Children born too close to each other
Please find below a case where sister and brother were born too close to each other:
I thought there would be an error message on the person page of the mother but this isn't the case. Why does FamilySearch not control this?
Answers
-
@Loïc Baert - I am not certain of this, but have an idea that the time between siblings check is part of the Data Quality routine, which does not operate on everyone but is limited to post 1800 births in Europe, etc
When the routine was first introduced, there were a number of ways that it generated false positives - typically with blended families where a biological child and a step-sibling were triggering the message but there was potentially no "step" indication on the relevant child "because it was obviously a step-child". So the data wasn't necessarily helpful.
And this is before we consider the number of profiles where the baptism date has been put in the birth date because that's what people did...
So, yes, the check is important, it's somewhere but it's not quite as issue free as we might hope.
2 -
-
Should it be not an error like possible duplicates instead of an quality score?
0 -
I see you have now changed the birth year of Jean Joseph to 1804, but I can understand why you have raised the suggestion here. Perhaps a better argument would for a "warning" that any inputted event should have a source, or at least a reason statement added to justify the input. Obviously, there was no evidence for an 1803 event, as the attached 1804 source now shows.
Again, a "possible duplicate" suggestion would not really be appropriate for children of different sex. I believe I have seen "possible twin" suggestions, but probably not unless the dates are an exact match - in this case, they were shown as February 1803 and July 1803, until you made the amendment.
Adrian raises a valid point in that I regularly see a user's input of a "birth" date when all evidence suggests this is actually the baptism date.
At least the "possible error warnings" that do now appear in Family Tree are a great improvement than in the early days of the program, where I don't think items connected to the mother's age in relation to the child (effectively, too young / too old, etc.) were even highlighted.
2 -
I've seen and dismissed helps for two children born the same year, even with exact dates of birth and death already in the profile. A couple I researched had two sons who were both born and died within a day. One was born and died on 12 January 1842, while the second was born on 17 December 1842 and died on 18 December 1842. I had already attached baptismal and burial sources to both profiles. Both sons were baptized with the same given name.
Research Help of "Possible Duplicate Child" appeared for each of them.
My guess was that the algorithm only evaluated the year rather than the complete date.4
