Remove "Delete Person" option
Comments
-
Lee Grant Porter said: Carol,
I agree with you completely. The Delete Person action should be a request option. The requester must be required to give a detailed reason including references to sources and logic that supports their conclusion that the person is the result of an erroneous submission and did not exist, or it is a record that is intended to be for a person whose correct record already exist in the records and need not be kept in the records. In the latter case the deletion could be accomplished by a merge, which brings up a whole new issue, in that some records should not be merged because the process will delete a person who is in fact not the same person as the one with which they are being merged. It would be very difficult to have every merge that is now legitimately needed in the Family Tree, go through an arbitration process in order to avoid such mistaken merges, but a good argument could be made for it.
In any case the Delete Person action should be a request very similar to the request required to change the deceased/living status of a person, which creates a case to be reviewed by the data administrators, and the case must be very well written by the requester, so that the arbitrator can understand it and make a decision without having to do any research.0 -
joe martel said: That's an interesting idea to make Delete Person behave like the deceased->living change.0
-
Ammon E. said: And suddenly, I'm reminded about the time that somebody's cow ended up on a US census, and somebody added the cow to the Tree as a person through the census and Quick Attach.
In some ways, having the user being able to delete records of people that they know don't exist would be nice, but I'm pretty confident that most people go for deleting relationships over deleting person records.
At the very least, have it be easier for records that they created on accident, much like the recent change for deceased-to-living when they accidentally add them as deceased, and it doesn't require a support case when they're the only one who edited them.0 -
Barbara Nelson said: I would suggest that the originator should be allowed to do a delete if it is done within a short timeframe, say a day or a week. I will delete under two conditions. If I have marked someone dead by mistake or in the case of system error.
My experience has been that it takes a long time to get a person changed to living, and I don't want the record sitting out there for privacy reasons. Additionally, I generally know immediately that I clicked the wrong choice.
The system error has only happened once, but I ended up with three people instead of one. I could have done merges, but delete was much cleaner.0 -
Lee Grant Porter said: I have never have never had the experience of putting a non-existent person into the records except when a gender error was made, and I was happy that I was able to delete that person or correct the gender, but I have had many occasions to delete a person, not created by me, that I have proven by documents and logic did not exist. I would be very happy to have my reasoning reviewed by an arbitrator before that deletion was effected.
On the other hand if I have proven to my satisfaction that a person did not exist, I am going delete the person and not just delete the relationship he has to other persons, and leave the false record floating around in the data base for others to attach relationships to. To me that is irresponsible and like sweeping dirt under the rug instead of disposing of it properly1 -
I would like to talk to someone with authority to remove a person I cannot locate.
9V75-ZSK (1872-1872)
is linked to my ancestors prior to their marriage & listed as being buried in Frogtown cemetery in Clarion PA. There are only five Frogtown cemeteries, none in PA. Looked at all of them, no infant Craig is buried or documented. I think this is an error and should be corrected as per above comment.
0 -
Maryann, I have found that frequently, in small communities that have a cemetery, that cemetery would informally be referred to with the name of the community in spite of what its actual name is. In this case the only cemetery located in Frogtown, Limestone Township, Clarion, Pennsylvania in the 1872 timeframe has been referred to as the "Frogtown Cemetery". But this may very well actually be the "Salem Cemetery" that is located in Frogtown (right next to the Nevin Church). In fact, the name "Salem" may have been added many years later.
The "baby" Craig that is currently in the FSFT was entered into the database early in 2012. In other words it appears to have been transferred from the earlier NEW FamilySearch database which unfortunately, would NOT have included any sources. But that person was a real person and there are likely records around somewhere showing the birth/death and burial in Frogtown. The location of the burial is close to the birth places of the other children so it is possible that she was born before the marriage, but if you find that this baby was NOT born to those parents, then you do NOT want to delete the record (In fact, you cannot delete it and and FS will not do it for you). You will only need to delete the relationship to the father, the mother, or both as is appropriate. That way the record of that real person will then remain in the database until appropriate parents can be found.
Hope this helps some.
1 -
if a person created the record - I would think they should be able to delete it . . .
BUT Im not sure the delete option is always available any way - Id like to hear some feedback from FS staff -
on many records the delete option says "delete opion unavailable"
I wonder if you are asusming (incorrectly) that the delete option is always (or even mostly) available - when it may not . . .
0 -
note - a "disconnection" (is much more possible) and can appear as if a person was deleted (when they werre not) - but simply diconnected from parent/child/spouse )
so I wonder if various scenarious are all being thrown together here . . .
0
