Probably all done with WikiTree.

Question

It has been a disheartening experience working with mods and mentors here. I don't know what I was expecting, but it's not the type of crap I want to deal with anymore. I've worked many hours recently to improve profiles and add new sources. What I got in return was my badges stripped and blocked from participating. It seems the staff is feckless, as I've passed from one mentor to another and have been given a special "referral badge" only to recently return to the first mentor that initially had a problem with me. I've spent many hours over the last few days adding sources to my profiles as I was (deemed forbidden from adding new profiles until I added correct sources to all the profiles I've created) hoping this would impress my mentor. He instead chose to point out how I did not edit the biography. This guy wants each profile to be perfect/completed before I add sources to another unsourced profile. Boot me, block me, whatever you got to do. Before I was blocked, I was on track to be the largest contributor of the month. I'm out.

Comments

There's something I don't understand here. Hundreds and hundreds (thousands and thousands?) of profiles lack sources on WikiTree, or provide links only to Ancestry, etc.  Many of us "sourcerers" spend time researching and adding sources to profiles that need them. There are so many inadequately sourced profiles out there. There are so many that only provide (excuse my language) what I call "green gibberish".  This is the first time I ever heard of a recalcitrant non-sourcerer getting blocked from creating new profiles. Beginners are beginners! There must be a better way.

---

Actually it's millions and millions.

---

Endless.

---

Hi Erlon, I'm sorry to hear that you are frustrated with the Mentor process. Instead of singling out a person in the G2G such as you have today, you could simply ask for another Mentor. And it is difficult for those reading the post to know what all occurred before you reached this level of frustration so they can't accurately help you. They are 'volunteer genealogists' just as our Mentors and Mediators are. You might find that one of them is quite helpful and supportive if you contact them privately.

I'm really happy to hear that you are going back and adding sources and hope you continue your work here on WikiTree.

---

Thank you, Mindy. I did ask for a new mentor. I got the same one I started with and nothing changed.  I think it's good advice for members to speak up here when they have continuing problems. I appreciate WikiTree for its potential and the members who chose not to judge me as simply negative due to this post. Best

---

Erlon, I read and replied to your previous post tonight in good faith . The comments you posted from the mentor’s email were there to help you and were perfectly valid. If you won’t accept any assistance or critiquing of what you are doing, perhaps you do need to step away from WikiTree for a while until you are more open to help.

Answer 1

When I started I created tens of unsourced profiles from a GEDCOM, many of which are still unsourced and have no biographies, for which I have never been disciplined. 

I note that on http://www.gensoftreviews.com/ there are a number of reviews complaining of similar treatment from WikiTree volunteers/staff. While I believe some of these reviews are duplicates or are in bad faith, it is my respectful opinion that WikiTree should try and be more welcoming otherwise it will develop a reputation for nastiness. Also, it should try and make using the site enjoyable rather than making entering information a chore. 

Being "disciplined", having priviliges removed or accounts blocked should only done if the user is a vandal or repeatedly shows a clear lack of understanding, in my opinion. Not if they forget some obscure rule about how to cite sources. 

Comments

Thank you for your comment, Abm.

---

Gedcom uploads have changed a lot in recent years, trying to avoid problems with duplicates, etc.  

Creating many profiles now with no sourcing or 'personal knowledge' with 1800 and before will usually be seen by the 'Rangers' or other people.  I don't know what the 'Rangers' look for, but there are multiple ways that people may come across many new profiles being created with no sourcing.  Rangers are looking for many things that could damage 'the tree'.  Adding profiles based on ancestry tree or family search tree or geni trees, or anywhere, without including the actual sources is not what wiki tree is about.  Everyone is supposed to be making sure that the profiles are accurate and with sources, other than ancestry type trees, which are not sources.

Frequently someone will remind them that sourcing is needed on wiki tree, so depending on the response or maybe just from what they see on profiles, some people may recommend them to the Mentor group.  I know I have come across profiles from the same person when I am working through some of the Data Doctor suggestions for my location.  If I see some with the same PM that are unsourced, I will usually send them a message reminding them that sourcing is needed.  I don't know what other people do.

Answer 2

Erlon, sorry you feel this way. The learning curve at wikitree can be frustrating, but well worth persevering. I had a quick look at a couple of your profiles and to me there is a problem. You have info that lacks sources, although you obviously have viewed them, they are not available for us to see. This is important because wikitree is all about the Universal Tree, where people related to your family might want to find out them, and if they can see where you got that info, what else was in the record, etc., that is good. They might even have more to add, and that would be a bonus.

Comments

A quick look at a couple of profiles; with no actual profiles stated! Feckless.

