Is... Is this even allowed?

BraydenGraves · October 22

I just came across a profile in the Family Tree, and something about it just rubs me the wrong way. I don't even think I need to do anything more than put the link here, it's pretty self explanatory.

https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/G23R-GF2

To make matters worse, I'm pretty sure at least one of the merged profiles was the victim of faulty research, not a person that doesn't exist. Any thoughts?

Julia Szent-Györgyi · October 22

Well, at least nobody else has taken him up on the "offer", so far.

Whether it's allowed or not -- and I guess it's not technically against any rules -- it's sloppy. Profiles for people who never existed fall into two categories: accidental or deliberate. Deliberate fictional profiles are against the rules and should be dealt with using the reporting tools, not by sweeping them into a random hole. Accidental nonexistent people, on the other hand, are basically always based on an error about a person who did exist, and should be gotten rid of by merging with that person.

Áine Ní Donnghaile · October 22

@Stephanie V. This is even worse than those "Delete Delete" names that I reported some months back. "Hell's Kitchen, New York City, USA" obviously didn't exist in 1699.

@BraydenGraves link to the thread where I reported something similar. https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/133708/abuse-of-the-tree#latest

I think both are examples of people who don't know how to properly document/correct profiles in the FSFT.

Áine Ní Donnghaile · October 22

It's definitely crude. And, in my book, it's disrespectful of those elders we strive to honor through our research.

BraydenGraves · October 22

@Áine Ní Donnghaile I think the location is meant as a joke about where the "fake" person belongs

Áine Ní Donnghaile · October 22

Of. course, but the FSFT is not the place for bad jokes.

Alan E. Brown · October 22

Look at the Note. This profile is explicitly designed to be used to "delete" persons via merge.

BraydenGraves · October 22

@Alan E. Brown I'm aware of that, but it feels wrong.

(Edit: There used to be frustration here with the lack of explanation, but I've had a conversation with the person who made the profile, and the person I thought was real wasn't, but the explanation probably shouldn't be made public.)

BraydenGraves · October 22

Well, I've been talking to the person who made the profile about one of the merges, and it turned out that they had genuine reasons to believe that the person didn't exist. I don't know if that changes anything on this topic, I just wanted to get that out here. They aren't ignorant like I thought before.

BraydenGraves · October 22

@Julia Szent-Györgyi As it turns out, at least one of them was deliberate sabotage.

BraydenGraves · October 22

@Julia Szent-Györgyi I sent a message to FamilySearch about the sabotaged profile, and I got a message back saying it didn't meet their criteria for abuse.