New method of merging

LegacyUser

Will Keeley said: Seems to me the new method or system of "merging" takes more time and looks like its creating many more duplications?

LegacyUser

Paul said: I had been cautiously optimistic the extended procedure would lead to less bad merges. Unfortunately, that feeling only lasted until Friday, when a reckless user merged several individuals of the same name, although of clearly different identities.

It seems to prove, whatever the system, it will not stop the careless wreckers that can cause me a couple of days work putting right their errors. It's not only undoing the merge, but removing sources, detaching spouses and children, etc.

Even when you think you've cleared up the mess, all the individuals you have "unmerged" come back as "possible duplicates" and have to be marked as "not a match"!

Getting back to the original point, this SHOULD be a great enhancement, but I guess careless users will not be thwarted from carrying out their damage, whatever the method adopted to carry out this work.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: Hence the need to do something about it at the user end rather than the merge end. This can only be solved through closer and more effective user policing. In other words have a bad merge notification flag available and have Familysearch personnel take a look at each flagging before restricting user access if necessary. However that runs counter to the philosophy and also resources of the organisation. So it is extraordinarily unlikely to be implemented.