Why does Family Search add people without sourcing where they get the information to add the person?

LindaMorasca

I keep finding people added to family tree by Family Search without any notes or sources. Then someone comes along and adds them to the wrong family without any explanation or source. It would be very helpful if Family Search sourced or noted the document they used to create the person. Here is an example: Amanda Allen 93KC-9ZZ. Someone attached her to my Great-grandfather as another wife, his real wife is Amanda Matilda Allen LCB4-L9M. When I searched for sources there were many Amanda Allens born on the same date as the one Family Search created. So now, she sits there without parents and without a husband. There was also another Amanda Allen KL2T-ZBV attached to my Great-Grandfather and created by you guessed it, Family Search. I merged her because she had the same birth and marriage dates. I find most of these were done in 2012.

Thanks, Linda

Brett .

@LindaMorasca

Linda

I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

You are not alone ...

Most of us have ... been there ... done that ... and, still, do ...

FYI

In relation to "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch' ...

'FamilySearch' DOES NOT add any individuals/persons.

These days, ONLY User/Patrons ADD individuals/persons.

ALL, of those OLD individuals/persons (ie. 2012 vintage), CAME from, ALL of the PREVIOUS iterations, of the VARIOUS "Systems", that were, in place; and, used by, the Church; and, the Members of the Church, prior to 2012.

eg.

[ But, not limited to ... ]

Temple Work

IGI ... ( International Genealogical Index )

Family Group Sheets

PAF ... ( Personal Ancestral File )

New.FamilySearch ... ( forerunner to "Family Tree" )

and, so on.

ALL of those did not have the "Sources", that are NOW available, in "Family Tree" of 'FamilySearch'.

Now ...

That Said ...

None of us are PERFECT.

We ALL make MISTAKES.

[ Admittedly, some, more (often) and bigger than, others ... ]

Basically ...

It is a matter of "Watching" (oops, sorry, 'old school', "Following") our MOST important Ancestors.

Just to keep on top of any 'wayward' changes.

One can "Follow", up to a Maximum of x4000 individuals/persons, at any given time.

I check, the "Changes" to those that I "Follow", on a "Daily" Basis; so that, I can keep on top of things.

More often that not, nothing needs to be done; but, at least, I have the opportunity, to be abreast of things; as, they happen/transpire/unfold.

just my thoughts.

Brett

Carla Tobler

@LindaMorasca 

Thank you for using FamilySearch Community. Your question is an excellent one, and Brett's answer is absolutely correct. Below is a paragraph from an article in the Help Center titled: "Why is FamilySearch a Contributor in Family Tree."

Here is a paragraph from that article;

Information transferred from a previous system

Much of the information in Family Tree transferred from a previous system named new.familysearch.org.

For information that the system transferred, Family Tree lists either a specific contributor or FamilySearch. The date is the date of the information transfer to Family Tree, not the original contribution date. If a user changes the information in Family Tree after the information transfer, the contributor information shows the actual contributor and change date. 

Best Wishes!

dontiknowyou

A name-only profile such as Amanda Allen 93KC-9ZZ may as well just be merged into the more detailed person page Amanda Matilda Allen LCB4-L9M. It does not matter who the person page was supposed to describe. The fact is, there never was any description so it could be any Amanda Allen who ever lived. There is nothing sacred about the PID 93KC-9ZZ.

I have cleaned up some large families where there were more than 20 duplicate records per child. It is tedious but the result is gratifying.

LindaMorasca

Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. I do follow and I do merge. However, now knowing that most of the duplicates came from the old system I will not worry about stepping on other's toes when I do.

Brett .

@LindaMorasca

Linda

FYI

Please be aware that ...

NOT "All", the "Duplicates", that come from the OLDER "Systems", are inactive; but, some are.

There are still, MANY "Duplicates", that come from the OLDER "Systems", that are quite/very active.

Please, still take care, when you are "Merging"/'Combining"; because, in some cases, you CAN definitely 'tread on other's toes'.

Such has been done on many occasions.

That is, exactly WHY, I "Follow", so many, of my "Ancestors", to keep onto of 'wayward' "Changes".

Many of my "Ancestral" Lines come from the OLDER "Systems".

And, it does not matter, whether or not, they are well "Documented" and "Sourced".

Even, the well "Documented" and "Sourced", are still subject to 'wayward' "Changes".

So ...

That Said ...

Still take care, when you are "Merging"/'Combining"; because, in some cases, you CAN definitely 'tread on other's toes'.

You do not always, need to 'Contact', the OTHER Users/Patrons; but, you still need, to check out, the "ChangeLog"; and, do some investigation; before, summarily undertaking the "Merges"/"Combines".

Just my thoughts.

Brett

dontiknowyou

Contrary to popular advice to follow and revert changes on pages, more and more I am un-following pages. There is no rush. Also, I do a good job on the pages I work, so erroneous FT hints are unlikely. The vast majority of changes I do see are good changes.

LindaMorasca

Thank you Brett, I always check the changes made to people I think are duplicates. I usually try to contact the person who created or changed the information. However, some never respond. When that happens I try to look for sources for both people and make my decisions based on what I find. In addition to sources on Family Search I always check Ancestry.com for sources and other family trees. I find this very helpful.

Dennis J Yancey

please watch this video - as it discusses the subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwRSRZ9amlM