Too FAR!
The Quality ranking is 99 percent wrong!
We do not follow English spellings for Europe!
Stop demanding burial dates when none is found!
Stop demanding place names be conformed to 1871-1918 standards when they exist BEFORE 1871.
Comments
-
What spelling is getting flagged? I haven’t run across that one.
1 -
no spelling getting flagged.
It is the conflicts between the Place Standards which I follow mostly for between 1871 -1918
It is the Quality one that is constant in conflict, saying those places before 1871 are wrong when they are actually correct.
Burial dates - Not all prior to 1920 have full burial dates, quality seems to demand that. "Missing burial DAY", "Missing burial DAY and MONTH". Good grief!!!
Even worse, the name spellings, Quality says they are wrong, saying they do not match the actual records (I'm talking about different spellings over the years and they're actually listed as "Also known as". Quality ignore this).
0 -
@W D Samuelsen contact me please
Thank you for your feedback!
This page might have some more information that would be helpful when it comes to the German Places before 1871. The summary of this linked post is essentially that the Place Team is aware and working on it, but it will take time.
We will look into the Quality Score and the way it handles the burial dates prior to 1920 for Germany. As well as the name spelling problem.
The rules behind the Quality Score will take time for us to get right for all places and times, and we are definitely open to feedback about places.
Thanks again for your feedback and suggestions, please let us know if you have more.0 -
Burial dates for Deutcshland? No - it's widespread in United States, Canada, just any place any where.
Place standards - I've been working with people involved in place standards, they are cleaning up for the moment the era of 1871-1918 just for Deutschland. They will work on pre 1871, AND post 1918 as well as for Poland between 1918-1939 and post 1945.
0 -
About places, stop the demand for ENGLISH-Centric
Losheim, Merzig, Rhein, Preußen, Deutschland is very correct Deutsch name for Losheim
What is worse is the demand below
The standard "Losheim, Merzig, Rhineland, Prussia, Germany" (ID: 12254903) is used for 1871 to 1945. This conflicts with the birth date of 23 September 1850.
The place is correct for at least since 1815 and lasted until Nov 8, 1918 - NOT 1945.
Merzig was merged with Wadern on 8 Nov 1918, same day the Kaiser abdicated his throne 3 days before the end of world war ONE. It has been Merzig-Wadern from that day to this day and still is.
"Preußen" (or Prussia for you English-centric) was still in use until 25 February 1947 when the Allies abolished the Preußen level of government, making the way for the formation of Bundesrepublik Deutschland (or Federal Republic of Germany for you English-centric) and Deutsche Demokratische Republik (or German Democratic Republic aka East Germany) (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_Prussia )
0 -
So there is still a problem with the wording of the statement in the quality flag. Also, there is continued confusion between the Display Place Name which is the name seen on the profile page and is never changed by the program and the Standard Place Name which is what the program uses in all functions and which changes to the language set by the user for the website.
If I go into Beta and create a test person and put in Losheim, Merzig, Rhein, Preußen, Deutschland, for his birth place with a date after 1871, the quality checker is perfectly happy. The place name is just fine and Deutschland doesn't cause any problem at all:
If I move the date back prior to 1871 then I get the flag:
The flag shows the Standard Place Name which is linked to the Display Place name, because the standard is the only thing the program really understands.
If I chop off the Deutschland, I the message goes away quite nicely:
but that's not a true test because Prussia is not included in the data quality checking routine yet so there are no flags at all.
But back to the flag using the English equivalent of the standard. If I change the website to German so the Standard Place Name changes to German:
I find that the quality checker is not available in that language yet. I suspect that when it is, and the user is using the website in German, the quality flag will also be in German and use "Losheim, Kreis Merzig, Rheinprovinz, Preußen, Deutschland" in the flag instead of the English because the German version will be the standard.
Of course, the real solution to this problem is to get added to the Places database the proper place name for each proper time period for every place in Germany from 500 or whatever to today instead of the apparently woefully incompleteness of the database currently seen for Germany. Should only take a couple of decades so we users do need to be patient.
0 -
Really?
Quality is questioning any mother having 11 or more children now.
This showed up when I was checking one of my families 5th cousin 3rd removed. She had 11 children.
That prompted me to look up my own great grandparents, 13 children, flagged for having more than 12 children (really?)
leading to 2nd great-grandmother (mother of above), flagged for having 14 children, more than 12
then to my great-grandaunt, flagged for having 13 children, instead of 10, then her sister in law (also my great grand aunt), flagged for having 11 instead of 10, now on to another sister in law (also my great-grand aunt), flagged for having 11 instead of 10 - this one is 4th great grandmother of Elder Nattress.
In light of this, I jump to maternal side (there are lot of families with 10 or more), but going to the one closest to me - with 16 children , mother flagged for having 16 instead of 12 children (I got photo of every one of 16, every one grew to adulthood).
Quality is out of control.
0 -
Thank you for the comments and feedback. We have logged two issues to be looked at.
0
