This article is within the scope of WikiProject Longevity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the World's oldest people on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LongevityWikipedia:WikiProject LongevityTemplate:WikiProject LongevityLongevity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
If you’re going to include immigrants, you should add Rokhel (Rachel) Wieselberg (23 June 1883 - 6 June 1996). She was born in Riga, Russian Empire (now Latvia) and is accepted by the European Supercentenarian Organisation.
Nothing special about this person compared to the rest on this list. Obvious BLP1E, no encyclopedic content beyond some dates. Randykitty (talk) 17:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you kept up with the news you would've seen that from serval reliable news sources the GRG and Guinness book of world records he just became the oldest living man in the entire world! And he had coverage way before that Wwew345t (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not only is he the worlds oldest man but him becoming that was reported by several news outlets and not just local ones it was covered by CNN and CBS Wwew345t (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:BLP1E. Also, how many supercentenarians in this list have their own article? Preciously few, exactly. Only the very few where something encyclopedic encyclopedic can be said (beyond "fish and chips on Friday"), have an article. The vast majority have none. Just getting old does not make someone notable. --Randykitty (talk) 17:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument "being old isnt notable" is subjective his life birthdays (the last few of them) and his Accession to worlds oldest man have been covered by several major news sources. Not every supercentenarian becomes the oldest living man in the entire world and he will likley receive more coverage then he has now (which is still enough for an article saying he isnt notable on the sole basis of your opinion that it isn't notable should be laughable Wwew345t (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP1E lists three conditions, all of which should be met. Not one of them is. 1) Being the oldest living man can hardly count as just a "single event". 2) Tinnsiwood is likely to remain a center of attention for as long as he lives. 3) He has a central role in the matter. See WP:NOTBLP1E —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) 22:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1/ It has long ago been agreed that growing old is just one event. 2/ Coverage of Tinniswood will fade until such time that he passes away. That's all part of the "sngle event". 3/ He obviously is a marginal figure in this list, far from being "central". --Randykitty (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1 maybe that policy needs to be looked over again because theres a difference between turing 108 turning 110 and becoming the oldest man In the world 2 That's an assumption 3 yet again another opinion that's subjective Wwew345t (talk) 23:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1) For the sake of furthering this argument perhaps you can point us to the discussion about whether being old counts as one event? 3) Of course, Tinniswood is not notable mainly for being in this list, but for his status as the World's oldest living man. Incidentally, you'll note that a large proportion of previous holders have their own articles. —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) —St.Nerol (talk, contribs) 07:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous discussions can be found at the Longevity project, talk pages of articles, and several AfDs. As for attention petering out soon, that's what almost invariably happens with these bios. A week from now, nobody will talk about Tinniswood any more (unless he suddenly passes away). And judging what is encyclopedic does indeed implies some judgment, but you'll never convince me that "eating fish and chips on Friday" is encyclopedic content. --Randykitty (talk) 08:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see lots of AFDs...and it's the same 3 people spamming afd with the same copy and paste argument what I also see is that when anyone came along and made a argument they lost and the article was kept Wwew345t (talk) 10:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When you refer to "previous discussions" are you referring to when in 2018 a group of editors spammed afd and copy pasted the same argument? I see they did more then 20+ articles in one day. "being old is only one event" turning 108 109 110 and 111 is 4 events not 1 he has also received coverage for being the oldest male in Britian so that's another event he certainly has the recognition coverage and life details to merit an article Wwew345t (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the whole "growing old is one event thing" should he reexamined furthermore several more recent AFDS (Edie Ceccarelli Elizabeth Francis and Pearl berg) have established that Being the oldest is Notable Wwew345t (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He now is the oldest living man. The page does cover how he became the worlds oldest British man and the oldest European man. I think it should be kept its own article. Joey (talk) 19:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Becoming Britians oldest living man and the oldest living man in the world is not one event unless they happened at the same time (they didn't) both of these events are cited as are his last few birthdays Wwew345t (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly disagree. The article mentions his role during WW2 and also his recognition by Guinness as the oldest male WW2 veteran due to this, on top of being the world's oldest man. The article also mentions interviews where talked about his longevity, shows the coverage he has received even years before becoming the WOLM, as well as previous longevity milestones. These milestones are not one event, nor are the previous things mentioned. Additionally, as another user has pointed out, several other SCs who are/were the oldest living of their nation (Edith Ceccarelli, Elizabeth Francis, Charlotte Kretschmann), their religious order (Inah Canabarro Lucas) or their ethnicity (Pearl Berg) have pages. OrchestralHuman (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can this get closed? It is obvious the consensus is to keep this article and it's been a couple days since anyone spoke in this Wwew345t (talk) 23:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead, close it. I still maintain that Tinniswood doesn't merit an article and that the current article only contains unencyclopedic trivia. BLP1E does apply. It's not like, say, becoming a running champion on the 100 m and then at another occasion winning the 1000 m. Those are two events. Turning 110 and then 111 are not different events and, unlike running, don't need any training or preparation but just randomly happen to people. But I can use my time better than arguing here with all the fans, so I'm giving up. --Randykitty (talk) 07:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
110 and 111 are two numbers 110 and 111 are two birthdays commen Sense therefore would tell most people that 2 Separate birthdays= 2 events Wwew345t (talk) 15:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And you still ignore the fact that he was covered when he became the oldest living british man AND the oldest man in the world those are 2 separate "titles" to get unless the previous WOLM was from the same country (which he was not) it feels like you are labeling us as "fans" just because we disagree with your opinion interestingly your own bio says the sooner someone would be to accuse the other of bias they themselves are biased so by your own definition you are more biased then we are Wwew345t (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
