FamilySearch. ChangeLog. WHY. Are RECORDS, Showing NON-STANDARD; But, NO Corresponding CORRECTION?
FamilySearch
Subject:
"ChangeLog". WHY. Are RECORDS, Showing as NON-STANDARD; But, there is NO Corresponding ( Later ) CORRECTION (or, "Standardisation")?
BACKGROUND
In the "ChangeLog", for an individual/person ...
This NOW appears ...
ie.
But, there is NO record, of the "Vitals" of either, "Birth"; and/or, "Death", appearing further along/up the "ChangeLog", that indicates, that those "Vitals", were ( Ever ) CORRECTED / "Standardised".
Hence ...
REQUEST
For clarification ...
In regards to the "ChangeLog", for an individual/person ...
Question(s):
WHY, are RECORDS, showing as NON-STANDARD; But, there is NO Corresponding ( Later - further, "Up" the "ChangeLog" ) CORRECTION (or, "Standardisation")?
Is this a FAULT / FLAW?
Or, is this by "Design"?
[ As, the above, appears to be quite inconstant - and, just plain WRONG ... ]
Furthermore ...
Has this, got ANYTHING to do with, the "Improve Place Names" Project; and, the 'Username' of "Volunteer Project"?
Please advise.
Humbly submitted for your, information; attention; and, consideration.
'Thank You' in advance.
Your cooperation, would be greatly appreciated.
Kind Regards
MAY THE LORD BLESS YOU IN THIS IMPORTANT WORK
Yours Faithfully,
Brett
Comments
-
This is a really nice update. Something that has been confusing people a lot is that when a place name was not linked to a standard and then the Volunteer Project has standardized it, the change log didn't show any change. Now it does. I really like this.
Former appearance:
New appearance:
In your example, no correction is showing because no one has corrected it. Feel free to go ahead and standardize your example and then the correction will be there.
This really does not have anything to do with the Volunteer Project to improve place names beyond that fact that if you or someone else working on the record in your example doesn't fix this standardization issue, then eventually it is going to get dumped into the pile of records being fixed by the Volunteer Project and be standardized one of these years.
If you are staring at this saying, but the Volunteer Project didn't do anything, yes, they did. The record used to look like this:
Now it looks like this:
0 -
Gordon
It's 'Brett'.
Just responding ...
Respectfully ...
'No', this is NOT a really nice update ...
Well, certainly NOT, in the case, that I came across ...
Your "Example", is NOT, what I found ...
On the individual/person, that I started, to work on, for the second time, in a number of Years, there is NO corresponding, LATER 'Dated', RECORD, in the "ChangeLog", to indicate that ANY, 'Date'; or, 'Place', had been CORRECTED (ie. "Standardised"), by the "Improve Place Names" Project" (ie. 'Contact Name' = "Volunteer Project").
Or, for that matter, ANY Other User/Patron.
And, the Records DID NOT have a 'Red' "Exclamation Marks", for "Data Error".
Your "Example" is acceptable.
But ...
That Said ...
In my "Example", I humbly venture to suggest, that such is NOT acceptable, in fact, is quite DECEITFUL.
[ But, obviously, NOT intentionally so ... ]
In fact ...
The individual/person, was actually "Created", in "Family Tree", in 2013, by another User/Patron.
I very briefly, worked on the individual/person, back in 2015, by simply associating them; as, a Spouse; and, adding an "Event", of "Marriage", to the Couple.
There obviously, was NO indication, that the 'Places' of both, "Birth"; and, "Death", were NOT "Standardised" (ie. 'Red' "Exclamation Marks", for "Data Error"), back in 2015 - otherwise, I would have addressed/fixed such.
In fact, I would humbly venture to suggest, that back in 2015 the, 'Date' (ie. Year ONLY); and, 'Place' (ie. Here, "Downunder"), were very much, acceptable; and, "Standardised".
Yet, NOW (2022), the "ChangeLog" indicates, that the ORIGINAL records for, "Birth'; and, "Death", WERE ... "Non-standardized Date and Place", BUT, there in NO 'Red' "Exclamation Marks", for "Data Error"; AND, there is NO corresponding, LATER 'Dated', RECORD, in the "ChangeLog", to indicate that ANY, 'Date'; or, 'Place', had been CORRECTED (ie. "Standardised"), by the "Improve Place Names" Project" (ie. 'Contact Name' = "Volunteer Project"); nor, ANY Other User/Patron for that matter.
