Here's a first chunk of feedback.

1) I really like the immediacy of this, edits to the profile are immediately reflected in the scoring. I shall be using this summary from now on to check the quality of my changes.

2) I really like the fact that you appear to ignore untagged sources in scoring.

A profile that is cluttered up with loads of untagged Person sources just makes the whole thing slower to work with, without adding verifiability in any usable way.

Maybe you could reduce the score where you found this sort of mess?

A good example is children's births - surely those sources should be limited to the child's profile (assuming there is no way of tagging the child's birth source against the Parent/Child relationship).

3) However, surely tagged, indexed, accurate marriage sourcing should be very much taken into account in the scoring, given that couple relationships are so key to the overall integrity of the Tree?

GZPH-JK1 has no indexed Person sources (as the summary points out) but her Couple Relationship's marriage event does have 2 tagged sources (one of them indexed) which you do not take into account anywhere (you clearly know that they are there - see my next example).

Conversely, re LBBQ-SJV, the summary picks up the lack of a tagged Marriage source, but indicates explicitly that this does not affect the scoring. (The relevant source is present against the Person, but obviously can't be tagged from there - another example of the clutter I mentioned above.)

I have talked with several of my staff at our local FamilySearch Center. One [expert level] thinks it is kind of useless, as she has been using FamilyTree since 2008, and can see, almost at a glance, if there are problems for a person on their 'person page'. Another [a professional genealogist retired] thinks it can be a useful tool, mostly for beginners. My sister in law [intermediate level] likes it.

I [expert level] agree, it may be useful for beginners. Those of us who are experienced, [over 45 years doing family history, use FamilyTree daily, etc.] may not see it as a useful tool, because we know what to look for "red flags" [indicates errors, wrong merges, wrong sources, etc. on FamilyTree] I don't know that I would use it or pay much attention to it, and it may just confuse newcomers to the website.

The title of this group is Person Data Scoring, and the results page has Overall Person Quality Score.

We are scoring the results of the Profile - the work we and our fellow contributors have done on the records of a person.

I propose the results page show Overall Profile Quality Score instead. To say the rating is of the person shows a lack of respect for the very people we honor by our research.

Thank you.

Is this hit and miss for some person pages? Here is the URL for my father's page:

https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/K2XG-NMD

Thank you!

My grandfather (4th line) was born on 25 June 1893 and is appropriately classified as under age 5.

The Profile Score Summary throws an error message that the date of birth conclusion (exact) does not match the "date of +1890" (which I understand to mean after 1890).

The exact date of birth is documented multiple times on the profile, with birth, baptism, military, and Social Security records attached. A census is an inexact reference to age/year of birth at best. The broad ranges used in the 1895 NJ make it less exact than the norm. The wording of the inconsistency at least needs to be changed because it appears to indicate that the census is more reliable than records of the birth event.

Thank you.