Require sources and explanation by the program when adding new individuals into family tree.

LegacyUser

Brian Eric Olsen said: When adding a new person into a ancestors family make it required that a source be attached and a explanation why that addition. So many people are using GEDCOM data with no sources of proof. Pardons are also adding individuals with no sources. How can the rest of us understand why and see the sources of proof to support this addition. Requiring this would save duplicates and messages wars between relatives and help stop wasted temple ordinance of being competed. We are asked to explain changing birth, death and marriage records. Why are we not required or asked to explain adding and removing individuals. Make it required by the program that if no source and explanation the save opten will not work adding a person, until this requirement is fulfilled.

LegacyUser

ATP said: An excellent solution to adding persons without sources attached to the Sources heading as well as changes to the vitals without sources. No source(s)! No Save! The sources should also meet the demands of Official sources, either government or institutional sources. Other certain qualifying sources under specific conditions created by the attacher could also be provided to the Sources heading if no official government or institutional sources are available.

No Source(s)! No Save!

Thank you!

LegacyUser

Brett said: Brian

Firstly, "Welcome" to this "FamilySearch" ( "GetStaisfaction" ) 'Feedback' Forum.

Secondly, "Official 'FamilySearch' Representatives", do monitor; and, sometimes, participate in, this Forum.

Thirdly, I am just another User/Patron, just like yourself (and, happen to be a Member of the Church).

Many Users/Patrons who regularly participate in this Forum who have a great deal of knowledge and experience with "FamilySearch", like to assist/help other Users/Patrons like yourself.

Finally, I understand the premise of your suggested enhancement; but,nice in theory; but, NOT in practice.

What do seem to not understand is that for SOME (if not, MANY) individuals/persons (both, "Deceased"; and, "Living"), in "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch", in fact, there are NO 'On-Line' "Sources" available in "FamilySearch" that can ACTUALLY be "Attached" to them.

Some of the reasons for this, is that the "Records" for such individuals/persons:

(1) have not been "Filmed" (and, nowadays, "Digitised"); or,

(2) have NOT been made available by the Record Custodian for "Filming" (and, nowadays, "Digitising"); or,

(3) have been "Filmed" (and, nowadays, "Digitised"); but, the Record Custodian has NOT given permission/authority of the Records to be made available; or,

(4) Other "Commercial" PAID (ie. "Subscription") "Web" Sites make very it difficult for "FamilySearch" to provide FREE access to such "Sources" (ie. Records).

For example, there are some 'On-Line' "Sources" (ie. Records) for where I am from; but, there are many of those that I require that fall into the aforementioned situations/circumstances.

For "Sources" that are not available in "FamilySearch", due to the aforementioned situations/circumstances, we can (and, I do) certainly "Create" the "Sources" that are "User-Defined"; but, MANY Users/Patrons DO NOT have the, KNOWLEDGE; EXPERIENCE; and/or, technical ability or know-how, to do so.

For MANY Users/Patrons the best that they can do is to enter the "Details" from the Record in as a "Reason Statement".

So, again, your suggested enhancement is, nice in theory; but, NOT in practice.

One thing that might be acceptable in practice, is that a "Reason Statement" is a REQUIREMENT when data is entered into a field; but, as we all know, such "Reason Statements" can contain absolute GARBAGE; so, although good in practice, such may finish up being more of a burden (ie. nightmare), rather than its intended purpose.

Again, I understand the premise of your suggested enhancement; but,nice in theory; but, NOT in practice.

==========

ATP

I am sorry, ... "No Source(s)! No Save!" ... is just not practical.

==========

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: As Brett says, while the motive for the suggestion is great, the practice is likely to be flawed, not least, as he says, because FS only has a tiny percentage of sources in its own databases.

Any reason statement can be filled in by such nonsense as "GEDCOM" - and note that a valid reason statement might simply say "1851 census" so requiring a non-terse statement won't work.

Also, it is vital to ensure that entering data is still practical. On many occasions, particularly when using a census record (say) that isn't in FS, it's much, much easier to enter all the new persons first without any sources and then add the sources later in that session. (Sometimes I've done this under the impression that FS doesn't have the requisite sources but then, after adding them, have found a hint for precisely the source that I thought wasn't in FS.)

LegacyUser

Juli said: The idea is fatally flawed: until you create (and save!) the profile, there's nothing to attach any sources to.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: If memory serves, this has been suggested before, not that many days ago with pretty much the same conclusions—not only impractical as Juli states, but also flawed in that “official” sources may not exist.

I have at least one of those, but then there is the 1900 and 1910 U.S. census which provides a count of all and living children. In at least some instances, my own relatives has a count of more children than the records can provide. They still need to be recognized in FamilySearch FamilyTree even if they are represented by a blank name and unknown sex.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: Ah - it's actually fatally easy to forget that - I certainly had, though I did add that warning about practicality.

Most of us will think about the very start and the very end, without stepping through all the bits in the middle when the validation kicks in too soon. (Yes I think that I did write some code where part way through I couldn't go forward or back. I did it once and only once!)