NUMEROUS ERRORS - You too?

LegacyUser

Star Durbrow said: There has to be a way to better control the quality of the research and connections made. I frequently find that relationships in my tree have been created by either the system or others that are completely wrong. I don't have time to manually correct all the erroneous connections made in my tree. Does anyone else share my experience?

LegacyUser

Paul said: Probably most users do, Star! I've spent most of today correcting the results of a careless merge. On average, I spend around 5-6 hours a week (a conservative estimate) reversing incorrect inputs / changes. Sadly, many of these are a result of inexperienced users accepting the record hints / possible duplicates suggested by "FamilySearch".

The "solution" to the problem is far from straightforward - better training, providing good reason statements and sources are frequently suggested here. However, as long as the open-edit format remains as it is the problem will remain, to some degree.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Star,

Welcome to the FamilySearch forum at GetSatisfaction.com! Note that I am not an employee, and I do not speak for FamilySearch (FS).

Unlike most other genealogical tree sites, since the FS FamilyTree is a single, SHARED tree maintained through collaboration, everyone's work typically overlaps. There are distinct advantages to this relative to the goals of the church in providing it. One of those is that there are many more eyes looking at any given piece of information, so the ability for that information to evolve and become more accurate and complete very fast is very real.

So your experience is common to many people all contributing by building their overlapping trees in the same place.

One thing to keep in mind is what is "correct" and what is "erroneous". I have had many things changed by others because they had more information or a new source that I didn't have when I first entered the data. I don't have a problem with being corrected, but they need to provide reasons for the change that are adequate in justifying what they put in.

So to me, the "most correct" data is that which is most documented via sources and notes that show how the data was derived. If someone is going to make changes without providing justification as to why their changes are more correct than those already there, they can expect for those changes to be removed.

And note that when you start getting back into the 1700's and before, sources are not not as plentiful and people will sometimes guess at things without documenting the reasons for their conclusions. You can run into a LOT of conflicts in those areas

Now you specifically were talking about relationships. These can be a real trial sometimes. They can be trashed by someone simply loading a GEDCOM files data into the tree without being careful or courteous. Another way this can happen is when people are merging away what they think are duplicate records, when in fact those duplicates are really different people. Untangling these can be extremely complicated sometimes.

So the answer to your question is YES! Many people have this same experience. So here are some ways to deal with it:

- When entering records or making changes, always document sources and the reasons for the conclusions that you have come to.

- Once you have gone through and vetted all the sources and notes that you can on a relative or ancestor, put them on your watch list. That way you can follow any changes to that person made by others.

- Use the messaging feature to contact others who have made changes that you don't understand or agree with. As I have, you might discover that the change that they made is more correct than what you had.

- Just be aware that there ARE some folks out there that would rather take family stories as fact over formal records that cover the same issues.

So good luck with that, and if you run into specific issues you need assistance on, post a note here (usually include the PID of the records so that others can look at it)