Sorcerers "Challenge"?

Question

I have been participating in the "Sorcerer Challenge" for a few months now. Decided to write about something that has been bothering me.

There is always a list posted giving "rankings". You can find it if you try. I will not post it here.

While I understand this is a good way to get people normally unmotivated to source an "unsourced" profile, it seems some people do not know what sourcing a profile really means. Some seem to think this means you should find the fastest/first source available, save it to the given WT profile, update challenge list, and move on to next as quickly as possible. (To try and be top dog on the Monthly Challenge List, I guess).

They worry more about *quantity* of profiles they can say are "sourced" (note: "sourced" does not mean "completed") as opposed to the *quality* of the given WT profile and "completeness".

I understand having 1 source is better than none/unsourced, but how can you really say you have "SOURCED" a profile when all you did is load FamilySearch for 2 seconds and grab the first link that may or may not prove birth and save it to WT? This takes about ~30 secs per profile. 

This would explain why I see hundreds of profiles done by a select few people every month on the Challenge list. I do NOT call this "sourcing a profile". Rather, you are simply removing the {{Unsourced}} tag and making it an incomplete, single source profile.

I leave the {{Unsourced}} tag on it till it is COMPLETELY done. Then I add what I did to the challenge list. NOTE: You can find your own {{Unsourced}} profiles in your Watchlist area. Without that tag/sticker/category you find nothing. I leave profiles I manage "unsourced" till I can completely finish them.

I have looked at some of these quickly done profiles. As mentioned, they typically add 1 or 2 sources and call it 'completed' and remove 'unsourced' from it. I have found in the past that even these 1 or 2 sources can be wrong because they are not doing it carefully (rushing on to the next one) and/or not looking at the other sources as a whole.

I am not trying to point at anyone in particular. You do it your way. I do it mine. Though, recently a number of my profiles I manage have had 1 source added and the "Unsourced" tag removed. If I hadn't noticed it immediately, I would never have known the profiles still needed work. They are no longer in unsourced watchlist I use.

How do you know a profile needs any follow-up if you remove the unsourced tag from it? If you are so competitive that you need to be in the #1 spot, please have someone check and FINISH your work as you move forward. A given FamilySearch profile can have 20+ sources, but why do I only see 1 saved source to WT on many of these?

New feature request? : Is there an optional tag/sticker we could use like: "{{Followup}}" that would only appear in an area of our personal watchlist? Tracking profiles becomes problematic for me without the unsourced tag.

Thanks for reading this far.
-Brady

Comments

You can create Personal Categories, although a note place in the Help page quite a while ago said there could be change but nothing has been done.   I completely agree with you that one source does not mean that it is sourced because unless you have at least one more, it could be for a different person.  There are so many people with same names, and spouses, in the same area.  Yes, it may have a source, so the source template can come off but you might be better with the personal category which someone would probably not remove, but anything is possible.

You could have one categories for sources, another for needs profiles, etc

---

Brady, I quit doing such challenges years ago, but haven't stopped sourcing, in fact I do more sourcing now, along with bio improvements, than when I did these challenges.  But adding a single source is not an error, sometimes I am looking up the profile of a child whose godparent I am working on, to add the link.  Will often add the baptism to the child's profile as I'm going there anyways.  Many not having unsourced tag at all.

---

Danielle - Never said adding a single source is an "error", (or is a problem  - assuming it's followed up on when it's quite clear there are -many more- sources available from s FS, Ancestry, Google, whatever).

And occasionally a single source amongst many others on FamilySearch (for instance) is just wrong. And even more occasionally this gets put in a WT profile with nothing else because the entire context of person's life was never taken into account because someone is just trying to fill in a (single) blank as quickly as possible.

