mr borne just released from prison is the oldest person in us that I can find.

Henry William borne 117 yrs old Charlotte nc 75.170.154.125 (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

What proof? WordwizardW (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Maria Branyas' age

Maria Branyas, who is living, should be listed as being 117 years and 2 days old today, but is showing up as 116 years and 363 days old. I can't figure out what's wrong to fix it. WordwizardW (talk) 04:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC) Elizabeth Francis' years and days old is also frozen. I would take over updating if I could be sure I was doing it right. Can anyone advise me? WordwizardW (talk) 07:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

When the two oldest living die, what then?

There are two living people on this list, one, the oldest born in the USA (and also the oldest in the world), and one, the oldest actually living in the USA (since the other one now lives in Spain). Will this list of the 100 oldest stay unchanging with no living people in it once these die? WordwizardW (talk) 01:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Depends on when they die. The next person who may enter the top 100 oldest Americans is Naomi Whitehead, who would do so in about four months. Softmist (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Secundina Camarena

Though I added Secundina Camarena to the list of 100 oldest known Americans in January, upon reviewing her GRG validation report, I feel that she should be removed. There are several details surrounding her case that are concerning:

• The GRG claims that Camarena understated her age by 13 years possibly because her husband was 9 years her junior [and] she wanted to avoid social stigma from this. They also theorize that this would help keep the appearance of not being an ‘older mother’ which can be frowned upon in some cultures. Most importantly, though, they admit that these theories cannot be confirmed. Should we trust a validation shrouded in speculation?
• The GRG had considered the case debunked before it was validated: Initially, some years ago, this case had been added to our ‘debunked’ list based on her obituary claim of being ‘only’ 100 years of age at death.
• The GRG credits the Social Security Administration (SSA), presumably through which Camarena was listed with an 1891 (as opposed to 1904) birth year, as the primary source of her validation. However, several long-standing supercentenarian cases that the GRG accepted as validated from Kestenbaum's SSA study were later debunked, including "117"-year-old Lucy Hannah and "114"-year-old Mathew Beard.

All of this makes Camarena's validation at age 113 a bit dubious, in my opinion. If another organization (e.g., LongeviQuest) releases a report on the case, we can certainly revisit this, but for now, I don't think we can confidently list her as one of the "100 oldest known Americans." Softmist (talk) 04:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I believe she should be added as she was recently verified. If she does in fact get debunked by the GRG in the future then it would be appropriate for her removal Adonis3000z (talk) 07:27, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Why is the age of living people not advancing?

Why is the age of living people not advancing daily? I thought that was supposed to happen automatically. Something needs to be fixed. WordwizardW (talk) 02:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

This is happening again.WordwizardW (talk) 14:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The age wasn't advancing and the tie was no longer a tie. I corrected the ranking and the age advanced, but the columns aren't right, and there's no other living person for me to compare it to to figure out how to fix it. Could someone help me? Whoever was taking care of this is not doing so regularly any more, and I would take it over, but I don't have this quite right. WordwizardW (talk) 06:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

My correction of the ranking has been reverted incorrectly to a tie when there is no longer a tie. The living person is now 4 days older than the person she was "tied" to, and is thus ahead of them in the ranking now now. How do I appeal this? I don't want an edit war, but this is clearly wrong. WordwizardW (talk) 11:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Not only is the living person still incorrectly tied with someone who died younger, but her age is stuck, not advancing day by day. I would fix it, but I was reverted when I did so before, merely because the columns did not look quite neat enough for someone. WordwizardW (talk) 08:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

revert?

Why was my edit listed as reverted? On Monday, the living person was tied with two others. This was correct for Monday, when I did it. It is now Tuesday, and whoever "reverted" my edit did not put her back below the two others, but ahead of them, as is correct for Tuesday. Please explain. My edit was right for the day it was made on, and the "revert" was not a revert, but showed the progression to the next day. Tomorrow, there will be another tie. for one day. WordwizardW (talk) 10:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)