Search for content in message boards

SURVEY - What facts do you feel comfortable merging from Public Member Trees?

Replies: 69

Re: SURVEY - What facts do you feel comfortable merging from Public Member Trees?

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 6:32AM GMT
Classification: Query
Kj_norway comment

“However, my comments for FTM and Ancestry were not really about data, but about the way they are less sophisticated regarding genealogy research standards and data capture and recording. Some times they facilitate bad habits that would not be acceptable in a scientific environment.”

Well, well, well, and my goodness; glad to see you [finally*] espousing this also---seems like a million previous discussions/posts/threads in this area

Yes it [the system as with its presently inadequate standards, definitions, instructions, processes, etc.] does facilitate bad habits

-Some users are even prone to using/creating/advocating [and in some cases incorrect] workarounds because of the system inadequacies
-Some users even enter data when they have no record to support that data just to pretty up their documentation [because the system won’t do what they want to do]
-The documentation and descriptions provided in the help areas leave much to be desired [as discussed many times] when providing definitions of terms---e.g., the running battle/discussion on whether a workaround in the “Places” area resolves a “Place’ or just kicks it down the hierarchy
-And in general, the many, many discussions on the inadequacy of “Places” , e.g., historical versus present location, missing locations in the data base, etc.
-Etc, Etc, Etc

*Note the word “Finally” – I realize you have previously been saying something to the effect of your statement, BUT this time you have succinctly and clearly stated it – maybe it is because you have let the PHD cat out of the bag






Comment by Rich Canfield

“OF COURSE WE ARE ALL IN AGREEMENT, this is to record these trees as a possible leads.”

No ---- we are not ALL in agreement on this ------there is no need to record the “TREES” as possible leads---- And in fact many users on this thread have pointed out the potential problems from using data from the trees------Hate to say this but, instant gratification in genealogy will lead to GIGO and lots of undo’s and Redo’s



SubjectAuthorDate Posted
Rich Canfield 16 Feb 2013 2:37PM GMT 
Rich Canfield 16 Feb 2013 2:53PM GMT 
silverfox3280 16 Feb 2013 3:15PM GMT 
Rich Canfield 17 Feb 2013 3:13AM GMT 
KATHYMARIEANN 17 Feb 2013 1:32PM GMT 
Rich Canfield 18 Feb 2013 1:53AM GMT 
KATHYMARIEANN 18 Feb 2013 10:39AM GMT 
Rich Canfield 18 Feb 2013 1:24PM GMT 
silverfox3280 18 Feb 2013 3:59PM GMT 
Rich Canfield 19 Feb 2013 2:43PM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | Privacy | Terms and Conditions