New Zealand profiles

Started by Private User on Saturday, July 7, 2012


Showing all 15 posts
Private User
7/7/2012 at 5:36 PM

At present, the New Zealand Births Deaths and Marriages Registry is being transposed into Geni.

The resulting profiles generally contain just a name, and sometimes a date. The country, source and other information is not being entered, presumably for rapid entry.

If any profiles already exist, they are duplicated then merged, which results in the revisions being lost, with inappropriate managers being assigned.

As they seem to be entered in random sequence, there are are large number of floating trees and profiles, many of which do not contain even the country.

I've identified that many of the links to my part of the tree are completely wrong, the only requirement for a merge being anyone with the same name. I suspect that this is frequent elsewhere. I have abandoned several branches as not worth recovering.

This is not genealogy, and it has already caused harm to the New Zealand profiles.

Private User
7/7/2012 at 6:01 PM

If a Private section of the tree is encountered, it is being replicated - presumably to force the owners into making the tree Public, as merge requests then ensue.

What is the point of this?

I have abandoned the New Zealand branches of the tree - it's pointless to correct and continue, only to have the next wave descend upon the tree.

I'll continue to maintain the main (Australian) parts of the tree for as long as they hold together.

7/8/2012 at 8:49 PM

Who is the manager named as creating these profiles?

7/8/2012 at 8:51 PM

Jason Scott Wills

Are you aware?

7/8/2012 at 10:29 PM

yes im aware, we are sorting it out

Private User
7/9/2012 at 2:58 PM

I realised I can analyse this after a gedcom extraction. Took me a while to work out how to isolate the creator.

27,432 have been entered with just a name.
33,021 have been entered with a name and a birth year.

As I cannot locate them, I assume about 21,000 profiles are detached/floating, and as they mostly have just a name - not even a country, the chance of them being lost forever - or worse, mismerged gets into the inevitable territory.

I haven't found a way of detecting mismerges because so little information is in the profiles. They can only be found by intensive investigation of each profile. I've found 72 just in my part of the tree.

A check on the last 24 hours shows they are being entered at a rate of about 33 per hour, 7 days a week.

I'm not a shrink, but this has crossed the bounds from genealogy to an obsessive/compulsive complex. I suspect someone is having difficulty leaving the keyboard to sleep at night.

7/9/2012 at 5:39 PM

Actually at 33 per hour that's less than 2 minutes per profile, sounds more like a "farming operation" than OCD.
Especially if as you say they are not building a tree but rather just creating 50,000 isolated profiles.

If you are able to identify even just one profile that is as you claim then we (or at least Geni admin) could see who the creator of that profile is and investiagate further.

As Jason Wills is the NZ curator and says that he is aware of the situation and sorting it out i would not be overly concerned... unless they create a duplicate of me!!

Private User
7/9/2012 at 6:14 PM

As presumably my part of the tree won't be corrected - I can't, I'm a Basic member, and curators can't because they can't identify the errors - that's it.

Sitting down and listing the errors for someone else to fix, while more are being created, doesn't appeal - easier to abandon it.

7/9/2012 at 6:32 PM

Each profile has "Created by" which shows who made it. Even if the name is obscured the database software will have a fingerprint that tells the administators exactly who created each and every single profile.
If Geni Admin/Curators identify who is creating these profiles you describe they have many different options open to them.
You don't have to make a list of all the errors, as soon as Geni identifies who is doing this they can track every single profile that person creates.

The fact that you are a Basic member is completely irrelevant to the situation.

Private User
7/9/2012 at 6:51 PM

I've been down that track with both curators and Geni Admin. As the additions are not malicious, it has nothing to do with Admin. Tracking over 70,000 profiles is beyond the scope of curators, as they have mentioned.

That I am a Basic member IS relevant - I can't fix my own tree, and neither can anyone else, as I've just explained.

Private User
7/9/2012 at 6:58 PM

The curator has been as helpful as he can. The correction of ONE profile has taken 4 days so far, and it must be driving him nuts. To apply this to 70,000 is beyond comprehension.

7/9/2012 at 7:01 PM

If you need help with your tree invite a PRO or Curator into your Family Group temporarily.
I'd offer to help but internet filter at work limits my capabilities severely and Bigpond cable at home is out of service at the moment.

You could also suggest that 70,000 isolated profiles could be considered a malicious attack on Geni's stated goal of a World Tree.
Perhaps it really is not a malicious attack and the creator(s) will revisit and add more information at a later date.
If your tree is private no one can force a merge with these "dodgy" profiles, if your tree is public then any PRO can help you with cleaning it up.
Have you discussed the issue in the ?

7/9/2012 at 7:01 PM

Sorry, i wrote last post before reading your most recent.

Private User
7/9/2012 at 7:31 PM

This discussion was opened to warn those with New Zealand trees that any additions or merges should not be taken at face value, and if errors are found, to explain the cause - which may help with the corrections.

Each member is obviously responsible for their part of the tree, but if this is impacting any Basic member there's little they can do. To review the profiles and merges that have been done is obviously not practical.

To pepper the tree with random profiles - this is really what is happening - is bound to cause problems. Genealogy is about building a tree outwards from a point - in doing so, errors are far less likely.

Private User
7/9/2012 at 7:33 PM

I guess the problem will continue, as no rules have been broken.

Showing all 15 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion