The idea is that the heritage areas of the Big Tree should have greater protection so that merges do not create more and more duplications in the historic area. Once the historic areas have been sorted out so that there is just one profile for each person and that profile has an concise overview and dates are backed with sources where possible they should then become protected so that addtions are only made following public discussions associated with the profile. New trees added to Geni won't create more and more duplications of these branches. They won't 'belong' to anyone. Once these areas are protected it should allow the import of Gedcoms to become more possible.
Date
Votes
4 comments
-
Dan Cornett This is a nice idea, if there were a way to "connect into" such a group of "protected profiles"; at the moment the only simple mechanism for "connecting" is merge two profiles together -- and that brings along with it all the OTHER profiles connected to each which now have to also be merged, etc.
At the moment, Curators can designate "Master Profiles", which are then the "master" in terms of merges ... the other profiles only get "merged into" the master -- and the Curator can also lock certain fields in the profile (e.g.: so that, for example, a known, source-backed, birth date isn't modified by either a merge nor an 'edit' of the profile).
It would be nice to "move a connection" without it being a full-fledged "merge" into the target connection profile. Perhaps, however, an alternative might be to "merge profile A [mine] into B [the other], but don't merge A's parents ... just disconnect them." ... or "... don't merge A's children; use B's existing children." One would have to deal with how to handle (display, so they don't get "lost") the "disconnected" profiles (maybe into a 'floating palette" similar to the one now used for "moving" a profile?) -- because, for example, one might have a grandchild directly connected to a grandparent, and you now have the info on the real parent(s) which need to be 'inserted' in between. Right now, that is a bit cumbersome to do ... it requires first "tangling" the relationships and then going in to the Relationship tab of a profile to "break" off the incorrect parentage. It could be easier...
-
David Prins How would this idea of "protected" profiles differ from locked MPs as they exist now?
-
Dan Cornett I'm not sure what Terry Jackson meant ... maybe MP's will do what Terry was thinking. However, perhaps the desire / need is for being able to "cut off" adding additional ancestors -- or descendants -- once one hits a merge (connection) with a MP. That way one would not have to be forced to deal with merging all the ancestors (descendants) in those situations where most (or all) of them are duplicates with the same or less information. If there were just a few additional ancestors (or descendants) then those could just be connected into the correct places.
That's another way to explain what I was trying to get at in my Oct 22 note -- ways of connecting into the "Forest" without having to merge all the 'duplicates' ... just merging the "connecting-point profiles" and then (if I choose to) "throwing away" my personal duplicate profiles rather than merging them. Of course, one could not "throw away" existing public profiles (except, perhaps, curators).
-
Terry Jackson (Switzer) Dan H Cornett seems to have understood the gist of this proposal. The MPs were, if you like, a first stage towards this. At the moment if someone is Pro they can add the whole historic tree again and this then needs to be merged in. (guess who ends up doing most of these?) Once an area of the tree is up to scratch (or as close as is ever likely) it can be closed to further profiles being added but trees can hook into it where they meet. so merging one profile and discarding the rest is one way of viewing this. The argument people may have against this is that they may have information that isn't already contained in the historic tree but there will still be the opportunity to add a discussion to the MPs or to add to the 'about me' or to ask the curator to make the change.
Another way of thinking of this idea would be to have areas of tree 'mastered' i.e.MB = Mastered Branch.
Please sign in to leave a comment.