Merging and matching into lowest profile number

Question

I have been asked why I do not always seeko to merge from highest to. Lowest and have therefore been paying more attention to this.

i find my merges are often sourced from m&m options or m&m tools, neither of which seem good at choosing higher > lower.

Comments

I have been paying more attention to that also since topic came up and noted the same thing.

---

I have also run into this problem sometimes.  I have once in a while "tricked" the system by changing the LNAB on the profile I manage, and then I can merge it into the desired profile without trouble, except if I am not on the trusted list of the latter. Then, it's only by requesting permission, or moving on.  The only time I really have a problem is when I find two protected profiles of the same person. Somehow, there is no way out of the looping messages with that one.  it does not happen often, though.

Answer 1

I'm assuming "m&m" means Match & Merge?

When a surname has the same spelling, dupes must always be merged into the lowest number; that's how it has to work, technologically.

Sources will copy over, so if you have better sources in the higher number, these will be appended to the merged copy that ends up with the lower number. You simply then have to edit the resulting merged profile narrative to clean it up.

I'm not sure what the problem is that you're encountering.

Comments

Yes, m&m means merge and match, so if one recommends a merge from tools I am saying that where there are two profiles with the same LNAB the program does not connect them higher first.

well maybe sometimes it does.

---

At the top of the last merge page is an option to change the direction of the merge.  Also when you try to complete the merge, IF the surname is spelled the same, the system will force you to switch direction.

---

I agree.

Answer 2

I have also run into this problem sometimes.  I have once in a while "tricked" the system by changing the LNAB on the profile I manage, and then I can merge it into the desired profile without trouble, except if I am not on the trusted list of the latter. Then, it's only by requesting permission, or moving on.  The only time I really have a problem is when I find two protected profiles of the same person. Somehow, there is no way out of the looping messages with that one.  it does not happen often, though.

Comments

Actually please do not do multiple name changes before merging.  Doing so creates redirects that are unnecessary and uses up system resources.

---

Completely agree Jillaine. Multiple name changes are a no go at this station. Redirects cause a lot more work if there is an incorrect merge done that needs correcting and uses system resources as Jillaine said.

---

I need to explain about this.  I do that "trick" only in the instance where a merge gets stuck in a cycle of #2 "must" merge into...#1" followed y #1 "must" merge into...#2. Going back only repeats the cycle, so that no merge can be made at all as both pages insist you merge into the other.  In that instance, when I am caught in a loop that has no end, I will change spelling of a profile I manage so that it is redireced into another group.  That seems to unstick the merge, and I can proceed without difficulty. I do not recommend randomly redirecting profiles.  I do this only when I cannot break out of a continuous circle.

As to the LNAB, if you see two spouses or two children that are duplicates in a profile, searching for the LNAB is problematic in the early years, before about 1700, because spellings variants are the rule.  Until the search engine is improved, trying to find the LNAB through a series of spelling changes can lead nowhere.  If there were a way to show the lolowest existing LNAB in the list of names, that would be helpful.  Frequent examples are found in Scottish, Welsh and Scandanavian names.  Brewes=Bruce=Bruis=Bruse/Haraldsson=Haroldsson=Haraldson=Haroldsen=Haroldson, etc. Within the same nuclear family, siblings have differently spelled last names. (This actually happened in my grandfather's family, were as immigrants, brothers had variants of the same last name name in records.)

---

Instead of doing an interim name change, which results in the undesirable multiple redirects, you can fix a "stuck" merge by canceling the merge, then restarting it. Do this by:

1. Reject the merge

2. Under the rejected section at the bottom of the profile, there's a "remove the merge" (or something like that)

3. Start the merge process over from scratch.

Answer 3

Arborists know they should merge into the lowest numbered profile. It's posted on the project page as well as discussions in the google group.

If neither seems a good option then mark  as unmerged match along with annotating notes as to why. Ask the profile managers for more information. Please don't merge lower numbers into higher numbers. IF someone needs info from the changes log it makes things more difficult to follow all the changes. Especially for our newbies that are learning the ropes on merging.

If in doubt don't merge the profiles & ask one of the project leaders or another leader for help. Multiple directs can make a merge correction very time consuming.

Comments

I totally agree. Arborists are also dear more likely, I suspect, then to use the m&m tools. Which results in some fine comparisons or merges BUT the tools don't seem entirely reliable in putting higher > lower.

having said which I think it is hard if not impossible to merge upwards.