We need an easy visual way to know that a person has discussions posted on them

LegacyUser

Joyce Irene Nagy said: Somehow flag/mark the discussions, source and note sections when good information has been added. Many of those I work with now don't remember to check these areas because most of the time, there is nothing helpful there. But they are missing important information that has been included by a patron that helps to explain the information that is there. For an example see PID KN14-NTG

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
A flag needed - Check me please.

LegacyUser

Pamela Kirkland said: Any way we could get some sort of alert that a discussion had been posted on someone in our family line?

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Notifying a new discussion.

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: You will be notified if you have selected the watch function on any individual

LegacyUser

Patricia Helen Young said: A visual indicator is necessary because it is not reasonable to put a Watch on everyone in your family tree. Watch is only good for a few specific individuals. As I move through my family tree- especially if I'm trying to untangle or combine duplicates I need to know there is a discussion about the individual without having to add them to my Watch list.

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: sorry - i added my comment in the wrong place. I was responding to another comment.

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: You can put a watch on any person on your tree and it will tell you when a discussion is added

LegacyUser

Elsie Lurinda Andersen said: With a large family file, it does not make sense to have to put a "Watch" on every person in order to know if there is a Discussion started!!! If there is a discussion, it should be readily obvious.

LegacyUser

Dale Peterson said: I agree that you can put a watch on any file, however that does not solve the problem. It is not practical to put a watch on everyone in a tree. Also, when searching for persons outside my tree, or combining records, I would like to know if someone else has placed a discussion on these records. In the next update to the program, please consider highlighting in some way the Discussion tab, as a means of drawing attention to it when a note is there. At this time I suspect that over 99% of the records do not have discussions attached, and therefore feww look at the Discussion tab.

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: I do not have an issue with having the discussion tab marked so you can see if a discussion exists - in fact I believe it is the correct thing to do. However, it is not reasonable to ask the system to advise you when anything changes in your tree. That is what the watch function is for. Just think if you go back 4 or 5 generations - that individual is in thousands of trees and so to send information to everyone is impossible.

LegacyUser

Sandy Coleman said: I also suggested creating a way to make a discussion noticeable and got shot down by Richard Melvin Bitter. I have started many discussions that are probably being passed by because nobody knows they are there. - Sandy

LegacyUser

Cliff said: Sandy, Getting shot down is kinda like falling down-we need to get up and keep trying. You haven't failed until you quit trying. Keep making your suggestions and we will eventually prevail. Thank you for your input.

LegacyUser

Cliff said: Hang in there Elsie, gasmodels if not correct. Adding a Watch to a record does not "tell you when a discussion is added"

LegacyUser

WLW said: To gasmodels:

I don't feel that we are asking the "system to advise us when anything changes in the tree". Watch function does that now when anything is added/changed on that person's information. Besides, it's my understanding the emails for Watch only go to the person/persons that have indicated they want a notice, not to everyone that is linked to that person.

The reason to mark the discussion tab to somehow draw attention to it would be the one big reason that we wouldn't need an email. When we got to that "page" or person, it would pop out at us and we would then know to look at the dicsussion tab.

Causal users today (and there are many that only use it "ocassionally" of "once since we had access") don't even think about looking for duplicates, let alone to look and see if there are discussions on the person. In fact often when I am working with someone they aren't even aware there IS a discussion tab.

It's frustrating when you are working with someone in the FHC and all they want to do is print a request...they do not want any investigation or look over the account. We try to explain the concerns (duplicates and discussions) and steps to assuring work has not already been completed...they listen and then do what they want. If that tab was marked, perhaps this would call attention to the fact that discussions have been added and, depending on how it is marked, it would give enough appearance of IMPORTANCE to the tab and they would then look to see what is written.

It does say that this is "under consideration" , they haven't said no yet, so lets just keep adding our concerns and maybe it will still bear fruit for us!

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: That is not true - The watch function does the following from the users guide

"You can select individuals in whom you are interested and receive an e-mail notification when someone changes the individual’s summary, when new activity in an individual’s discussions occurs, or when the individual’s record is combined with or separated from a record. "

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: I have no problem with marking the discussion - in fact I am in favor of it. One of the others, Pamela Kirkland, said she wanted notification whenever anyone changed a discussion on her tree and I replied that she could use the watch function to do that. I agree with all the other comments about the discussion tab. It will only serve its function if others read what is said in the discussion. I also think the discussion tab should provide the contact information of the contributor - not just his display name as it presently does.

LegacyUser

Sandra June Kennedy said: The programmers look at all the suggestions.They implement those with the most comments because they figure those are the ones people need first. Some are not possible at 'fix' at this time but are being worked on. This is an evolving process and you aren't shot down just waiting in a long line or great ideas!

