Editing Locations
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is VERY Careful to LOCK their Prophets Family Search Memorials, so no one can alter data, but invites TOTAL Strangers to Tamper with Dates and Locations of trees that are probably Unfamiliar to them..
Example: Many relatives I deal with are from "Northumberland, Pennsylvania", but one of the so-called Corrections Family Search suggests to strangers is "Northampton, Pennsylvania", they're not interchangeable and "Northampton, Pennsylvania" is Wrong..
Sometime in the past year or two Family Search decided having CITY, COUNTY, STATE included in a deceased persons memorial wasn't good enough.
Family Search wanted to cram a TOWNSHIP into that data field, never mind that the Location was/is 100% correct as is, but now with the Inclusion of the Family Search "Township" algorithm, that invalidated a majority of the CORRECT Locations and Family Search now invites strangers to make them incorrect with a 50-50 chance of probability.
Example: Family Search currently has NO Correct alternative for "Nottingham, Northumberland, Pennsylvania" or "Rebuck, Northumberland, Pennsylvania" instead Family Search offers ONLY "Rebuck, Washington, Pennsylvania" my guess is Family Search confused the Township "Washington" for the actual County which should be "Northumberland"..
If you folks at Family Search want to make an IMPROVEMENT how about pulling "Find A Grave Memorials" that currently DON'T show up in any Search..
EXAMPLE: Portzline family of Pennsylvania, their Find A Grave memorials have eluded Family Search for years, but they do EXIST.
Answers
-
William
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
[ And, I happen to be a Member of the Church ... ]
Just in passing ...
You happen, to be 'way of base', when you imply, that 'FamilySearch' (ie. the Church) ONLY makes the "Leaders" of the Church; as, "Read-Only" (or, as you suggest, 'Locked') individuals/persons.
There are MANY other, "Persons" of some 'Note'/'Importance', who are ALSO "Read-Only" individuals/persons
One of the REASONS, that MANY "Leaders" (and, OTHERS) of the Church, are are "Read-Only" individuals/persons; is BECAUSE, there are so MANY Users/Patrons, who ARE Members of the Church, who are linked/connected to them.
I myself, am "Related", to the Prophet "Joseph SMITH"; and, I am NOT even from, "North America"; nor, the "United Kingdom"; or, "Europe".
You have to be aware, that 'FamilySearch" (and, the "Family Tree" Part thereof) were ORIGINAL "Created", by the Church, for Members of the Church, to follow the "Tenets" of the Church; and, that is STILL the PRINCIPAL purpose thereof.
Plus ...
Like it or not ...
The basic 'nature' and 'premise', of the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch' is that ...
We do not have our OWN "Tree", in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch'.
We ONLY have "Branches" (ie. Ancestral" lines), that are interconnected, in this SINGLE "One" World "Tree", for all of us, that is the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch'.
The "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch', is NOT like 'On-Line' "Websites" (eg. "Ancestry_com"; or "MyHeritage_com"; or, the like); and/or, 'standalone' personal (computer) programmes (eg, the OLD, now no longer supported, "PAF"; or, "Ancestral Quest"; or, the like).
We DO NOT have "Private"/"Personal" 'Trees', in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch', like other 'On-Line' "Websites"; and/or, 'standalone' personal (computer) programmes.
We do not even, own; or, manage; and, are NOT even responsible for, the "Deceased" individuals/persons, in "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch'.
And, most importantly ...
We DO NOT even, own; or, manage; and, are NOT even responsible for, Our OWN "Deceased" Ancestors/Family/Relatives, in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch'.
The "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch', is built on a "Open Edit" Platform - hence, why any "Registered" User/Patron can "Edit" (ie. Add, Delete; and/or, Change) ANY "Deceased" individual/person, in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch'.
Now ...
That Said ...
It is quite SIMPLE ...
IF, a "Place Name", DOES NOT exist, in the "Place Names" Database, of 'FamilySearch'; THEN, request it ...
And, ...
IF, a "Place Name", needs improvement, in the "Place Names" Database, of 'FamilySearch'; THEN, request it ...
The choice is yours ...
Again, it is quite simple ...
By the way ...
I just has a quick 'look', in the "Place Names" Database, of 'FamilySearch':
https://www.familysearch.org/research/places/?pagenum=1&pagesize=20
BOTH those "Places", that you mention ALREADY exist.
