not seeing a decrease in duplicates (gedcom uploads).

LegacyUser

m said: I am not seeing a decrease in duplicates (gedcom uploads) even though I know something has been done.

Are other patrons experiencing a decrease?

LegacyUser

Paul said: Statistically (as Joe Martel has previously suggested) GEDCOM inputs are not the leading cause of duplication. I assume you are basing your thoughts on your personal experience, in particular seeing that word ("GEDCOM") in different fields on the person pages.

My problem has always been due to the older programs of the GSU / FamilySearch - whereby multiple IDs were created against each "event" rather than each individual. (For example, "John Brown" having ten IDs - one against each of his 9 children's christenings and one for his marriage.) These are not going to disappear any time soon.

I acknowledge the serious problem many users have with the GEDCOM issue and hope others will confirm these are now falling away. However, this will only very partly reduce the duplicates problem, in my opinion.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The only GEDCOM adds that I see now took place long before the latest changes were made to the compare and add/change/correct problems. Nothing recent.

I am a bit surprised that we haven't seen complaints about how hard it is (now) to add a GEDCOM to FamilyTree.

The biggest problem at this time plagues many of the methods to add information from a third party program. The compare screen being used by the GEDCOM process is the worst, but even the source linker compare screen is really lacking, especially in the area of comparing dates and places. As others have pointed out, far too many people are carelessly adding and merging based upon suggestions offered by the system. A better compare process with place and date checking would go a long way to correct the problems encountered.

Warnings, if nothing else are needed:

Warning: the place is in another country/state/county from those entered in this record. Are you sure this source applies to this person?
Warning: The date for the event in this source is before/after the person lived. Are you sure this source applies to this person?

Warning: The place recorded in the record you are about the merge is in another country/state/county from those entered into the surviving record. Are you sure these two records are for the same person?
Warning: The date(s) for event(a) in the record you are about the merge is before/after the person (in the surviving record lived. Are you sure these two records are for the same person?
Warning: The person you are about to merge may not be the same person, but a sibling of a person with the same name who died before the person you are about to merge. Are you sure these two records are for the same person even though the name is the same?

LegacyUser

m said: I wonder why I am not seeing a decrease in duplicates, then, if it is now hard to upload gedcoms.

LegacyUser

ATP said: m,

I, too, am seeing an increase in GEDCOMs, which started some 3 or so months ago, so something triggered an increase, whether programming bug, or some other reason, I am seeing a remarkable increase in GEDCOMs. So, you are not alone.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: Paul - re "My problem has always been due to the older programs of the GSU / FamilySearch - whereby multiple IDs were created against each "event" rather than each individual."

They seem to be my major cause of "duplication" as well. I try to sooth myself by thinking of them not as dupes but as multiple part records. They are an inevitability of the way that individual events once generated individual profiles in the Extraction Programme. What would concern me is any counting of dupes that included these (not sure how I can exclude them mind!) and thereby downgraded the priority of other categories.

Mind you - I seem to have hit at least one chap with an incredible number of sources that have come from multiple films and indexing of the same event. John Bate LCQD-CDH has 69 sources attached currently. He has 9 children so I can see 9 Parish Registers and 9 Bishops Transcripts - but 69???? I see he has 5 sources attached for one of his children's baptisms - but there are 13 attached for another! Some, but probably not all of those, generated dupe part-profiles ages ago.

Plus Bate has been indexed as Bale and Gate and profiles were created for those, which led to my needing to merge those in as well. One of the John Bale profiles had been once proposed as a dupe for John Bate and had - oh irony! - been dismissed as a "Different Name". I happened to be a bit more cynical about the indexing and was able to check the data for that date in the original parish register - correct - no Bale there, only Bate. Well, I can't have it both ways, wanting people to check proposed dupes and then wanting them to accept differences!

LegacyUser

joe martel said: Last month Gedcom ingest had the lowest percentage of dups of all the products and has been low for the last 6 months.

The only way to check if something is now amiss is to provide PIDs. Thanks

LegacyUser

Earl Marshall said: I have also seen an increase in gedcom activity on my lines

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Seeing an increase has more to do with when the GEDCOM ingest occurred and compare run. The old compare routine is still in place for those files ingested prior to the compare / add / update change and if someone comes back and starts working with those, they will be a problem.

As I said, I have seen a drop in GEDCOM-based duplicates.

LegacyUser

Richard M. Smith said: I dislike doing all the "merges" of dups, but console myself that no one else will have to do this for this ancestor! BTW, I sometimes see "3 dups" listed, but as I am doing the merges, others "multiply". It would be nice if the system could be more automated to reduce these, but on the other hand, I discover another marriage, more kids, or the names of pareents, previously unknown.
I'm willing to put up with a little "pain", in order to "birth",(speaking ONLY from a male who has never BIRTHED!), another ancestor for ordinaces.
Dick

LegacyUser

m said: Every day duplicates and merges, but different people are making the duplicates. I did see GEDCOM and no mention of GEDCOM in the various duplicates.