LegacyUser

Gene Sabin said: I think a number should be added to the button to indicate how many discussions.

LegacyUser

Mary Urban said: Good idea!

LegacyUser

Mary Susan (Carlson) Scott said: Yesterday while on New FamilySearch, I discovered that someone(s) had merged the two wives of my ancestor.

One wife has no name and I simply used Mrs. with her husband's name several months ago. They had at least one son, maybe two.

The second wife was born 10 years after the son and was the mother of several children. We know her name and her parents' names. She could not be the wife of the son because he was born in 1795 and she was born in 1804.

I separated the families the best I could and also added discussion notes. Perhaps someone will notice but I feel a bit hopeless.

One day I might go back and find the two women merged again.

If there was a symbol, color change, or something to encourage me to read the discussion notes these two women would be distinguished from one another.

Instead, without the discussion notes changing in some way, I worry that I will be doing the same tasks in three or four months. The hour or more than I spend writing discussion notes and separating two individuals could be time used in more productive ways.

Please, please do something to mark the discussion tab so everyone will kinow that there has been information added.

LegacyUser

Richard Bitter said: I have noticed in my own work and in the comments of others that there is a problem with people combining records "just to combine records". Somehow they seem to feel that everything needs to be combined. Perhaps the combine feature could be changed to Require valid contact information and a reason for combining the records. The reason could be simply a radio button selection for several options...but at least it would require some reasoning and justification for the action. I would like to see the contact information of the person doing the combining, the reason for the combine action and a list of the PID numbers combined in the next Watch notification that is produced.

LegacyUser

Mary Urban said: That sounds like a really good idea! I especially would like contact info required for ANY change, such as combining or discussion posted. It is difficult to work together without contact info. I also like the idea of requiring some justification for combining! There is a lot of really weird results I am seeing as the result of hasty combining.

LegacyUser

Dea Jean Pyle said: It would be a great help if when discussions are added on a person that there would be a symbol added next to that person so that we know right away there is a comment to view. When we were able to dispute, the circle with the line helped us to know right away there was a possible problem

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Symbol for names with discussions added.

LegacyUser

Richard Bitter said: Thank you, Sandy, for your comments. I am concerned that any post I may have made would be in any way discouraging or upsetting to anyone. Such is not my intent. I apologize to Sandy and anyone else who may feel the same way. I agree with Cliff’s comments. I appreciate all the work the programmers are doing. I also encourage everyone to continue to express their opinions and suggest ways to solve any problems they encounter while using the FamilySearch sites. Every opinion is valuable. Every opinion expressed represent many others with similar concerns but who don’t take the opportunity to express their ideas.

LegacyUser

Kathy Bray said: I'm happy to see that disputes are going away, but I'm hoping that in the process you will add some type of "flag" to alert us to discussions that have been entered. A simple asterisk after the word Discussions is all it would take. Could you make the asterisk appear automatically whenever a discussion is added, whether it be a legacy dispute or a new discussion?

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Add an asterisk after the word Discussions to alert us.

LegacyUser

Sandy Coleman said: The site GENI.com has an excellent display for discussions and when a discussion is made it goes right to the contributor's mailbox. I and everybody involved receives my discussion and I also get an email when a contributor replies to my discussion. I never thought I would lead FamilySearch to other sites for a lesson, but so far GENI.com and http://www.gencircles.com/globaltree can teach the church a few things.

LegacyUser

Janine Parsons said: I agree that we need a quick easy way to see if a discussion has been made on an individual.

What if an icon was put by the person's name or highlighted a different color when viewing the "Parents and Siblings" or "Spouses and Children" screen?

LegacyUser

WLW said: Amen to Richard's and Mary's comments!

LegacyUser

Janine Parsons said: I am wondering if it would be most beneficial to have an icon, symbol or other marker such as highlightened text, connected to the father's surname on the pedigree screen, which would indicate that someone in that family has a discussion on them.

Then when you go to the "Parents and Siblings" or "Spouses and Childrens" screen it would also be indicated by the person's name who has a discussion on them.

My main reasons for doing it this way, is that a lot of people start from the pedigree page and a lot of people are interested in discussions on more than one family member in the same family.

LegacyUser

Richard Bitter said: I agree. I think that this would be a marvelous way to easily identify discussions and should satisfy all needs.

LegacyUser

brguest said: Not only would it be nice for the 'discussion' tab to indicate a discussion has been started when we are looking at an individuals information, but also when we are looking at an entire family (spouses and children tab) that there is some kind of indication by each individual name, either an * or 'D', by their name. ALSO, when we are looking at possible dupes, the same indicator needs to be present so we can click on the indicator, and check out the discussion before we combine the record.