RE: tags
Yeah, my problem was that I got in the habit of adding a new profile with the "unsourced" tag so as to follow up on it in near future using my personal watchlist/unsourced list to organize them and pull from. Now that that profile creation has changed, it no longer adds the unsourced tag. Now you have to manually add a given tag. Which means it's now just as easy to add it to a personal category as referenced in answer I picked. This also avoids someone cherry picking a profile I manage and removing the tag since 'they "sourced" it' (with 1 source).

As far the challenge, yeah I get it.
IMO, I still think quality would be a better competition than quantity, though.

---

that's why there is a Profile Improvement project which might be of interest to you.  I believe they sometimes run challenges, although not sure.  Possibly the GEDI challenge is theirs.

---

Thanks Danielle. Heard of it.. yep, maybe a better fit for me.

---

Hi Brad,

I used to get irked by this, and when i suggested to a "Prolific" Profile Maker i got reported and had a Mentor appointed as i had an "Atitude" - it is apparently acceptable, though frowned upon.Name Source projects often do this.

---

That’s what I do. I prefer solitary challenges and I would rather follow the rabbit holes.  There are always people who do things halfway. Can’t change them.

---

If you want to check what sources are used in your watchlist profiles, you can use Biocheck.  

• How to find profiles - Check watchlist
• Profiles to report - Sources report
• Report Style details - uncheck
• Report all profiles

Select Check Profiles.

Results will show sources that the app recognizes.

You can search for -1 to find the profiles that do not seem to have sources.

Count column will count sources found.

---

Thanks, Linda. I knew about the Biocheck, but not the "Sources report". This is very helpful to know about. (I also save as csv and open w/ excel to sort/search/etc..) Thanks again for the replies.

---

You can sort columns, but once you save your results you can do lots from that file. Glad I could help. Kay has lots of stuff in there.

Answer 1

Brady do you know about Personal Categories? It could be a way to help you track those profiles on your watchlist that need more sources that wouldn't be subject to someone else removing an Unsourced template and preventing you from using your Unsourced watchlist. 

For an example I am doing the 15 Nations Global Tour and have made a personal category called Kellett-33 Profiles to write 15 world tour Argentina. This helps me keep track of the profiles I have created that have sources but no Biography and possible future connections needed. If I didn't do that then the profiles would get lost in my main watchlist and I may not get back to them for a year or two.

There are also a lot of Needs categories where people add the various missing items such as needs death record, needs birth source etc. Have a look at the options in Category:Maintenance Categories which can be broken down further to countries and states and so forth if needed. 

Comments

Uh.. I know about creating categories.

Didn't know they could be personal. :-)

Just skimmed the help page. -> Yes, this will help me keep track of things better. Thanks, Darren. (And all who replied.)

---

Don’t feel bad, Brady. I’ve lived her for more than 3 years and just found out about them last month! And my, do they help!

---

@Carole B.
   yep. Thanks for the encouragement.
Yes, I discover new things all the time. Especially with regards to the API / 'apps'. I am starting to finally get the hang of categories, though. (finally)
 

Answer 2

Once even ONE source is placed on the profile, it is no longer 'Unsourced'.  True, it may need birth records, censuses etc - but the literal definition of the word 'Unsourced' means 'no sources at all'.

You can add categories like Needs_Profiles_Created, or Needs_Birth_Records - but the {{Unsourced}} template should come off.

Comments

Yes, if I find only a couple sources I add the tags Location_needs_profiles_created, locations_needs_more_sources, etc.

Answer 3

We celebrate Sourcerers Challenge and Saturday Sourcing Sprints participants because WikiTree and unsourced profiles are better for every bit that they do.

The other answers you have received have covered most of the things that I would have said. I'll just add a link to the help page that explains when the Unsourced template can be used (see the fifth section):

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

Comments

Thank you, Debi!

---

Thanks so much Debi!

Answer 4

 

I totally agree with your reasoning.  But ONE source is placed on the profile, it is no longer 'Unsourced’.

I have been sourcing UNSOURCED for the last 16 + months and have been adding per Profile.

