Quality score Not available at this time

kathryngz

This morning I came across two PIDs (K2RZ-W2S and KKQ8-1LF) that had a quality score of Not available at this time. Both had a non-standardized christening place and no birth information.

I clicked the Not available at this time button and it led me to this Help Center article, which lists the requirements for a quality score to be shown. The profiles met all the requirements, so that wasn't the problem.

When I standardized the christening on one, the quality score immediately changed to Medium. When I added birth information to the other (but left the non-standardized christening information), the same thing happened—quality score immediately changed to Medium.

So it appears that in order for the quality score to be shown, the profile has to have at least a standardized birth or christening (or perhaps one other vital event—I didn't check all possibilities).

I don't know if this is a bug or is by design, but as a user I'd rather see a low quality score if the birth or christening is not present or not standardized. Seeing Not available at this time is only helpful if the profile really doesn't meet the requirements in the Help Center article linked above.

Thanks!

Kathryn

AudMarit

I have also had 'Not available at this time' shown. I then worked on someone else, not related to the first person. When I later looked into the first person again, the quality score show the score. This has happened several times. It could also happen after just leaving the computer for a while. I would guess that it is a bug or something in the system (some updates?).

Adrian Bruce1

@kathryngz - I'm just a user but it seems to me that your 2 profiles did not meet the requirements for doing a quality score. It says on the link you supplied that:

"Ancestor must be born in Canada, Continental Europe, South America, the United Kingdom, or the United States…"

You said that "Both had a non-standardized christening place and no birth information". If the christening place is not standardised, then the system has no recognisable information about where the christening took place - in other words, it could have been anywhere, so it fails the "Born in …" test.

I don't know why the "Born in…" test is there but I presume that it must be there for reasons of practicality - without that test being satisfied, the system can't, I suspect, know what a reasonable set of quality checks might be.

Gordon Collett

The help center article is out of date. Not surprising with a feature that is underdevelopment and getting updated frequently. All of my wife's Norwegian and Swedish family born before 1800 have the quality score functioning.

I have also had times when people that I know had the quality score button active one day have the "Not available at the time" message the next day. Then it was back the next. So there have been times when the quality routine has been off line.

@Adrian Bruce1 , I'm pretty sure based on the earlier entries in this Community group, is that the Born in.. test has to do with the algorithm. What is an obvious error in one time and place is perfectly normal in another. For example, on one Norwegian individual I was working on recently, a possible error was flagged because the burial date was more than eight days after the death date. At the time in question what was recorded in the church records was actually the funeral date. This could be days to months after the actual burial depending on when the priest was in town and when the family could pay for the funeral service. Sometimes even the burial was delayed past those eight days for various reasons, such as it being in the middle of winter. So for Norway from 1800 to around 1850 or so when they started recording both the burial and the funeral, the algorithm should really be adjusted to allow for more than eight days between death and burial. And from replies to comments, such specific adjustments to the quality algorithm are possible.

Now off to test what it takes to get an active Quality Score button….

Gordon Collett

Here is the results of testing. The routine is quite strict in its requirements at this point:

Birth Information Variants:

• Name only - not available
• Name and birth year - not available
• Name and non-standardized birth place - not available
• Name, birth year, and non-standardized birth place - not available
• Name and standardized birth place - not available
• Name, birth year, and standardized birth place - available

Christenting Information Variants:

• Name and christening year - not available
• Name and non-standardized christening place - not available
• Name, christening year, and non-standardized christening place - not available
• Name and standardized christening place - not available
• Name, christening year, and standardized christening place - available

Death Information Variants

• Name, death year, and standardized death place - not available
• Name, birth year, death year, and standardized death place - not available
• Name, standardized birth place, death year, and standardized death place - not available.

Birth/Christening Combination Information Variants:

• Name, birth year, standardized christening place - not available
• Name, standardized birth place, christening year - not available

I would wonder if some of the variants might be included at some point. The last two could be reasonable. The developers might need enough requests with suitable justification for such from users.

Adrian Bruce1

@Gordon Collett - thanks for that. I was pretty sure that the quality score algorithms must need to understand the locality and era in order to establish the customs and practices around things like vital events but lacked any examples of such variance. Your Norwegian burials and funerals practice is just right for that - as well as being interesting in its own right. Nothing like that in the British Isles - although I have always wondered about what happened in the more remote Scottish Isles such as St. Kilda.

Rhonda Budvarson

Thank you everyone for your comments, research and input. Thank you @Gordon Collett for taking the time to dial in and list the variants for a PQS response. I checked the Help Center Article, it was updated on May 22nd. You are correct that this bears watching to make sure the information is kept current.