What (or who) is "UKBN Project"?
I stumbled across this record just now and imagine this is just another project that has been given the go-ahead by FamilySearch. I wonder to what purpose? The fact that this individual does not belong to the family to which he has been added is clearly indicated, so why has nothing been done (by "UKBN Project") to address this?
Anyone can go through Family Tree branches and find numerous relationship errors, but surely the idea is then to correct them, not just add a note and leave the rest to anyone else that might have an interest?
If I send a polite message to UKBN Project will there be someone around to read it? Perhaps (as Gordon Collett suggested recently) such names are not even what they seem - this might just be an individual who thinks they might sound more authoritative by giving themselves such a username.
FamilySearch should be evaluating two issues here:
(1) The usefulness of any "officially authorised" projects that go about adding comments to existing IDs within Family Tree (as well as those that add duplicate names to such).
(2) The ability of users who use multiple or deceptive usernames to be identifiable and contactable.
Stephanie V. Community Manager
Thank you for bringing this to our attention @Paul W. We have done an extensive review of this user along with the behavior associated with this user. This issue has been escalated. We also, appreciate your username restriction suggestions and are exploring that more. Thanks all!
The fact that this individual does not belong to the family to which he has been added is clearly indicated, so why has nothing been done (by "UKBN Project") to address this?
If you mean that you agree with the note - then surely you can just make the changes you agree with - but why 'not liking' the note (if you agree then why wouldn't you like it?)?
As far as the username - why should that make any difference as long as the contributions are good/reasoned. Yes you can certainly message the user and they can respond or not (as any other user).
If FamilySearch created a list of officially sanctioned Projects/usernames would that make you happy?0
UK Bee Removers? 😉2
Firstly, again you use a phrase which is far too cryptic for me to understand:
"...but why 'not liking' the note (if you agree then why wouldn't you like it?)?"
Secondly, I will detach this individual from these parents later, but wanted to leave him there for now to allow others to check where / how I had found him.
Thirdly, the "identity" of the username is important, in that I would like to know if I am sending a message that will see seen (though quite possibly ignored) by the individual who made the input or by, say, the project manager of UKBR (i.e., assuming someone is monitoring responses to these inputs).
Finally, is it unreasonable for me to ask what the purpose, aims and objectives of the UKBR Project are? My immediate reaction was, "Oh no, the other volunteer projects I've encountered have done enough damage to the tree - surely not another one to clear-up after?"0
Thank you for that @Áine Ní Donnghaile.
I know I wasn't too light-hearted with my original post, but we do need a bit of humour here at times: puts the really serious matters we encounter (in life) in perspective, doesn't it?!2
I'm glad you took my comment in the vein I intended, Paul. I, too often, find myself annoyed and need to be reminded to take a breath.
I will now return to grumbling about the 6 extra children, including a Cherokee Princess, added to my 5th GGP in Colonial Virginia.2
Sorry, I missed your remark: "If FamilySearch created a list of officially sanctioned Projects/usernames would that make you happy?"
In this case, that would be of help in establishing that this really is a bona fide project, rather than an individual who wants to make themself sound authoritative.
As a general issue, again the answer would be a qualified "yes". Hopefully, the perceived benefits of each project would be attached to each one. In spite of repeated requests, there has been little response to questions relating to benefits FamilySearch is deriving from these projects - as opposed to the criticism from FT users, especially with regard to the huge amount of duplicates that have been created thereby.0
I'd suspect this is a user picking an interesting username based on that portrait. It just doesn't look like FamilySearch's style.
This kind of makes me wonder if someone out there has a few dozen user accounts with names based on whatever project he is working on. UKBN Project for United Kingdom Branch Names? DTBN Project for Dutch Branch Names? SWBN Project for Sweden Branch Names? It would give him a different starting name for each branch of his family and the ability to follow 4,000 X N people.
I agree that it would be good for any official FamilySearch appearance in Family Tree that is going to have a contributor name other than FamilySearch should have an easy link to explain what it is. Even the only one I know for certain is FamilySearch backed, the Volunteer Project that links standards to non-standardized place names is confusing for people who are not aware of that process.2
Thank you for that. I do find it strange that FamilySearch seems perfectly happy for its patrons to hold multiple accounts. Both here and within Family Tree one can think two separate individuals are being dealt with, whereas it might be the one person who has different accounts.
I also believe that there should be a restriction in being able to adopt usernames that imply a FamilySearch approved group/project is involved, when it could transpire an individual has created this, for reasons (perhaps perfectly "innocent") best known to themselves.2
Thank you so much for giving your attention to this matter.0