Add a 5-star rating for "accuracy" for each vital
Include a 5-star rating system for Name, birth date, birth place, marriage date, marriage place, death date, death place. Allow all users to vote. If the data changes, reset the rating.
Why a special rating for accuracy? Because it is critical to assess accuracy prior to reserving ordinances, per the First Presidency and FamilySearch policy, yet there is no simple prompt that helps users understand this critical step.
Many users see a colorful icon that suggests to them that FamilySearch believes ordinances are ready to reserve--FamilySearch says it is good to go, so why do anything more? They reserve ordinances and share with the temple. No assessment of accuracy is done, partly because the system does not make it clear it should be done.
If a user sees blank 5 stars, they can easily see that accuracy has not been checked by anyone yet. If they see low star ratings, they can see that perhaps some research needs to be done. I admit it is an imperfect solution, but it is better than the status quo.
Pre-empting common rebuttals:
"But it so subjective!" -- So is everything in FSFT, including the vitals themselves. FSFT is all about having imperfect people collaborate.
"Nothing is ever perfectly certain, but some profiles will not get any more research because they see 5 stars" -- I would be happy with capping the displayed value at 4.5 stars, so everyone can see that no vital is perfectly certain.
"We don't want to add hurdles to participating in ordinance work" -- Users can still have the option to reserve and complete ordinances regardless of star status. They can choose to check for accuracy or not--but at least they will have a prompt that tells them whether anyone has looked at it.
"People can just look to see if there are sources attached to the vital." -- Not all sources are equally reliable, and not all sources agree with one another, and not all users take the time to check them against one another. Thus, having 4 sources attached to a single vital doesn't necessarily mean that vital is accurate, or that anyone has tried to assess accuracy yet.
"People can just write a comment in the 'Reason this information is correct' box." -- That box is used for more things than a swiss army knife, and careful justification in that box is commonly overwritten or deleted by merge. But there is much bigger problem--the presence of that box does not prompt users to check for accuracy prior to reserving ordinances.
"Users already know they need to check for accuracy." -- What can I say to this other than speak from my own experience? If I add a name anywhere on the tree and leave it for 48 hours, ordinances for that name will be reserved and shared with the temple system before I come back to it--even if I only added the name as a placeholder and have no good evidence of the existence of that person. When I follow up with the users who reserved the ordinances, they 100% every time say that FamilySearch told them the person was ready for ordinances (they saw the green icon). Many face-to-face conversations with novice users have revealed exactly the same misperception--they think the green icon means "good to go"--no more steps to take.
You may disagree with the solution and that is fine. But please advocate for some solution, of some kind. Users need to easily see that they need to check for accuracy prior to ordinance work, and they need to have an easy way to show they have followed that First Presidency counsel.