Merge Process is standardizing data.

LegacyUser

Leroy Roberts said: The new merge process is standardizing the data on the right side (surviving person) and not displaying the actual data from the person's page.



The data on the left is from Thomas Ashton's page and does not match the standardized data on the right. You notice that his birth city of Penkethe is not carried over, and the United Kingdom is added which is incorrect, the U.K. did not exist in 1592.

Please fix this process and populate the surviving person's data with the actual data from the person's page.

LegacyUser

Lyle Toronto said: This seems to be a difference of showing the Original place text vs the Standardized place text. When the standard was picked for "Penkethe, Lancashire, England", "Lancashire, England, United Kingdom" was chosen.
From the changeLog it looks like it either happened on the 9th or 10th of May, between 2 merges.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: The problem is that the merge is showing the standardized version of the place names rather than the actual complete correct place names.

This is why this is a major problem and needs to be fixed:

If I have Ola Olsson born 1750 at Høyland, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway with the available standard being just Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway and Ola Olsson born 1750 at Onarheim, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway, again with the only available standard being Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway,

then, when another user sees in the merge routine just the standardized versions:

Ola Olsson, 1750, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway
Ola Olsson, 1750, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway

the risk for an incorrect merge is greatly increased. The merge routine needs to show the full place name like this:

Ola Olsson, 1750, Høyland, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway
Ola Olsson, 1750, Onarheim, Tysnes, Hordaland, Norway

which makes it quickly apparent that these two are not the same person.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: There is no standardized version that includes Penkethe, therefore when attaching the standardized version to the actual correct place name, "Lancashire, England, United Kingdom" was the only available option.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Yes, that additional "e" (should be "Penketh") means standardisation will be based on the next level inputted - (the county of) Lancashire.

If inputting manually, I found "Croston, Lancashire, England, United Kingdom" still appears above "Croston, Lancashire, England" in the drop down menu, even if a pre 1801 date has been inputted beforehand. So not surprised the places are appearing in this format after being carried across in a merge. (Not saying they should be, though.)

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: I haven't checked, but this display of the standardized value is only during the merge, right? After the merge, the display value should still be there as before.