Can we eliminate Find a Grave from Suggestions?

Question

In the past, Find-A-Grave has been treated as an unreliable source.  Often, it proves why this is the case.

One of the suggestions reported, was for a person whose death date didn't match FaG.  Except, it does.  No, the suggestion isn't wrong, but depending on how you look at the record, it's both right and wrong.

You see, the person who entered the grave, entered the wrong date.  However, if you actually look at the tombstone however, it says the correct date.  The date I used.

I've found more than one instance of this, but I've found instances of the location of death being the location of the burial, not of the death.  The place of birth being whatever the person conveniently found, usually on a death record, not the birth record.

I don't generally consider anything given on a death certificate or tombstone the gospel truth regarding birth records.  I've literally had a birth record, and the child throughout his life celebrate his birthday a month early, because he repeatedly uses a November DOB rather than a December one, which is on his birth record.

It's the same thing with names.  What's on the birth record is gospel.  What's used throughout their life, is the name they prefer.  Early census records get preference as well, since the parents are the ones submitting the names and ages.  

I love Find-A-Grave, it's a awesome resource, and helps fill in the cracks.  However, I don't personally, and I'm not sure why a site that prides itself on well sourced/documented profiles, would use it as a preferred resource for suggestions.

I just went through a book, featuring 48 people, all documented in the book, but for whom the author gets a lot of facts wrong.  Everyone in the universe has used that person's data as factual evidence of names, birth dates, etc.  Yet, they are in serious error in many accounts, and almost every instance of their records on F-a-G are likewise in error.  

Please consider eliminating Find-A-Grave from the suggestions.  Either that or break the results out into two tabs, Errors being one and Suggestions being the other..

Comments

I agree that FindAGrave "suggestions" (formerly known as "errors") can be annoying, but fortunately you only need to click "False Error" once, and the suggestion will disappear thereafter.

---

As many problems as I have seen with FAG they still have some benefits.  Other contributors sometimes add primary sources to memorials there that I had not previously seen.  A few times times I've contacted the person maintaining a memorial and that person has decided that a WT profile contained many useful sources and attributed facts to me.  It is a "two-way" street unless the owners Ancestry decide to void their agreement with Tim that started FAG and place it behind a paywall.  Should that happen, any references to WT will need to be eliminated.

---

Use the Template and add sameas=no ==> then you are under the radar 
 

Answer 1

Yes add FindAGrave links using the template

Use the Template and add sameas=no ==> then you are under the radar 

Example Hower-100 that have FindAGrave suggestions

if you are sure its the same person and "dont want to compare" use the template

{{FindAGrave|83918108|2017 oct 7|Phillip Hower|sameas=No}}

• 83918108 is the number of the grave
• 2017 oct 7 is date when I accessed the FindAGrave record
• Phillip Hower is the name used at FindAGrave
• sameas=No tells the Project Database Error this person has not the same data as the WikiTree profile so dont compare them
  • If it is the same person its better NOT using sames=No
    • Then try to correct FindAGrave
    • Add a Research Note in WikiTree explaining
    • Mark in Project Database Error false error

The text generated will be

Phillip Hower on Find-A-Grave: Memorial #83918108 Retrieved 2017 oct 7.

Comments

is it possible to lookup on WikiTree's help pages to see the documentation for this template and how to use it -- other than this post here on G2G?

---

eventually discovered the answer to my own question...

Help Index -> T -> Templates, list of -> Category:Templates -> External Link Templates -> FindAGrave
although, I personally don't find that document very helpful or enlightening, especially in regard to the new "sameas" parameter. And seems like an awful roundabout way to find any helpful information, buried so deep (ah, I guess the first three links could be replaced by the single link to "Help Category" which does not appear to be a complete replacement for the Index).

Using the "sameas" parameter, its helpful to know this:

• sameas=yes -- that it is the same profile (even though there may be differences)
• sameas=no -- assumed it is a link to a relative or other person for reference

---

It says on External Link Templates "This usage of templates is not currently approved. -- Whitten-1 11:14, 15 December 2016 (EST)". As the FindAGrave template is in that category, it's use is not currently approved.

---

Is it the case that this additional coding only works if you use the FindAGrave template?

I don't use the template. Instead, I write out what I believe is a proper citation ... and am more than a little unhappy that, separate from "hints" I have FindAGrave warnings and errors.

Perhaps someone could come up with terminology other than "Error 578: FindAGrave - Different death date ... ," etc.

Seems a step too far to assume the work on WikiTree is erroneous, just because it doesn't match something on FindAGrave.

Edited to add: Would prefer we not encourage others to "correct" these "errors" by plucking the all too often unsourced data from FindAGrave and using that to change WikiTree profiles. 

How about we just have "Hints" and add a FindAGrave connections linker, similar to the FamilyTree connections linker.

Answer 2

I find it strange that we (WikiTree) do not consider FindAGrave a reliable source, but when it doesn't agree with our data give it full credence, at least to the point of including it in "suggestions."

Perhaps we should not compare WT data with FAG.

