Talk:Jeanne Calment

This has been a very contentious topic however I feel like its absurd that this is even a debate this is supposed to be a encyclopedia yet here we are devoting an entire section of a article to a conspiracy theory that has absolutely 0 proof of evidence that was debunked by most actual experts in the field also after a year or two people just forgot about it all together because it was just a sensational claim made by someone seeking attention Wwew345t (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE would be the relevant policy for this. Peaceray (talk) 04:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

We dont have to delete the article but at the same time calling it skepticism or controversy makes it seem like the thing was taken seriously by sources which they werent they were published in reliable sources but not because they actually believed the theory but because it was a sensational headline the paragraph already accurately depicts what the soucres say on the issue I am just proposing that the name of the paragraph to be changed so it doesnt mislead people Wwew345t (talk) 10:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I wish I knew why gerontologists aren't accepting the theory. (Please include as part of your answer the statement that the reason is NOT simply because they don't want to ruin a special statement; specifically the statement that Jeanne Calment had the longest lifespan of anyone, and that they're just trying to find good arguments to show that the theory is false rather than simply moving on with it.) Georgia guy (talk) 11:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

There was never a good argument to begin with just use common sense and its plain that the theory never had a chance first of all the same guy who made the theory also made theory against other supercentenarians second do you even realise howamg people they would have to either trick or involve to get away with an identity switch they would have to fool everyone in Jeanne's hometown and her friends too or are you suggesting they managed to convince an ENTIRE town to be involved in this small petty pension fraud? That's why it was never taken seriously because the whole claim was completely ridiculous Wwew345t (talk) 11:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Supercentenarian claims are very often fraudulent. Shigechiyo Izumi was recognised for decades as the oldest living human, until it was revealed that he had assumed the identity of his older brother. The unlikelihood of identity swap needs to be weighed up against the even greater unlikelihood of a person being comparatively healthy at 122 years of age. 159.196.168.252 (talk) 12:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

However, we need more than original research. We need verification from reliable sources. Do you have any? Peaceray (talk) 15:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Full stop. 140.166.206.57 (talk) 13:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• The topic absolutely has to be addressed, but I've cut it substantially per DUE. EEng 03:50, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

To me, the statistics seems strange. Now, in principle it could be possible that she reached that age, but if you look at the next 25 super-old people, none of those got that very close to her age. On second rank is at 119 years Tanaka: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people - it seems very odd to me that Calment would have been +3 years older than the two who reached 119 years. Sooner or later people will break those years, but it seems to me as if Calment would break a trend here almost +25 years before anyone else did, and this is simply very very strange IMO. I have doubts about that age; I don't doubt the e. g. 118 or 119 years old; these are in a much closer cohort range. ~2025-35093-91 (talk) 12:31, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

~2025-35093-91, you are speculating in what is called original research, which is disallowed on English Wikipedia. Do you have verification from a reliable sources that provide support for you conjecture? Peaceray (talk) 04:53, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• JeanneCalmentaged40.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:51, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

The photo has now been deleted because the photographer was thought to be unknown. It was taken by Gustav Ouviere as labelled on the original photograph displayed at the Médiathèques in Arles. (see https://calment.fandom.com/wiki/Jeanne_Calment?file=JeanneFromFassin.PNG) The copyright would therefore expire 70 years after his death. Some genealogical research might be able to find when that was.Weburbia (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I found that he died in 1943 from here https://www.musee-orsay.fr/fr/ressources/repertoire-artistes-personnalites/gustave-ouviere-37675 . So the photo is in the public domain since 2013.Weburbia (talk) 22:46, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

I made an undelete request. Comments for or against can be made at commons:Commons:Undeletion requests 86.153.193.0 (talk) 07:47, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

The photo is now back so its removal from the page can be undone Weburbia (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Since November 2025, there is a ^[who?] tag, added in Special:Diff/1322437830 by PK2, that should be easy enough to resolve: The "Russian researchers" in footnote 1 need to be identified. Are these the same Russian researchers (Novoselov and Zak) who are discussed in the rest of the section? Renerpho (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

I have nominated File:Yvonne Calment.jpg for deletion, due to a possible copyright violation. I presume the question of the unclear footnote is moot if the file is deleted. Renerpho (talk) 22:10, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Yvonne Calment.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2026 (UTC)