As such ...
HOW, can the so indicated, "Non-standardized Date and Place", NOW, all of a sudden, have been "Standardised'?
That, is the possible FAULT / FLAW, that I want addressed.
So ...
That Said ...
Contrary, to what you suggest ...
In my case, NO correction (ie. "Standardiastion") can be made (or, is required); as, the ORIGINAL, "Birth"; and, "Death", Records, are ALREADY "Standardised".
Somehow, there has been a SCREWUP ... somewhere ...
Either,
▬ the ORIGINAL, "Birth"; and, "Death", Records, are WERE "Standardised", when input/entered; but,
.... the "System", at some stage, thought, that they were not, then 'reneged'; or,
▬ the ORIGINAL, "Birth"; and, "Death", Records, were NOT "Standardised"; and,
.... they HAVE been "Standardized", by the "Improve Place Names" Project" (ie. "Volunteer Project" ); but,
.... there is NO Record of such in the "ChangeLog".
.... And, there is NO indication, that such was done, by ANY Other User/Patron.
.... [ Plus, there has NOT, been ANY "Merges"/"Combines" ... ]
Hence ...
My ORGINGIAL 'Questions', still stand ...
WHY, are RECORDS, showing as NON-STANDARD; But, there is NO Corresponding ( Later - further, "Up" the "ChangeLog" ) CORRECTION (or, "Standardisation")?
[ Plus, NO 'Red' "Exclamation Marks", for "Data Error" ... ]
Is this a FAULT / FLAW?
Or, is this by "Design"?
[ As, the above, appears to be quite inconstant - and, just plain WRONG ... ]
Furthermore ...
Has this, got ANYTHING to do with, the "Improve Place Names" Project; and, the 'Username' of "Volunteer Project"?
Please advise.
I usually come across; and, reference, things, that are NOT the NORM ...
Just my thoughts.
Brett
ps: Like the "Delete Person Unavailable"; when, in fact, such should NOT be the case.
..... At least, that is NOW address/fixed, for future instances.
..... Even, if such has NOT, been addressed/fixed, for past instances.
.
0 -
Gordon
It's 'Brett'.
To make matters even MORE confusing ...
I just started working on the Parents ...
Their situation/circumstance is the SAME ...
Both; where, ORIGINAL, "Birth"; and, "Death", Records, indicate "Non-standardized Date and Place" ...
Yet ...
NO 'Red' "Exclamation Marks", for "Data Error" (requiring "Standardisation") ...
NO corresponding, LATER 'Dated', RECORD, in the "ChangeLog", to indicate that ANY, 'Date'; or, 'Place', had been CORRECTED (ie. "Standardised"), by the "Improve Place Names" Project" (ie. 'Contact Name' = "Volunteer Project"); nor, ANY Other User/Patron, for that matter ...
NO "Merges"/"Combines" ...
I am CERATIN, that BOTH, the 'Dates'; &, the 'Places', were acceptable; &, "Standards", when input/entered.
And, thus, DID NOR require "Standardisation"; &, NOT, even after any Release/Upgrade by the "System".
They CANNOT, "All", have been WRONG, when input/entered (ie. NOT "Standards"; or, "Standardised" ... )
DEFINITELY something SCREWY going on ...
This may become, more of a NIGHTMARE, than IT was TRYING to address ...
All because, 'FamilySearch', DID NOT use, the "Contact Name", of the likes of, "FamilySearch, Standardisation".
[ For the "Improve Place Names" Project ... ]
Rather than, the likes of the 'Contact Name', of "Volunteer Project".
UGH ...
Brett
ps: I just wonder, if any RECENT "System" Release/Upgrade, HAS "Changed", the 'Status', of the ORIGINAL, "Birth" (and/or, "Christening"); and, "Death", Records, for ALL (or, MANY; or, even, ONLY for CERATIN Countries/Locations) individuals/persons, to indicate "Non-standardized Date and Place"; even, when they were, acceptable; and, a "Standard" (ie. NOT requiring "Standardisation").
pps: If, that is the case; THEN, that is a "Major" DISCREPANCY, that NEEDS, to be RECTIFIED --- ASAP.
