Tree Validation is meant to be a quality control mechanism as well as a tool to communicate with other users that we have validated a 'most correct' structure for a SV/PROG for x 4 generations (b-e).
Should you feel a SV/PROG meets the criteria below or if you are working towards validating a progenitor towards meeting the criteria below add them to this project.
Should you have:
- 1) matched a SV/PROG & his family until 1800 or for 4 generations to GISA,
- 2) matched a SV/PROG & his family to this and any of his relation's "About me"
- 3) left the particular part of the tree in pristine condition having solved all duplicates, merges, conflicts in proximity.
- 4) Searched for any new duplicates and merged all those possible.
- 5) Contacted the collaborators who made duplicates and refering them to the tree building basics.
THEN ADD to South African Stamouers/Progenitors - Tree Validation
Should you have done the above to your satisfaction, link such progenitor to the relevant publication.
1) it would be helpful to somehow determine when we believe the most correct structure has been achieved for a SV/PROG.
2) we are now reaching a level of tree stability which needs us to introduce a mechanism to validate and confirm the 'agreed' structure around a particular profile. Something we could hardly do before, but now is a good time to bring this into focus. This will assist greatly to improve our accuracy and start solving the tough interpretation issues.
3) it would be great if others (including newbies) could participate to keep SV/PROG profiles well maintained without them having to similarly spend days figuring the details as we did or do.. So a quick reference guide on his key data and LISTING ALL relationships of any particular person in "About me" is part of the objective..
4) if we get this right, new users may just possibly in future rather use our summaries to build their duplicate trees if they feel the urge to do so... which will simplify things greatly to merge these duplicate tree's in The alternative is they will continue replicating all the mistakes we have collaboratively already learnt not to make for them. If they can't trust our profile structure they must be able to start to evaluate and trust "About me" and the ideal is of course to start to participate in rather fixing the 'Base Tree' and debating on a particular profile for setting such profile as per their own prefered version where this may differ with our 'OFFICIAL' tree.
This project seeks to solve these issues and promote a system of VALIDATION by TEMPLATE using the 'About me' section of complex profiles. The idea is to reflect a consolidated and summarised view (SNAPSHOT) of the key genealogical information identifying the key elements:
- Key names person known by
- Birth and death dates
- Parents, Spouses and Children.
- Best Sources
- Decisions and assumptions that informs how we set the profile in Geni.
- Identify Unvalidated/Currently linked profiles that are possibly wrong.
- Indication when profile was last reviewed and validated as correct.
- Any others?
'The idea is to only use the topics relevant on a particular profile.'
What can you do?
- When working in a particularly troublesome area, setup the basic profile structure in about me as per the examples. Keep it updated and reflect the best structure in Geni as to best represent the most accurate sources.
- Validate the part of the tree you are working on against the 'Profile' Template when working there.
- If you have validated the full profile against the template - record your validation.
- Make sure you list any sources in the summary section..
- Create a discussion on the profile if you dispute something on a "validated" profile.
- Please join this project as a collaborator if you support this initiative.
Things to Consideration and Lessons learnt
Questions and Answers
- Q. Why duplicate that information in the 'About Me', - it is already listed two times on the profile? A. You cannot 'correct' a wrong profile based on the the existing Geni information. This allows for a 'snapshot' of a profile that is easy to manage and maintain.
- Q. Should I do this on every profile? A. You are welcome to apply this on any profile, but this is intended for the most complex and problematic profiles and areas of the tree.
Under construction ---
Maybe a [http://help.geni.com/forums/337266-feature-request Feature request could result in some basic functionality to help with validation.
In any case for now it is sufficient to record it if you validated a profile by adding it below the summary.
:Last Validated by: John Smith 22/10/2012
:About me reviewed by: English John Smith 22/10/2012 English
So validation is envisaged to be mainly about?:
- Confirming the profile and surrounding 'Structure' is as correct as possible in and surrounding structure agrees with the "Concise Genealogical Summary"
- Sources are listed
- "Unvalidated/Currently linked but Possibly wrong' items" are closed or clearly noted and identified..
- Nearby Tree and Data conflicts resolved.
- a General Search has been performed to look for DUPLICATES and any found have been merged into the main tree.
- All Orphan Relationships have been removed and a placeholder profile (ie ??) created for "BLANKS"..
- About me cleanup
- Profile Guideline Validation
Find attached to this profile templates we feel represent what we are after and participants are invited and encouraged to use them. (Also for the moment to attach any others you feel may be appropriate)
The following template examples are incuded here to facilitate conversation and debate on the various considerations.
HEADER & BODY
Example A - Basic
[http://en.wikipedia. Schalk Willem van der Merwe]
Birth cXXX Death cXXX
Example B - Extended (Our Goal?)
Unvalidated/Currently linked but Possibly wrong:
Last Validated by: John Smith 22/10/2012 Last Validated as to XXXX publication/geneaogy society records by Peter Pan:
About me reviewed by: English John Smith 22/10/2012 English
- List them all here.. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT AND WILL MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE NEXT PERSON TO UNDERSTAND THE WHY AND WHY NOTS OF A PARTICULAR PROFILE.