Should parents of Thomas Gardner be removed? [closed]

+5 votes
169 views
According to Anderson's Great Migration Thomas Gardner's origins are unknown. Parents have just been added to his profile. I believe they should be removed and PPP added to prevent future problems. Thanks!
WikiTree profile: Thomas Gardner
closed with the note: Resolved
in Genealogy Help by Kay Wilson G2G6 Pilot (184k points)
closed by Darlene Athey-Hill

2 Answers

+5 votes
 
Best answer
The parents were unknown when I worked on Demaris Gardner research a year ago. These parents have been added at the same time Demaris sprouted a new first husband and all of these additions are based on family search pedigrees which don't even appear to be linked. For some reason these additions attachments being made to PPP profiles when this should not be possible.
by T Stanton G2G6 Pilot (194k points)
selected by Carol Baldwin

There's a bug that was introduced with the recent coding change. Namely if you add a parent to an unprotected child, it automatically adds that parents as a spouse to the child's other (PPP) parent. The bug has been reported and I regularly nudge Jamie about its status. 

You can recognize this bug in action if the change log looks like this (emphasis added):

11:00Dennis Hutchins added Samuel Shattuck (1595-abt.1698) as spouse for Damaris (Unknown) Gardner (1597-1674)(Connected spouses while adding father) [Thank Dennis for this | 1 thank-you received]

Did anyone look at Family Search? They have sources for those parents although I could not view them or copy them. Apparently they are Ancestry clues and it just takes you to the subscription page.
Adding the spouse connection can happen because someone puts one parent Wikitree ID at the top and selects Go 'without' scrolling to the bottom of the page and 'unclicking' the other parent, who was not previously connected as a spouse.

The 'parent' being protected is a new issue, but we really need to have 'other spouse' being checked by default, moved up to the area where the 'Go' is, also.  That was reported earlier as something that should be done.
+5 votes
I agree.  Actually, I already detached them before I came across this G2G post . . .  (and I added PPP).
by Darlene Athey-Hill G2G6 Pilot (433k points)
He still has a veryspecific birth date and place; should that be genericized to about [year] in England?
Anyone know if the bug that allowed this to occur has been repaired?
I removed the 'exact' DOB (put it in research notes) and replaced it with estimate based on his 1661 deposition.

Related questions

0 votes
1 answer
+6 votes
1 answer
+4 votes
0 answers
+3 votes
5 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
+9 votes
3 answers
174 views asked Jul 23, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Georgina Healer G2G Crew (440 points)
+5 votes
2 answers

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...