Northumberland, Pennsylvania
Northampton, Pennsylvania
So ...
That Said ...
IF, you believe, that IMPORVEMENTS, to particular "Place Names", are required; THEN, simply, suggest it.
You can do so, through the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch' ...
Now ...
That Said ...
As, to "Updates", from "FindAGrave.com" (ie. of Memorials); well, that is another matter.
Those "Updates", are certainly NOT as frequent; as, most of us would like ...
But, I wonder why that is?
ie. Because, of "FindAGrave.com"; or, the COMPLEXITY, of including the "Updates", to such, in 'FamilySearch'.
Things, are certainly NOT as SIMPLE; as, most of us believe/think ...
Just my thoughts.
Good Luck.
I hope, that this may help/assist, somewhat.
Brett
0 -
By coming at me from your soap box "I'm aware that Family Search is a One world Tree", You fail to address the most IMPORTANT part of my concerns, which is included in the photo I attached above.
1) Family Search is Actively inviting STRANGERS to change Information in our Family Trees, who may or may not have any knowledge of the area.
2) Family Search changed their format to Include City, Township, County, State, which changed many EXISTING Locations that are/were previously correct, to incorrect.. See Concern#1
Elvis Presley's memorial isn't "Locked" and like your convenient connection to Joseph Smith, many people have also linked themselves to the King.. or am I "way of base?"
You also fail to address the Find a Grave Memorials that are not searchable within Family Search, even though they've been created for years..
It's better to talk to people than down to them, don't you think?
Will
0 -
Will
I was talking, to you; and, NOT 'Down' to you ...
So ...
That Said ...
Firstly ...
The Project, to "Improve", the accuracy 'Place Names", in the "Family Tree" Part, of 'FamilySearch', is certainly NOT about, "... inviting STRANGERS to change Information ...".
The Project is about, getting Users/Patrons, to help/assist, with CORRECTING the "Place Names", associated with individuals/persons, that are NOT a "Standard"; and, thus, evoke a "Data Problem" (ie. 'Red' "Exclamation Mark).
And, I believe, that may Users/Patrons, who help/assist, in this Project, try to work on Geographic areas, that they have knowledge of; as, it is EASY to "Pass" on a particular Record, if one is not certain about the specific Geographic area, for that particular Record - eg. I have certainly "Passed", on some Records; where, I was not comfortable, with my knowledge, of the specific Geographic area.
Please be, aware; and, advised ...
That the "Volunteer Project", is part of 'FamilySearch'; being, a "Project" (and, a "Process"); whereby, "Place Names", that evoke a "Data Error"; because, they are NOT "Standardised", are addressed/corrected.
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/improve-place-names/
Quote
------------------
Improve the accuracy of Family Tree.
You can help by associating a user-entered place with a standard place found on a map.
What you will do:
1. See the user-entered place. Compare it to the places in other life events.
2. Add the standard place that is most similar to what the user entered. What you add will not overwrite or delete the user-entered place. Skip to the next person if you are unsure.
Note: If you prefer, select a country or location below to review places from a specific country or location.
Select Country or Location
[ ... ]
[ REVIEW 10 PLACES ]
------------------
The "Volunteer Project", involves Users/Patrons, working, to HELP "Improve", "Place Names".
There are NO, "Sources"; nor, "Reason Statements".
Hence, the "Contact Name"; being, that of "Volunteer Project", rather than that of an individual User/Patron.
As an aside ...
Perhaps, the the "Contact Name" SHOULD be something like "FamilySearch, Volunteer Project"
[ just a passing thought ... ]
Now ...
That Said ...
Here are some Articles, in the 'FamilySearch" "Blog":
Improve Place-Names
Online Volunteer Opportunity: Help Improve Place-Names
https://www.familysearch.org/en/blog/online-volunteer-opportunity-help-improve-place-names
I hope, that this may help/assist, somewhat.
Secondly ...
The "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', is an ongoing, 'Work in Progress', that is everchanging ...
And, will most likely, NEVER end ...
And, 'Yes' ...
The "Place Names", in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', are CONSTANLY being, Added; Amended; and, Updated; as, NEW information/details comes to light - ie. certainly NOT static.
The HOPE is, that the "Place Names", in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', can; and, will, contain BOTH, past (Historic) and present (Current), iterations, of particular "Place Names".
It is more than likely, that SOME (if not MANY), of the ORIGINAL "Standards", for particular "Place Names", in the in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', were wrong; or, suspect; and, NEEDED correcting.
