Why is FamilySearch allowing so many people to be added without sources?
I just found 3 new girls added to a tree all one name Alphin. They have different years of birth but zero sources. That doesn't stop them from having the Temple ordinances completed. How do you know they are real and not fictitious? I'm adding photos.
Answers
-
If you look at the user information for those three you will see that one user added these girls in June. He is participating in the Chat function so you can contact him and ask him about his work in the tree and the sources he is using. He may be right in the middle of constructing the family and have much more work he is planning on doing. Or he may be a brand new user to Family Tree and has not realized the stress put on sources here. Feel free to politely suggest he add any sources he has if this family is of interest to you. The basic information looks good. It would be pretty common in the early 1800s to have many children die very young and then reuse a name for the next child.
When you contact him, do keep in mind that he may not be a member of the Church at all and may have no idea what you taking about if you bring up temple work.
It was a completely different user who apparently was just scanning through relatives and found these three girls not quite two weeks later who reserved and shared the temple work. Unfortunately there are users who do just harvest names without doing any work personally to verify any information. That people can only do this now for people to whom they do have a documented familial relationship was a great improvement which has stopped people who did this from just reserving any name they could find and justify doing so by saying that if you go back far enough we are all related.
At this point in time the reservation routine does not require sources. If they are not real people, then any work done will not be valid. If they are real people, then it will be, even without sources.
6 -
Likely the information came from 1810 and 1820 census showing number of males and females whose identities are still unknown yet.
3 -
Good spot @W D Samuelsen contact me please, Alphin being the surname these profiles may well be placeholders for these girls (the father has attached 1790, 1800, and relevantly 1810 censuses). Doesn't explain the exact birth dates given, though. Maybe they are just guesswork based on the 1810 census age range counts. (Can't see what the father's 'before 1820' death date is based on, either, perhaps it's just absence of an 1820 census entry, which feels like a bit of a reach...)
4