1. Biography

2. As many sources as I can possibly find.

3. Update (suggest) all Find a Grave® information.

4. Adding cemetery categories.

4. Search for a photo to add to the profile.

5. Search for people on the Profile for duplicates Profiles

6. Requesting mergers and complete mergers.

 This process averages 100+ Unsourced to source a month.

 I also need time during the month to work on my own family tree.

Comments

That's great Gary. When you are ready to look beyond just those profiles that already have the {{Unsourced}} tag and if you like to work on families, you might find the GEDI challenge interesting https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1531981/gedi-challenge-february-2023

Answer 5

Hi
While we seem to have members who aim just for as many "points" as possible, I'm sure many members try to make profiles perfect, once they are working on them.

If I'm sourcing an unsourced profile, I always try to find sources for all stated facts. If I can't for some reason, I add the most accurate maintenance category (such as for a country or if available, even for a region). See here: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Maintenance_Categories

Answer 6

I started doing Sourcerers' Challenges last year. The instructions say that if you add a source, take off the Unsourced tag. So if I only add 1 source, I take off the tag and feel like I actually accomplished something.
 

I'm struggling with completing profiles, especially since most of my family didn't come to the US until late-19th century or early 20th.

Even though I've been on WT for years, I've only just completing my PIP Voyage a year or two ago. I'm still learning when it comes to extensive research, and I want to make sure I'm doing my citations correctly.

I don't want to mess up others' research and documentation, so I'm trying to use challenges as a way to to learn more about research and sourcing. Are there resources/challenges/opportunities that could help me expand my knowledge. WikiDay helped, but that's only once per year.

Answer 7

If I find even one primary source (in other words, not Wikipedia or a family tree on some other site), I remove the {{Unsourced}} template, but if I haven't found at least three primary sources, I add [[Category:Location, Needs More Records]] in its place.

I explain my reason for doing so in the surname reports I do each month, like this:

The percentage of all Crozier profiles on WikiTree which are partially sourced barely show as a thin light orange line in the chart. For the tallied profiles, I depend on the counts in my spreadsheet, where I assign sourcing levels as I check the profiles. For WikiTree as a whole, I depend on WikiTree to get a count of profiles with the {{Unsourced}} template, and WikiTree+ (thank you, Aleš!) to get a count of profiles with the appropriate [[Category:Location,_Needs_More_Records]] category applied. But because both templates and categories are applied manually, there are a ton of profiles to which they should be applied, but haven't been yet. So that's why the tallied profiles show as nearly 40% "fully sourced", while all profiles show as over 95% "fully sourced". (This is one big reason why I keep saying that such-and-such a percentage of profiles on WikiTree is "supposedly" sourced.) As the appropriate [[Category:Location,_Needs_More_Records]] categories and the {{Unsourced}} template get applied to more Crozier profiles where they're needed, both lines should get more visible. That might seem like going backwards, but it would actually be progress, because the numbers would more accurately reflect the state of Crozier profiles. (Of course, sourcing those profiles which are unsourced or partially sourced, but aren't marked that way, would be better still, but even if you can't find any sources, marking the profiles appropriately would alert Sourcerers to profiles where their efforts are needed.)

Comments

Actually, because I sort profiles by edit date and then go through the Open ones starting with the ones that haven't been edited in the longest time, I'm not usually removing the {{Unsourced}} template, because it usually hasn't been added. (Nor, for that matter, have == Biography ==, == Sources ==, or <references />.) So I add {{Unsourced}} more frequently than I remove it.

---

I also remove the Unsourced tag if I can add at least one source, but some sources are still missing (several reasons might apply, such as they are not yet available online, they need more hints to be found online, or they are privacy protected). I also add the most fitting "Needs" categories. I see this as improvement, because then someone with local knowledge might be able to help, but would not find the profile with only the Unsourced tag. Also, we are able to find those profiles later, when more records are available online.