Oh, I am also "Related" to "Elvis"; and, in fact, many more "Famous People", all around the hole World ...
And, personally, I do not think, that "Elvis", really warrants, his Record to be "Read-Only" ...
Thirdly ...
Although, I have knowledge of "FindAGrave"; and, have myself, created a number of "Memorials", in such.
I DO NOT claim to have a knowledge, of WHY, some "Memorials" in "FindAGrave", DO NOT appears; and, are NOT "Searchable", in the Records, of 'FamilySearch.
Suffice to say ...
That such may be because:
(1) Some "Memorials" in "FindAGarve", may NOT have been passed, from "FindAGrave", to 'FamilySearch'; or,
(2) The "Structure" of Data (ie. Info) in the "FindAGrave" Records, may be slightly DIFFERENT to 'FamilySearch'.
.... ie. I have found, that many of the "Place Names", in "FindAGrave" are 'way of base'.
.... [ I certainly DO NOT like, the LIMITATIONS, of the the "Place Names", in "FindAGrave" ... ]
And, I believe that the latter is one of the particular reasons, that some of the "Memorials" in "FindAGarve", cannot be found, in a "Search", of the Records, in 'FamilySearch'.
Hey; but, that is only speculation, on my part.
And, I stand corrected, if I am wrong.
Finally ...
As I stated ... I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
And, I am certainly, NO ONE, of "Authority" ...
I am just someone, who has been using, 'FamilySearch'; and, the "Family Tree" (and, its "Predecessors") Part, of 'FamilySearch', for MANY Years.
Plus, I have been a Staff Member, of various "Family History Centres", of the Church, for many Years, helping/assisting others.
So, that said, I do have, some, knowledge; and, experience, of what I proffer ...
But, certainly, feel free to, take it or leave it; and, disagree, many do ...
I know, that this certainly may not help/assist; but, I hope, that this may provide you with, some additional, insight; and, perspective.
Brett
0 -
@William R Knouse, are you aware that you're in the minority among users of FamilySearch? Most of us are not members of your church, and calling us "strangers" is, in my opinion, offensive. LDS membership doesn't magically make people infallible, just as non-membership doesn't confer cluelessness.
The Places database is a perpetual work in progress. If something is incorrect in it, there are tools provided for suggesting a correction. (For what it's worth, I agree that adding townships to Pennsylvania places is misguided, not the least because boroughs are not part of any township.)
If you have a person's Find A Grave entry, you don't need to wait for FS's hinting algorithm to find it. You can attach sources without those blue boxes. There are many reasons the algorithm may fail to turn up a record, and most of them are outside of FS's control, such as incorrect or incomplete placenames entered in either FG or FS, or an incorrectly-rejected hint at some point in the profile's history.
3 -
I did a quick search for Portzline in Pennyslvania in Find a Grave. Here is the URL of the 186 matches: https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?count=20&q.anyPlace=pennsylvania&q.surname=portzline&f.collectionId=2221801
Is your family still not showing up in these matches?
0 -
0 -
You're too easily offended if you were so by my comment, the fact is "Stranger" by my definition is someone who is NOT related and has NO direct connection to the specific Family that Family Search has openly INVITED them to make changes to.. It has been my experience that many of the Family Search providers don't have the brains to Properly Address an Envelope, FREQUENTLY they Omit the Date of Burial, Cram the name of the Cemetery name on the same line as the City, County, State line..
The fact is I have MANY instances where "Strangers" have changed Northumberland, Pennsylvania to Northampton, Pennsylvania NOT the SAME Place at all, simply because they were encouraged to do so by Family Search and the 1st Location Name suggested in the Drop Down list was "Northampton, Pennsylvania
0 -
Amy Family Search just sent me a message saying that my screenshot of Find a Grave was "Restricted" LOL
The Find A Grave names I'm referring to that Family Search has not added to their "Sources" are "Partial List"
Frank Arbogast Portzline 1885-1949 Pennsylvania
Fannie Portzline 1882-1957 - Pennsylvania
Frank S Portzline 1838-1928 - Pennsylvania
and there are SEVERAL more all dated from 2016
One person here suggested I don't know how to add Find A Grave Hyperlinks to memorials, but are they aware that Hyper Links can be easily broken, if the company even slightly changes their algorithm?
0 -
Oops! Error!
0