---

Elmer-6132, Bickford-905, Bickford-906, Houdlette-7. Worthless, useless? I think not. Please do not assume I am having a go at you. Wikitree is so different to other sites but once you get the hang of it the benefits are great.

---

Erlon has been a member since 2013. If mentors have been picking on him since 2013, there is a real problem!

---

Mentors don't 'pick on' people; they help people.  And Erlon has only had the badge for a little over three days.

---

Marion,

I fixed all of the profiles you mention. Thank you for bringing them to my attention. I don't have a problem finding good sources. Please reread my original post.  

I have been a member since 2013. Only recently, after I started adding some large amounts of really great material did this problem begin.

Proverbially speaking, I think some of the mods went running with their tail between their legs. The bureaucracy I've had to deal with is unnecessary.

Synonyms of feckless: Counterproductive, hamstrung, ineffective, ineffectual, inefficacious, inefficient, inexpedient.

Don't just take my word for it, look at my profile and the additions I have made, and ask yourself if I deserved to be banned/blocked from participating.

Best,

Erlon

---

I am still being harassed.

Answer 3

I just checked on some of the profiles that you added at end of April, ie.  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hall-40794  That profile has a lot of information, seems to have information that is needed, but the sources are a problem.  They have a Source #, probably from ancestry, but that is the problem.  There is nothing to say what the Source relates to.  Although I don't use ancestry, the source numbers that I have seen on profiles have the title of where the information came from, ie Birth, Marriage, Death, Census, etc, as well as other information that can be used frequently to find it in family search or some other resource.  It looks like some of your profiles have the related source information that relates to the Source number.   Perhaps part of the problem has been with GedCom imports that you have been doing.  

Comments

Yeah, the basic problem is that those aren't even reference numbers for Ancestry.com, they're internal codes specific to the GEDCOM that it was imported from. There's only one place where "Source: #S1737" means anything to anyone, and that's in the GEDCOM file that it was imported from. I don't know why the GEDCOM importer didn't import those sources (it did get S1751) but it could be that it simply wasn't present in the GEDCOM file. I get the impression a lot of people use GEDCOM files that have been passed around a lot, and they often seem to end up with significant chunks of the source data missing.

---

I think Linda has identified the key issue to resolve, somehow the ancestry sources are getting stripped, leaving a dangling Source numbers from Ancestry e.g., S1737, that others would be unable to track down to the sources to to reproduce the research.

---

Not all s codes are from Ancestry. They each represent a specific record and I doubt that is a good reason to block someone.

---

Yeah, I'm sure they represent a specific record, but the problem is that the specific record isn't listed.

---

Right, sometimes the actual source record is not transferred with the code, but it usually is. It is quite easy to find the code source if it ends up missing. The additions have been from the Georgetown Historical Society of Maine, and these codes are traceable. The s codes shouldn't be a problem that warrants blocking, especially considering the source of the ones I have added. When they are allowed to work as they are supposed to, they are helpful. The truth is, each mentor has a different approach! The mentors should agree amongst themselves first before they try to implement policy.

Answer 4

Erlon, The profiles on my watchlist are not "perfect" and are far from complete, they probably never will be but I have never had a problem with just adding sources to them and have never been called out because of my biography's, and I admit they are not the greatest. I have some that are unsourced and have no biography's and to date no one has given me any trouble about them or told me to not create any new profiles  until I had fixed all of the problems with the other ones. My suggestion list had at last count almost 300 possible errors listed, most created prior to me joining WikiTree so I just don;t understand why you are having a problem. I wish I could be more helpful but with 4832 profiles on my watchlist needing work and the above mentioned possible errors I simply do not have the time to try and figure out your exact problem so that I could try and help. Most of us are volunteers on WikiTree.

Comments

If it helps here is an example of a profile I just worked on in my normal style

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Doherty-340

---

That is a nice profile Dale. Thank you!

---

good work. That era is kind of a pain to find sources for, so good job with that.

---

Thank you for your response, Dale.

Answer 5

Unfortunately, Erlon, making comments like you have stated in this post may be part of the problem.  Name calling and making statements like this are not needed or wanted in wiki tree.  People are not referred to a mentor unless there is a serious problem that someone reported about and / or they will not work with others on collaborating with others with a profile, which is another large part of wiki tree, in addition to 'proper' sourcing.  

Proposing multiple merges for people incorrectly, changing names or relationships without proper sourcing, not accepting merges with someone that seems to be clear duplicates are other reasons that people are reported for mentoring. I am not saying that you have done any of these things, but there are many reasons for being referred to a mentor.  Not sourcing profiles properly is not usually the main reason, unless there is no sourcing or just stating ancestry.com or FindAGrave.com with nothing more, which is really no sourcing

I suspect there is more to the story than one complaint to a mentor and he banned you from doing anything.  That is definitely not how wiki tree or the mentor process works.  You are usually banned, I think, only after repeated complaints or your repeated continuance of what the mentor asked you to change.  When wiki tree feels the 'One Tree' is going to be harmed, then I think they will ban someone, but I doubt that happens very often..