.
0 -
Can’t comment without an ID number to evaluate.
0 -
I went ahead to try to find an entry with a bit more extensive history to see how this new notation appears. An it does look like this first attempt at flagging things in the change log doesn't work as intended. Since the notice at the top of this Ideas section says that bug reports are to go under the General topic, I'll post my observation there.
0 -
Gordon
It's 'Brett'.
Just in passing ...
Sorry ...
I saw your 'Comment' of:
[ ie. 12:49 am, Monday, 14 February 2022, MY (Local) 'Time' (ie. UTC +11 Hours) ... ]
But, as, it was well past the 'Bewitching Hour'; and, had just closed down my Computer; and, was in Bed, I had to leave responding; until, I had a couples of Hours, of 'Shut Eye' ...
Oh; and, I wanted to "Check" SOMETHING ...
Now ...
That Said ...
You KNOW [ ie. from the Days, of the OLD 'FamilySearch' ("GetSatisfaction") 'Feedback' Forum ], that I NEVER, post the 'FamilySearch Person Identifiers' (PIDs), of MY Ancestors, in the "Public" nature of these Forums.
Plus ...
I have been around long enough, with some "Experience", to KNOW, when SOMETHING is NOT "Right" ...
So ...
That Said ...
A new Morning ...
I did the "Checking" ...
And ...
As, I suggested, my PREVIOUS 'Comment', is VINDICATED ...
It WOULD appear ...
That a RECENT "System" Release/Upgrade, HAS "Changed", the 'Status', of the ORIGINAL, "Birth" (and/or, "Christening"); and, "Death", Records, for ALL individuals/persons, in 'Family Tree", to indicate "Non-standardized Date and Place"; even, when they were, acceptable; and, a "Standard" (ie. NOT requiring "Standardisation").
And ...
This was for BOTH, "Old"; and, "New", individuals/persons ...
I checked on an individual/person, that I ONLY "Created" Two (x2) Days ago ...
Both, the ORIGINAL, "Birth"; and, "Death" Records, NOW indicate "Non-standardized Date and Place"; even, though I KNOW (ie. 1000%) that they were, acceptable; and, a "Standard" (ie. NOT requiring "Standardisation"), when I input/entered them just Two (x2) Days ago.
Plus, MY Parents; where, the ORIGINAL (and, subsequent "Changes" to), "Birth"; and, "Death" Records, NOW indicate "Non-standardized Date and Place"; even, though I KNOW (ie. 1000%) that they were ALL, acceptable; and, a "Standard" (ie. NOT requiring "Standardisation") , when I input/entered them.
Now ...
That Confirmed ...
That IS a "Major" DISCREPANCY, that NEEDS, to be RECTIFIED --- ASAP.
DEFINITELY a SCREW-UP ...
This HAS become, more of a NIGHTMARE, than IT was TRYING to address ...
All because, 'FamilySearch', DID NOT use, the "Contact Name", of the likes of, "FamilySearch, Standardisation".
[ For the "Improve Place Names" Project ... ]
Rather than, the likes of the 'Contact Name', of "Volunteer Project".
UGH ...
Brett
0 -
All
FYI
I have now, subsequently ...
Cross-Posted: in 'Categories' of (1) "General Questions"; and, (2) "Family Tree" ...
Brett
0 -
I'm sure they'll get it fixed. I don't think it's that big of an issue since I get the impression that not that many people, present company excluded of course, ever look at the change log.
0 -
Gordon
I agree with you, on the latter ...
But ...
That Said ...
Regardless ...
Such IS a BIG Problem/Issue ...
Just imagine, WHAT it will be like, when Users/Patrons, DO use the "ChangeLog"; as, quite a number, now do.
Especially; as, we (eg. You and I; plus, Others), are "Teaching", the "Participants", in this Forum, about; and, how to use, the "ChangeLog" - in, MANY; Many; many, "Posts".
Oh Hum ...
HOW, easy it is, "Trying" to address/fix, one "Perceived" problem/issue, by some, can lead to DISASTER ...
[ Especially, when such, is NOT really, a problem/issue, in the first place ... ]
Brett
0 -
As this is a problem report, not an idea as the Suggest an Idea category requires, and the thread has already been cross-posted to General Questions, I'm going to close this one.
0
