Please do NOT merge unsourced duplicates into the MEDIEVAL tree

Started by Sharon Doubell on Friday, July 29, 2016
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing 61-90 of 4562 posts
9/7/2016 at 10:57 AM

At the least the software should not allow merging in 'dirty parts' (where conflicts exist) into the 'clean part'. Start to ask software developers! I state this in knowing I can do whatever "I want" !

9/7/2016 at 11:08 AM

True. I'll keep requesting. If y'all do it too that might help.

9/7/2016 at 1:11 PM

René van Oeveren most of the time the World Family Tree *is* the "dirty part".
The unsourced duplicate trees are perfectly pristine.

Be careful what you ask for.

9/7/2016 at 3:04 PM

Dear Sharon,

I know I'm a very wicked person, but I merge medieval people almost every day, usually I think without problems and I am a bit loose about sources (except where there are obvious problems).

I'm also rather cynical about the magical curator's tools. A non-curator can cut relationships (although this can be dangerous and even lose a line), move people, etc. What a non-curator cannot do is lock name-fields or the whole profile. As you say, this has a difficulty for curators in terms of time.

Surely the answer (so far as there is one) is more strident or explicit orders on what to do when there is a merge. I.e. look around on the tree with which you are merging. Perhaps, though I doubt it, a mismerge where there is an obvious mistake should even encompass a fine, though I doubt if that is practicable given that I have just copied out something from the 1620 Visitation of Devon which comes up with a perfectly genuine match from Essex; the problem being that the Devon line and their alleged Essex ancestors are in fact contemporary instead of being 200 years apart. (I think this was just so the Heralds could use a coat of arms that was already in existence at the time).

Anyway, keep it up. This is a field of knowledge (or supposition) in which frustration is the norm, even if you are doing it yourself instead of collaboratively.

P.S. I think we are also decended from William the Conqueror (what a surprise) and even from Charlemagne, Let's split the profits, if any,

Mark

9/7/2016 at 11:40 PM

:-) Mark, it's not wicked to merge in Medieval duplicates, it's wicked to create Tree Conflicts while you are doing that, and leave them for others to fix. Because on the Medieval Tree the exponential results of that problem are huge.

If you have the tools to fix the conflict (and there's a big difference between what a pro user and a non pro user can do - or there was last time I looked. I'd be delighted if that had changed) and you're using them - glory hallelujah and an invitation to sainthood :-) :-)

9/7/2016 at 11:59 PM

This is a fantastic repository of Geni Help projects created by hugely hardworking Geni Curators: https://www.geni.com/projects/A-to-Z-of-Help-Topics/38243
How to resolve Tree Conflicts is covered here.
Remember that, on the Medieval Tree, you create a huge amount of work or lose a huge amount of research by others if you resolve it wrong - so you must have researched it before you do it.

9/24/2016 at 10:21 AM

Sharon Doubell - Question about how to add profiles here. I recently found an unsourced profile for Sir Roger Bacon, now profile 600000002904634164, and on the profile page I clicked on the option to invite this profile to join the project. So a message was sent to the guy who added it to the tree, asking him to add it. He added it, BUT he also merged it into the master profile BEFORE he added it so now the MP is here and Roger's tree now needs to be cleaned up.

How do I avoid repeating this? Can I add a profile directly to the project without using the "Actions" option asking the manager to do it? Or does it need to be added to this or another discussion. Or something else?

9/24/2016 at 10:41 AM

Hmmm, okay - I hadn't thought of that. Pondering....
I don't think you can, you know.

9/24/2016 at 10:55 AM

Truthfully, I'm stuck for a solution to that. I'm going to sleep on it.
All input re solutions will be gratefully accepted :-)

9/24/2016 at 3:39 PM

Is it a difference between "inviting" (a user) versus "adding" (a profile)?

9/24/2016 at 5:57 PM

The issue may be that as a PRO Abbie cannot just add any profile she comes across to a Project (Curators can do this so perhaps Sharon and Justin have forgotten this detail?), the privilege depends on Collaboration chains connecting Abbie to the manager(s) of the profile in question. If there is no chain then a PRO (or Basic) user cannot add the profile to a Project they can only invite the manager(s) to add it.