Comments

I'm sure there is much more to the story. But where are the people responsible? Getting passed around just to have nothing accomplished is not my idea of fun. Yes, I'm upset. I did not call anyone a name, I called it as I saw it. Also, note that he tried to close this thread but it was reopened by another team member.

---

Linda is correct. Mentors don't ban people. What they do is call for another mentor to take over if they feel their mentoring is not effective with a particular mentee. Ultimately this can be escalated to a mediation which implies temporarily blocking the mentee. It's not a ban, it's temporary block. And it is not arbitrary. Mediation requests are reviewed by the Mediators.

And no one "tried to close" the thread. It was temporarily hidden while waiting for someone from the Team to remove the name of a member. It's considered bad form to name a specific member in a post like happened here.

---

I am still being harassed.

Answer 6

There seems to be a problem with the family you recently sourced when Marion pointed them out in her answer.

Catherine Bickford seems to have been conflated as Catherine Bickford born 1803 has the father and husband displayed on the profile. Jane Catherine Bickford born 1804 has the birth date and mother displayed in the profile. The sources you have provided also confirm this. This also means that the marriage of Robert Tibbets Bickford and Ann Catherine Houdlette does not exist.

As you now have chosen to take this public, I can tell you that this is the kind of thing you have been called upon recently and the kind of thing mentors help correcting. We need to research our ancestors thoroughly in order to get the facts right.

Comments

I have now fixed 2 or 3 profiles that were created by you that are similar to the above statement.  Same parents given to 2 people with same name, but they were not the same person.  Sources showed different dates in the birth date field, biography and sources area.  Another guy had 2 records associated with him as a spouse.  One was his wife, the other was actually his sister who had the same name as his wife, therefore, they had the same name when married.  When I looked at them further today, there were lots of family search sources on one profile, but if the census records that were attached had been reviewed, it cleared showed that the person that was married to this guy was born in 1811, so I removed him as spouse of he 1799 birth, which was his sister when birth sources (that were attached) were reviewed.  I moved almost all the sources in an orderly fashion over to the other profile which had limited sourcing, so your sourcing has helped another profile, just not the one that you said you sourced.  Your profile now only has the birth source that matches that person, which was in the profile also.    Unfortunately, when there are common 1st and last names, more research is needed to make sure that the sources are being put on the correct record. In this case, the census records had the clue because of the age.

---

I think it is important not to conflate two separate issues here. Thank you for the help with those profiles, As you may also have noticed I have been working on this group as well recently.Amazing how several mods have jumped on board to sort these profiles out now. Very promptly. Honesty is a good policy. If you mistreat me, I will call you out.  How can we expect any effective change unless people speak up about the problems they are having. I won't cowtail when I have my own valuable opinion to offer. Saying I am ignoring you so you can have me blocked is terrible form and also a lie. It seems I have to fight back here, and I did not cause this.

It may be more helpful to post your comments about Bickford and others directly on the profiles in question, That way others can also benefit and perhaps contribute more information.

---

People are looking at your contributions because you Erlon have said there was no reason for anything to be said to you.  I think a few of us have reviewed and found a few of the reasons that something may have been instituted.  When people are concerned about 'damage to our One tree', people will ask for a mentor or someone to help the person understand some of the problems that are seen by others, help them with sourcing properly, help them with merging so merging is not done with the wrong people, etc.  These can all be serious when profiles 'look' the same because incorrect sourcing was added or dates / relationships were changed incorrectly.  Personally, I frequently go to the Changes Log to see what the Original creation information shows.

---

Linda,

I did not say there was no reason for anything to be said. Please stop making things up to suit your apparent agenda. The Bickford profile, created in 2018; however, the specific relations I have myself questioned and has been something I've had in the back of my mind since I first started working on the profile. It's good of you to help clarify this. I appreciate the help more than you know. It still needs more work, though.

Pointing out a couple of bad dates and links in profiles doesn't seem worthy of the treatment I have received; especially when I have helped others on the forum selflessly.

Finally, what does it have to do with the work I've been doing recently?

Instead of making excuses, try to see where I might be coming from and perhaps entertain the idea that I have a valid point.

Best,

Erlon

---

I want my referral badge removed. Not one person has helped me. Furthermore, when I do have a valid point, it is simply ignored. How is that any way to treat someone? I could have been a top contributor, instead, I've been put under the boot of your mods.

---

I am still being harrassed!