I am not sure what the process is, nor am I even sure he wants this (so sorry Peter), but I think that Peter (with more geneology experience than any of us) should be a geni curator. I know the current curators do a wonderful job and have their hands full, but Peter has been asking for weeks now, that the Sigmund Freud tree be cleaned up. It's frustrating enough when our ordinary trees are messy due to inattentive managers, but this is a "famous" tree and should be properly presented. So, two things: Someone please fix the Freud tree and consider (if he wants it) offering a curatorship (?) to Peter Rohel.
Hey Judy, just so that you know... curators can't help with this particular issue around Sigmund. The generations are too recent, and thus we can only apply to the good sense of the managers that have blocked some of those profiles. I think some of them have abandoned Geni quite a while ago, and then it's up to Geni to intervene. Having said that, keep in mind that these generations are recent. It may be about Sigmund Freud but, from a privacy perspective, it's like we're simply talking about our own great grandparents.
Thanks - will be listing more merges to do with this family presently.
http://www.geni.com/merge/compare/6000000002041059224?to=6000000002... (the dates appear to very different but the relationships are correct and they are definitely the same person [manager must have made an error in the dates]).
Thanks Fred. I'll try and see if I can fix the conflicting data - but I think I'm not the manager for any of these profiles. Perhaps we need a thread for the fixing of data and parents for Pro's to do?
Ofir - I am aware that merges sometimes convulate the data and sources get mixed up; however, in this case that did not appear to have happened as the profile with the odd date had not bee merged with anyone. I know that there's a lot of dodgy data on the net particularly with old families like this one and it's difficult sometimes to get an accurate or approximate date. I just made the note so that the merge would not be rejected for that reason (I've had merge requests refused before due to data differences even though the families were the same). But thanks for the heads up.
Please could someone assist with the following merges.
I am a PRO user but cannot complete the merges as you will see.
The other Managers are NOT PRO users so they can also NOT assist with the Merges.
Jacobus Frederik Theodorus Bergman has previously attempted to assist and has approved some of the Merges but still they will not get finalised.
It is annoying to have a Family Tree populated by profiles with those crosses and nothing can be done.
The other option is to simply build a parallel tree with all the data from the other tree's profiles, but that defeats the purpose of ONE TREE.
This is an intense sense of frustration - why cannot a Curator be able to complete the merges.
Help please someone.
The other set is private profiles should should probably also stay private after a merge since they are so recent in time. Even Curators does not have access to private profiles unless they are family.
You even try to merge the profile of the manager herself.
To be able to merge these profiles you have to invite the managers to your familygroup, but in respect of their privacy I would recommend you to cancel the requested merges, pull out and delete the duplicates of their close family since a merge would make the profiles public.
Gave up a long time ago to kindly ask those profile managers to open up their long dead private profiles, so we can clean up: They seldom or never react. I have noticed 2 likely reasons: They are no longer active at Geni. Or, much worse, they are stubbornly hanging on to their "property", those profiles they personally entered - and which quite often are double entries messing up the whole tree from there and down. /SW
Over & Over - I said - " it is a Geni Problem & up to GENI " - to solve its Merging Problems - Caused by Private Profiles - and Not " non-Paying Users /Pros ".
Just Apply the 99 or 120 year Dead Rule (if or what the law states) - and have the Geni Program "Automatically" - make the Profiles Public.
That should have been the Merge Problem solution - Not "Removing Capabilities" - from non-Paying Users, many crucial to our genealogy research and Geni's success !!