"FamilySearch's Tree Integrity Initiative"
This sounds like a very interesting presentation: https://www.familysearch.org/en/rootstech/session/familysearchs-tree-integrity-initiative
It is certainly a very important topic. Could it please be broadcast and/or recorded instead of just being an in-person event at Rootstech?
Answers
-
Oh, how I wish this would happen. Integrity! I know place names change, and FamilySearch and their researchers have done a GREAT JOB, in trying to get the right place names for their users. But. It needs to be emphasized that as much you spend researching your family names, YOU need to research place names just as thoroughly. It gets so irritating to try to keep place names correct, and then someone comes along and changes it with out an explanation as to why it was changed. I think, getting the place name correct, is just as important, as getting your family names correct. I spend more time CORRECTING place names, as I do researching my FAMILY NAMES.
A pat on the back and a big THANK YOU to FamilySearch, and their VOLUNTEERS.
JMiller
PS Please, please, NO abbreviations, date should be entered as day, month, year.
2 -
Mod note - A post was edited to remove an email address. For more details, see
1 -
Often the presenter is the one who defines the terms - live only, recorded, no photos. Since Mr Parker is listed as an employee of FS, there may be a better chance of changing the format.
2 -
This appears to be the only session (online or in person) that focuses on Family Tree information management/data quality, and there don't seem to be any API/developer sessions at all. Is there perhaps a separate event focused on more technical matters?
0 -
Since I can't get to this in-person meeting, could somebody bring up that a big problem is allowing external software that can't read Notes (including Alerts) or Reason statements to overwrite anything on the site? All the effort put into communicating is useless if, with a single button, somebody can just overwrite corrections with the same old common errors or misinformation that have infested personal trees and unverified genealogy sites. And they can do it while ignoring FS messages completely.
3 -
Another request-could someone perhaps obtain clarification on FS's plans in relation to the handling, visibility, and data quality of Relationships and their notes and sources, as discussed here
and here
please?
Thank you.
2 -
@Gordon Collett I understand that there are limits to how many rooms will be recording sessions. Unfortunately, this session does not appear to be happing in a room set up to record. I have been told that the status and locations of the sessions have been finalized. I'm sorry that I don't have an answer that is more pleasing.
1 -
That's too bad. Oh, well, never hurts to beg.
1 -
Could we beg the presenter to come here and interact with us?
1 -
Or to have his syllabus and slide deck posted?
1 -
That would be fantastic, and/or maybe if we asked nicely they would re-run the interactive session virtually for us?
It's clear that a lot of effort goes into fixing data problems at a tactical level, but it feels to me as if the limited resources and communication channels available are not being used optimally, given that FT is, I guess, one of the largest collaborative data stores out there. It would be good for the community to understand (and where necessary challenge) the strategy here.
0 -
3 notices but only 1 comment:
1 -
Thanks!
1 -
All three were caught in the spam filter. I approved them and then deleted duplicate and x2. Let me know if there's anything else missing.
I'll see if I can pass your invite along.
2 -
Is there any lucky person reading this who was able to attend the session & who can provide us with a summary of what was discussed please?
There was no recording, as we knew would happen unfortunately, but there is also no syllabus available for download (I did ask in the chat, but no answer).
My assumption is that the Profile Quality Score experiment was one part of the story.
Thanks!
0
