Standardized places when fixing place-names
edited September 28, 2020 in Suggest an Idea
Marianne Ronström said: Hi, I ́m trying the new volonteer opportunity to fix name-place in Sweden. Great idea! But several times I have found that the places already are the rigth places. Other times I cannot select the rigth place because it ́s not an option. And also one place can be in one county (län in Sweden) for a period of time and then be moved to another county (län) for another period of time and only one of the countys(län) is an option. To find the person one must have the rigth place. There must be a way to do this rigth otherwise it ́s meningless. Have a nice day.
Gordon Collett said: Keep in mind that in this volunteer opportunity, you are not correcting displayed place names or changing them in any way. You are attaching missing standardized values to display place names that do not have them.
I posted a fairly lengthy explanation on what is going on with this activity with screen shots here:
When you see "places already are the right places," what you are seeing is a place name that is correct but has a red exclamation point next to it in Family Tree because it is missing the standardized value like this:
The entire goal of this process is to get rid of the red exclamation point.
When you say that you cannot select the right place because it is not an option, is that even when you type in a standardized value rather than picking one of the options shown? That text box should let you enter whatever value it needs to be. For example I can switch to any standardized value I want like this:
(I did not do this, by the way. This was just to illustrate the principle.)
The place name database is far from complete, so you may only be able to set the standardized value to the next greatest correct geographical value like this:
That is fine. That is all they want from us.
In this last example, please note that you are not removing Gothe Vesteras from the person's record. It is still there as part of the displayed place name.0
Marianne Ronström said: The entire goal of this process is to get rid of the red exclamation point.
When you say that you cannot select the right place because it is not an option, is that even when you type in a standardized value rather than picking one of the options shown? That text box should let you enter whatever value it needs to be. For example I can switch to any standardized value I want like this"
Yes, it doesn ́t let me write the value as it should be and as in your example with Virestad, Kronoberg, Sweden that is the correct standardized value, it doesn ́t let me chose it and I can ́t write it myselt. So my option is to choose something that is wrong or skip it.0
Gordon Collett said: Sounds like something is not working right. Can you post a specific example? A screen shot of what you see when you first come to an entry and an explanation of exactly what you want to set as the standard for that specific entry would make clear the problem you are seeing.0
JimGreene said: Please remember, Sweden is a standardized place. In instances where it would take much more research to get the correct fully identified place, just enter the highest level standard. What the original contributor entered is still there, we are just looking for a correct standard in the standardized name field. If this is your relative, then have at it and do the research. We are hoping to get a standard so that eventually a family member can and will find it and enhance the standard place name. Without a standard place name it is harder for it to be found.
The Improvement we are looking for in the place name is a recognized standard at the lowest level possible, but even the highest level is better than no standard. Something is better than nothing. Don't make this too hard.0
Marianne Ronström said: Thanks for your answer.0