Comments

Use the Template and add sameas=no ==> then you are under the radar  
 

Answer 3

This issue has arisen more than once.  We are told, just mark the suggestion as a false error and get on with our lives.  So usually I do that.  This week I have 20 or so Find a grave errors on my suggestion report (I added about 200 profiles to Wikitree as part of a project, and also as the easiest way to add cemeteries to my state).  So only 10% generated errors.  How much time will that take to correct?  Let's say 5 minutes per error--100 minutes or so.  Sure, I have 2 hours to spend on correcting these suggestions.  I'm retired--time isn't an issue (how else would I have managed to create 200 profiles if I didn't have time?keeping in mind that they are not yet fully sourced).  If I thought these suggestions added value, I'd be all for keeping them, but I think they're time wasters.

Comments

I really hope that you are at least first verifying that our data is actually more accurate before marking the report as false.

---

Why do you suppose it takes so darned long to check each error before I can mark it false?  I don't just willy-nilly mark them false. I'm a Wikitreer--I look for additional sources and attempt to verify which is correct. That's why it's so darned time consuming.

---

sorry...didn't mean to accuse. I was simply mis-reading in-between the lines.

---

: ) Good one, Dennis. 

Answer 4

Hi Larry,  Your initial statement about FindAGrave prompts my opinion here.  I have come to the belief that no records are always accurate or error free.  Even gravestones sometimes have errors, as mentioned elsewhere in G2G.  

I consider each WikiTree profile to be a repository for all the information, good or bad, available about an individual.  If a source has an error, I think it is imperative to retain the source on the profile and add a statement of what information is in error and the source for the correct information.  Pointing out inaccuracies is the only way we can correct the errors that are passed around the internet like a bad virus.  We must correct inaccuracies, include a biography statement of what is in error, and provide the source for the correct information.  We can't ditch all 162 million FindaGrave memorials because some have transcription errors or other inaccuracies.  We need to try and correct the errors, at least on the WikiTree profiles.

Unlike other family tree websites, WikiTree defines a source as, ". . . the identification of where you obtained information."

"Sources are critically important for genealogy. Some even say that genealogy without sources is mythology.^[1]"

"You must include your sources when you put information on WikiTree. It's in our Honor Code."

So, reliable or not, FindAGrave must be included as a source if that is where information is obtained.  

Comments

Kitty,  I agree.  I put the FAG Memorial # as a source.   In the biography, I note that so and so died on day ? Year and is buried in This Cemetery, Then I write that the FAG memorial has or doesn't have a headstone photo and if the headstone had any info inscribed on it and what the info is.   I stopped putting the links to the FAG page. They may be changing with the new format and stop working anyway.   But at least with the Memorial #, anyone can find it if they go to the Find-A-Grave website.

Answer 5

I like the Find A Grave suggestions. I tend to make more mistakes in typing than the FAG reference. But you’re also right in that there are errors there as well. I have asked the person who did the FAG reference to fix it and they have always responded positively.

Answer 6

The easiest way to remove find-a-grave from the suggestions report, is to stop using find-a-grave as a source on our profiles.

You've got it backwards. Its not that its being used "as a preferred resource for suggestions". But rather its that various people are already using it, in spite of repeated warnings of inaccuracies, so the the suggestions report is merely pointing out those inconsistencies that it finds.

As Kitty says, we're looking for inconsistencies, and correcting errors where we have control and can. Not all record sources are accurate, including what's carved in stone. We often have to make judgements as to which ones are more accurate (which is why we cite sources).

As Ellen says, if we know our data is more correct, then mark it as such.

Answer 7

Within one particular line of my family Findagrave info is incorrect.  A lot of it.  The correct info is on the profiles.  The Findagrave info is a big pain to deal with.  Over and over in various ways.  I will not in anyway consider Findagrave a reliable source.

Comments

Reliable source:

I guess FindAGrave is like WIkiTree and internet that you need to decide if it is reliable per WikiTree profile or internet web page....

What we can say is that FindAGrave miss some fundamental components like adding a source statements to make it a good tool for doing genealogy you can trust. Its good for uploading grave pictures, add coordinates,write a small bio and connect family members..... plus Request A Picture of the grave

WikiTree reliable?

As we see so many problems with FAG I think it's important that WikiTree try to move in the direction of being a good genealogy member on internet. Aleš work is excellent but WikiTree need more components as a Quality process..... and a common research method... 

Answer 8

I have no idea if this works, but I too, hate checking FindAGrave for mistakes, and then there are those on  FindAGrave that says Burial unknown, to add to this mix.

I now just add See also: Find A Grave Memorial # xxxxx without brackets, after the Sources/references lines and am hoping this won't trigger suggestions.

Comments

Use the Template and add sameas=no ==> then you are under the radar   
 

---

Thusly?

{{FindAGrave| XXXXXXXX}} sameas=no ==>

Answer 9

Find A Grave is a great source at times.

I use it if :

1. it shows the gravestone info listing name , dod /dob

 

or

2. it lists sources

Comments

Update:  Find a Grave memorials now have suggestive sources automatically pop up on the memorial from Ancestry.com records.

