Data Problem - Standardize
Yesterday I had a patron at the Lehi FSC that had changed a birthdate on a person's page that did not show up in the top banner but stayed at the old date. We couldn't figure out why, until we noticed that the date was not standardized. As soon as we standardized it, then it was corrected in the other areas, including her relationships.
What concerns me, is that I have not been seeing the red exclamation marks under the Research Helps to say that dates or places need to be standardized. Has this been taken away? I certainly hope not!!!
Answers
-
There is still an alert, in red, if there's no associated standard for the date and/or the place. There are also separate messages for each unstandardized conclusion under Research Helps, marked with red exclamation marks.
You weren't seeing these alerts, however, because the date was standardized: the previously-associated standard had not been updated. This is actually fairly easy to achieve if the display text is different from the standardized label (in a different language, say, or abbreviated): when you edit the date, the dropdown has two choices, a reddish line that matches what you typed/edited, and a suggested standard. If you choose the former, then the previously-chosen standardized value will be kept.
2 -
Just to add a couple of thoughts to a sufficient explanation. Your initial question suggests that you are conflating to very different issues. Those are whether or not a date or place is standardized and whether or not that data is standardized correctly.
"Standardized" just means that the displayed data is linked to a standard version. If it is not, then the red error messages appear:
Being standardized incorrectly is a completely different issue and the computer cannot post any warning because it can have no idea if something is standardized correctly or not. That is a judgement only the user can make. Users of Family Tree do need to be aware that the displayed data and its linked standard are two separate pieces of data and take care when entering and editing data to proofread both data items.
Having these two separate data items is a great feature of Family Tree because it allows us to have more complete and more accurate data than the limited standards lists may include. What the patron you were helping accidentally did was make use of a powerful feature that lets us avoid the tyranny of computer rigidity and put in the best information we can even when the standardization routine refuses to recognize valid data. I'll illustrate this through a graphic in another post.
0 -
Here is an illustration of the power and flexibility of Family Tree. Suppose I have found an old Norwegian birth record that only gives the date as the named Sunday in Norwegian of 1. søndag etter Hellige tre kongers dag 1755, but not the date as we would recognize it. For accuracy, I do want to put in the date as it is found in the record. But so it can be more generally understood, I am going to include the Latin equivalent named Sunday. In addition, I do want to have my conversion of the date but mark it as my editorial efforts adding to the actual data.
(Image 1) If I type in the full data, the standards routine cannot interpret it. It is too complicated for the program and the dropdown menu choices are all hopelessly wrong.
(Image 2) So to get the correct standard, I have to type in just the simple date.
(Image 3) Clicking in the dropdown menu enters the standard.
(Image 4) Now I can paste back in the full date. I get the same dropdown menu.
(Image 5) But when I click on the top line which shows the data I typed or anywhere on the page other than in the drop down menu, my data is entered and since there was already a standard, that set standard is not changed.
(Image 6) Now I can save the date and my complete data displays on the Detail page. Hovering over this shows the linked standard in the tool tip that pops up.
Some people may say that they personally would never want to enter dates like this but would rather hide the information away in sources, notes, or reason statements. But there is no reason not to have it in plain view when necessary and Family Tree gives us the marvelous ability to do so.
2 -
Thank you both for all your explanations! The patron had thought that she had clicked on the right standardization - with the calendar on it. But apparently, she had not. It was not a matter of if the date itself was accurate, but just the computer version of the accurate date. Thank You.
0