Would someone please open this profile?

Question

This profile is Project Protected without a Project:

(https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Haile-23)

There is nothing about this person that suggests a need for a "protected" status.  Additionally, it is an 'Ancestry-only' profile.  There are other references available for this ancestor of (guessing) 1.5 million people.

Thank you to the people with WikiTree-powers that-be.

Answer 1

It was PPP'd many years ago before project involvement. But it looks like it was protected to protect the last name at birth. There have been in the past several duplicates with spelling variations. This suggests continued need for protection.

This profile could fall under the scope of the US Southern Colonies project which includes Maryland and Virginia prior to 1776. I will add that project.

Is there something that needs to be done that PPP is preventing?

Comments

By the way, the profile was already "open." PPP does not "close" a profile; it prevents changes to last name at birth and changes to relationships. All other data is editable.

---

Looks like Southern Colonies is now one of the Profile Managers, so it's up to S.C. to determine if the PPP should be removed.

---

I just did. :-)

-- co-leader, US So. Colonies project

---

Very nicely cleaned-up of Ancestry leading-nowhere-sources. Was 921 PPP Without Project Account and without ProjectBox repaired?  I only see the {{ }}, not the [[  ]].  Thank you, Jillaine!

The following were not his children, per the Will transcription:

* [[Hale-844|John Hale]]{{citation needed}}
* [[Hale-843|John Hale]]{{citation needed}}

* [[Hale-846|Shadrack Hale]]{{citation needed}}
* [[Hale-845|Meshack Hale]]{{citation needed}}
* [[Haile-72|Abednego Haile]]{{citation needed}}
* [[Haile-73|John Haile]]{{citation needed}}

This one profile has 2 of Nicholas rolled into: 1.  Nicholas and Frances (the contents of this profile) and 2. Nicholas and Ann, who married second to Ruth, having a daughter, Elizabeth, in 1746.

Nicholas and Frances were the parents of Haile-23.  So why is the Will for Nicholas and Frances (and the children) on the profile for Haile-23?  If the Will and all other references for Nicholas (born about 1680) and Frances were moved to Hale-3287 (including the children proven by the Will), then some semblance of making-sense would emerge.

---

It was locked to editing, hence the reason for posting to G2G.  Perhaps the error of "921 PPP Without Project Account and without ProjectBox" caused the uneditable, which doesn't matter now, as edit is available.

---

No, the error message doesn't lock the profile.

The only thing you can't change when a profile is PPP'ed is LNAB, and any relationships (parents, spouse, children).

All other fields are editable.

I did not update the error status. I'll leave that to you. :-)

---

:-) I updated the error status, citing you :-)

So I take that as a yes, go ahead and put the Will on the profile on which it belongs: From Haile-23, to Hale-3287?

---

>>"Is there something that needs to be done that PPP is preventing?"<<

Yes.  Please unprotect this profile: Haile-23 born 1702

Children cannot be put under the correct father:

example:  Where is John Haile born 1743 of Nichs. Hale and Ann

* "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYGF-6F2M), John Haile, 1743.

Duplicated profiles cannot be merged.  Duplicated, in my opinion, because of this 'freeze' called PPP.

(https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Special:Honor_Code) 1, 2, 8, and 9.

Please unfreeze this profile: Haile-23 born 1702

---

B. Britain,

John Haile-73 is already attached as a son of Nicholas Haile-23 and Ann Long.

What duplicates need merging that can't be?

---

Ah, I see that the mother is not attached to John. Fixing. Was there more?

---

Ah... I now see another problem. When I attached Ann as John's mother, I got a warning message that she would have been 55 years of age-- rather old to be a mother.

So either something is wrong with John's birth record about the identity of his mother, or Nicholas had a second, younger wife by the same name, Ann.  Or Ann Long-351's birth date is inaccurate.

That is probably why Ann was detached as other of John.

---

I had attached John as son.  I've located some duplicates and proposed merges.  There seems to be some confusion as to who fathered whom.  I am climbing out of the rabbit hole for now . . .

---

B. Britain - the link you provided to the Maryland birth of John is broken...

---

I'll check the link for John, but I think I updated it already (on the profile).  Thank you, Darlene.

Jillaine,

Thank you so much!  Haile-23 has the correct children, although most of those child profiles are a mess.  At least the verified children are on Haile-23. From my experience these past few hours, I agree this profile should be a PPP.  Any other changes can still be done even with the PPP Status.

With Appreciation, B.

---

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYGF-6F2M

---

And here are search results for children of Nicholas :

https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?q.surname=Haile&q.fatherGivenName=Nicholas&f.collectionId=1674912&count=20&offset=0&m.defaultFacets=on&m.queryRequireDefault=on&m.facetNestCollectionInCategory=on

---

Yes. Thank you.  I find it easier to do the search by Nicholas and Ann, then Nicholas and Frances.  The children for Nicholas and Ann are complete. Need to PPP Haile-23, in case of another gedcom import. The children are still in process, but not this parent's relationship to them.

---

PPP put back on.

---

Please add a PPP to Hale-3287 to prevent gedcom import of children.  All children accounted for.

---

B.Britain, not sure Hale-3287 meets the criteria for PPP. It needs to meet the criteria outlined here:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Project_Protecting_and_Merging