Are you referring to individuals/person in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'?
Or, are you referring DOING to "Indexing" in 'FamilySearch'?
Here are some "Knowledge Articles" in 'FamilySearch':
How should I enter names in Family Tree?
Where it states, among other things:
Every person in Family Tree MUST have a first or last name.
Avoid invalid words ...
Avoid the following in name fields:
• Words that are not usually names, such as “not named,” “unnamed,” “Mister,” “Wife,” "twin," or "Son."
Why does a person's name have a question mark in Family Tree?
On 27 June 2016, our systems added a question mark to the name field of any person whose first and last names were blank. You can change a question mark to the correct name if you know it. Otherwise, leave it as a placeholder until you discover the correct name.
Church related ...
Temple ordinances for unnamed children
For an individual with an unknown name or a child who died without receiving a name, enter only the last name of the father or family name into the surname field. Do not enter a first name. Do not enter Mr., Miss, son, or daughter. Be sure the sex is correctly entered as male or female.
How do I index given names?
Sometimes the record does not include a person's given name. For example, the given name of a deceased child could show as “stillborn,” "baby," "child," or "son of [parent's name]." Do not index these terms or phrases in the Given Names field.
How do I index last names (surnames)?
Do not assume the surname of an individual based on the surname of someone else, such as a parent or a spouse, unless directed otherwise in the project instructions.
How do I index individuals whose names were not fully recorded?
If a family member was referred to but the person's name was not given, do not index information for the individual.
Do not assume the same last name ...
And do not create any additional records ...
I hope this helps.
In 'Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' ...
By the way ...
Although DESIRED, you DO NOT require a SUPPORTING "Source".
[ Such is NOT "Mandatory"; certainly, preferred; but, not mandatory ... ]
If you have, personal knowledge of; or, anecdotal knowledge of; or, have researched such; THEN, add the Name as known/research by you.
Such can ALWAYS be "Changed" ... 'latter down the track' ... if needs be.
Brett, Thank you for your prompt reply.
I guess my question was concerning FamilySearch but information on family tree entries would also be helpful.
The reason I ask is there are times when names or dates are added or edited in my family’s FamilySearch tree, (particular older family entries that are difficult to track down reliable records for), without any notes or source citations being added. I understand that FamilySearch is a community endeavor but when this happens I’m afraid it will lead some future researchers to draw incorrect conclusions or hinder others from searching out concrete sources to cite that might exist. I speak from experience here because there have been times when I’ve hit a dead end or been drawn down the wrong path in my research only to discover I have been using information that was not properly cited or sources.
Basically, what I’m asking, are there rules or etiquette on how to handle these situations. I don’t want to step on people’s toes or discourage people from adding usable information. However, I also think we all depend on documented sources and information to do good research and therefore I think it’s a disservice to leave these entries unaddressed.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
I am just another User/Patron ...
Just like everyone else ...
It is, refreshing, to 'hear' someone asking if there are, rules or etiquette, on how to handle the the "Naming" in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'; or, for that matter anything.
Many go ahead without considering such; and, do their own 'thing'; especially, those new to Genealogy/Family History (and, a few old one, as well).
NOT wanting to, 'step on people’s toes'; or, discourage people from adding information, is commendable ...
But, unfortunately, unavoidable, in an "Open Edit" Platform ... such as this
No matter, how hard you try ...
You always, seem to upset someone ...
Such is life ...
Apart from the generally (very loosely) accepted Standards in Genealogy, in Naming, what I have provided is a good/reasonable guide for "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' - there are probably more.
"Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' is NOT perfect ... although we would like it to be.
But, in an "Open Edit" environment, "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', will/can VEVER be (as) perfect; as, we all (individually) would like it to be.
We all have our own preferences ...
There are ERRORS ...
And, 'Yes', those ERRORS can lead Users/Patrons the wrong way ...
But, one must NEVER accept what appears in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', to be correct, WITHOUT, doing the Research and Verification, just like anything else - Trust NOTHING.
Unfortunately, many new to Genealogy/Family History (and, a few old one, as well), do just that, accept, WITHOUT, doing the Research and Verification.
[ ie. IF, it is "Recorded"; THEN, it must be correct ... ]
The aphorism, "Genealogy WITHOUT Documentation [and, "Sources"] is Mythology", is spot on ...
As I previously stated ...
As, you should not make it so ... as most CANNOT "Afford" to PAY for "Sources".
There are "Many" FREE ('On-Line') "Sources [eg. as provided by 'FamilySearch'].
But, equally, there are also "Many" "Sources", that are NOT "Free".
Sometimes, just providing the "Details" (eg. Name; Dates; Place; Record Refence number, etc), from an "Index" reference, in "Reason Statement", is enough - certainly better than nothing at all.
Many Users/Patrons MAINTAIN their OWN "Private" Database, which is external to "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.
And, with good reason ...
I have seen some my ENDLESS Ancestral lines in (originally, in "New.FamilySearch", the forerunner to) "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch', ruined, decimated, by 'wayward' Users/Patrons.
'FamilySearch' even had people trying to "Resurrect' those , ruined, decimated, branches; but, without success.
Oh well ... such is life ...
Just use; and, enjoy, "Family Tree" in 'FamilySearch' ...
And, commiserate, when someone, makes a mistake ...
Address/Fix it ...
Oh, and, try to, help; and, teach, them as well ...
I know my 'rambling', do not help ...
But, I hope you get the gist/picture ...
ps: Been there, Done that ... do not get too hung-up on it, any more.
I have read the following.
I also read the Nordic surname document. https://familysearch.brightspotcdn.com/34/8c/4f2c379bb914be24c9a1e47f374e/best-practices-on-family-tree-for-nordic-ancestors.pdf
Is using the last name of "son of Antipater" appropriate in the Biblical era middle East? Since Josephus and Biblical authors associate a first name to a "son of". Sorta like how Nordic entry: Ane (first) Johnsdatter (Surname) is entered? Is this OK?
King (Title) Herod (first) son of Antipater (surname) : https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/L5KH-Z7Y
Also check out Herod's wife's and children, is the name entries appropriate?
Best regards, LeEric
I think there should be a better statement regarding the entry of unknown names.
My relatives are Norwegian. Women did not change their names when married.
be But there are all kinds of entries with Mrs as the title and the males last name in the wife's last name entry.
I understand that if a name is not known, a PID should NOT be created.
That does not help when the PID is already created with a fake name. There should be recommendations on what to enter since something has to be entered.