Answer 10

FindAGrave is a good source for hints, which can in turn lead you to source records. I’ve seen many pages that include snippets from marriage, census, or death records as well as the obituary. I’ve seen memorials with incorrect dates and gravestones engraved with the wrong date. It usually, but not always, does tell where someone is buried which is a big clue as to where they or their family lived. I’ve had good luck with memorial managers responding to requests for updates; many of them participate in a genealogy hobby.

My thought is that a FindAGrave citation (or any citation for that matter) should include sufficient information for the reader to be able to find the cited source. Adding a URL is a nice to have, but a URL can change thus become worthless. The new FindAGrave site gives a nice citation that fills in the person name, cemetery name, location, memorial number; it’s easy to change the generated newfindagrave URL and wrap the memorial number with the template.

Any suggestions that make you look twice at your facts is probably good. Just acknowledge and move on.

Comments

Agree and maybe WikiTree is mature for start "weight" evidences for a fact

i.e. 

1. A death date based on a FAG with no gravestone
   
   is weaker than
    
2. A death date based on a FAG with a picture of gravestone 
   
   is weaker than
    
3. A death date based on a FAG with records from cemetery confirming the date
   
   is weaker than 
    
4. A death date based on a FAG with records from cemetery confirming the date and death records in the church books....
    

I guess a ranking like that needs to be done per profile and not possible to do with some software algorithm ==> its a genealogy evaluation done by the researcher....

Benefits:

1. Easier to understand if we can trust the research on the profile
    
2. Easier to find "weak" profiles in the family tree that need more care 

 

Answer 11

FindAGrave is a "source". It may not always be a "good" source but then again the same can be said of wikitree itself. Anyone can make a profile, and in most cases anyone can change a profile. Many sources conflict. Some people put a birthdate down as certain even though the source is their christening date. Or a death date is actually a burial date.

The more sources used, the better the picture and more accurate the profile. I am very careful not to ditch sources. But in all honesty, Ancestry links would be the first to go for me. After all, I've seen people publish their family tree as a huge biography online and it is used as a source also.

A suggestion of a difference between FaG and wikitree doesn't automatically make 1 or the other right, they could both be wrong. If genealogy was perfect we would have complete documentation all the way back to Adam with birthdays, movements, marriages, and deaths for everyone who ever lived.

Answer 12

Like many other non-primary sources, Find-A Grave can provide helpful clues.  I recently had one with an unusual name (one of many variations none of which were on his baptism record), the wife had a quite wrong age, and the son's obituary which was connected to FAG said that his mother had a completely different maiden name (turned out to be her sister's married name).  All that led to finding the real person, the correct spouse, and lots of family members.  The whole mess was interesting and a win for Wikitree!  Several Wikitreers helped find sources and it was satisfying teamwork.  This also points out the lack of veracity of non-primary sources, which always need to be checked.

Answer 13

I would like to continue to have suggestions about Find A Grave.  I currently only have one "suggestion" and that one relates to a FAG source.  It is Looser-47.  I had done the memorial and bio and not noticed there was a difference in the death year on FAG.  I am quite sure the date I listed on WikiTree is the correct one but the FAG memorial and gravestone show the year as a year earlier.  What I plan to do about it -

1. Notify the FAG manager that there may be an error on the gravestone and documentation that I have.  He can make a correction note if he so chooses.

2.  Add a research note on WikiTree noting the difference in the tombstone year and other sources.

3. Mark the suggestion as a false error and Notified FindAGrave of its error.

My goal in genealogy is to improve my knowledge of my ancestors and pass it on with as much detail as I can find.  I would rather note the FAG memorial and whatever problems there seem to be, along with my thoughts, than to have the next person "discover it" and spend time reaching a decision about what they think about it.  I think that having it available on WikiTree is a valuable tool for future searches.

I also appreciate whoever it was in the past who put up the gravemarker who spent time and money to honor their loved one / ancestor as well as the memorial manager who took the time to add it.  I am sure they both had good intentions and gave it their best effort at correct information.

I am very grateful to have WikiTree as a place to share and collaborate, but I think we have to acknowledge that not all users have the same goals in it's use.  It is only a part of my research.  I use it to expand and share, but I limit my use each month so that I can continue other writing and research projects.  A admire the folks who add or correct hundreds or thousands of profiles, but probably won't ever reach that level of use.

Answer 14

When I joined Wikitree almost 5 years ago, all of the "checks and balances" did not exist.   I uploaded a large GEDCOM from Ancestry.com that included MANY references to Find a Grave.   I spent my first few years on Wikitree improving the sources on the profiles, but never thought I needed to add the specific URL for FInd A Grave.   When the Suggestions started I had over 300 profiles that had suggestions just due to the lack of a specific URL for FindAGrave.   For the most part, I just ignore those suggestions, I feel like marking them as false is wrong, because they do need real URLs, but I am down to the last 30 and I are just tired of fixing them.   Just being honest.