So the question then becomes, what should a user do if they cannot add a profile to the project... or actually maybe that was always the question :)

I would invite the manager(s) to join the project and then tag the specific profile(s) in this Discussion, that way the manager(s) may gain some awareness of the issue plus any of the Curators monitoring this Discussion can either add the duplicate to the project or just deal with it straight away.

9/24/2016 at 6:21 PM

Haven't forgotten that, Alex, and it was my first thought -- but Abbie used the word "invited", which is a separate action. It's been a long time since I invited (accidentally) a deceased profile to a profile, but last time I did the system sent the request to the manager.

9/24/2016 at 6:33 PM

Justin "the Pachyderm" Swanström ;)

9/24/2016 at 7:01 PM

"Show up, pay attention, don't volunteer" -- that's my motto ;)

9/25/2016 at 12:58 AM

Not nearly as catchy as Disconnectrix.

9/25/2016 at 1:10 AM

:)

Other curators need to reveal their super powers more.

9/25/2016 at 1:42 AM

Alex, I think you've hit the nail on the head - Curators aren't given updates as to what users can and can't do when that changes, so we/ I often don't know.

Abbie Louise, did you mean 'invite' or is this the effect of attaching (a single managed?) profile to a project.
In which case, adding it to this Discussion is - as Alex says - probably the only solution.
But alerting the manager is our biggest weapon against duplicates - just because most managers are duplicating because they're unaware of the problem - so when we contact them, they quickly become part of the solution.

Justin's too nimble-thinking for a pachyderm, Alex. I forget your Curator superpower name, Justin - just that I loved it (I think I coined it, actually - Certainly I'm never going to be accused of being 'an elephant who never forgets'! :-))

9/25/2016 at 10:37 AM

Yes, "Invite to Project" is the choice I'm given when I open the "Actions" menu at the top of the profile. Some of the unsourced duplicates I've "invited" were then added directly to this project by me - perhaps they are ones I have a direct connection to. The others were given to their managers to decide what to do. Some were added, but other managers just ignored the invitation, or like Sir Roger's manager, merged their profiles. That made me feel I was doing more harm than good.

I think I will just add any others I find to this discussion, then one of you curators can decide what to do with it, given that my options are limited by just being a Pro.

9/25/2016 at 11:09 AM

That seems like the best idea for the moment. Thanks for spotting it Abbie.

9/25/2016 at 11:10 AM

> I forget your Curator superpower name, Justin - just that I loved it (I think I coined it, actually

Yes Sharon, you coined it, My curator superpower name is "Soul Killer" because I specialize in exposing fake and fantasy genealogies.

9/25/2016 at 11:33 AM

Yes. That was it - very Voldemort. :-)

9/26/2016 at 4:23 PM

Abbie,

I've generally been happy with the response to my invitations to projects. If you want to add it yourself, just duplicate the profile (name only), remerge, and you are a manager. What I find more annoying is that once someone is on one project, and should also be on another, there is no way on the profile of adding another project. (I know you can go to the project and then add the person, but this is time-consuming and I am too lazy to do it).

Mark

9/26/2016 at 5:14 PM

All of this is very unclear and so is the way that having an ancestor from 2 different lines shows up. I did the research and I may have the same person as a 17th and 19th GG, for instance.

9/26/2016 at 7:27 PM

Woodman Mark Lowes Dickinson, OBE Thanks for the tip. I will try that

9/26/2016 at 7:32 PM

Woodman Mark Lowes Dickinson, OBE

On the profile page use the Actions button, second option from the bottom is Add to Project. I don't think there is any limit to the number of projects a profile can be linked to.

9/29/2016 at 4:34 PM

@Agilbert I Narbonne, van

needs to be put in a superlative file of whatever he needs to be detached as father of @Francon I, vicomte de Narbonne

9/29/2016 at 9:22 PM

What do you do when you find duplicate profiles where one is the father and the duplicate (name, age, spouse, offspring, the whole shebang) is his son?

9/29/2016 at 9:59 PM

At a guess I would say break the relationship between the two men then merge them together.

Post a link to one or the other or both profiles.

9/29/2016 at 10:51 PM

Cut all the relationships on the unsourced duplicate profiles first. Then merge it into the correct main profile. It's time consuming, but less than re researching the whole line to fix the inevitable tree conflicts it will bring with it.

9/29/2016 at 10:56 PM

Judi, I'll do that when I get onto my computer.

Showing 61-90 of 4562 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion