McMillan's running calculator says it's worth 29:15 for 10k which is 16 seconds faster than Wang's questionable WR. With so many American records and women's WRs falling, it seems like something is going on. If we ignore it, it may be like watching Sosa, Bonds, and McGuire hitting 65+ HRs in a season without any skepticism.
We have a big post in our weekly recap about women's equivalent records.
One thing we hinted at but didn't say directly is based on the equivalent performance charts - women are way better at longer distance stuff than shorter distance stuff. I dont know if the charts are made for men or what but they don't really work great for women - the longer they the, the better their records get.
Clearly a 65:12 is better than a 2:20 marathon. Lots of women run 2:20 in the marathon. Have you ever realized what a 2:20 marathon equates to in the mile? McMillan says 4:08 in the mile. JK say 4:05.9.
Women don't come close to that in the mile (in the modern drug testing era).
You compare it to a 10k to make it look dirty (JK has it at 29:29 by the way) which isn't really fare. If you compare it up to 26.2, then it seems doable. McMillan has this at 2:17:15 for 26.2 - Jk has it at 2:19:00.