db errors on non-open profiles - more support needed for monitoring

+16 votes
When trying to fix errors not on one's "own" subtree but more globally, i.e. by error code or by location the significant amount of non-open profiles are a problem.

Posting a comment on such profiles, stating the error(s) and asking for correction currently is the only available option if one wants to do at least something.

It would be nice if we could record that a comment was posted, in the same way as currently supported for reporting false errors. That way we avoid processing such profiles again next time. Also a better view of the progress in the project is available then..

Of course the best solution for non-open profiles would be to automatically post a comment. But that would require bot-like functionality.
in WikiTree Tech by Living Terink G2G6 Pilot (276k points)
retagged by Maggie N.

No include file (header) yet, concentrating on the error first. Better like this?

I would put also text of the error in the page title. Maybe like this

Error 101 Birth in future (Database Errors Project)

In Checks performed section also mention private profiles with date written like 2020s

I added to Space:DBE_101 as a test


  • has a sample banner
  • a category DB_Toolbox ==> gather all stuff we create at one place


  • has just a footer with project related links.....

My experience is its good to have them even if they are empty....
Feel free to do what you want with them...


In Checks performed section also mention private profiles with date written like 2020s

I don't know what check this is, so I can't create text. Please explain, and I will add text.


Ok, thanks for supplying Header & Footer
It is for Error 101. Private profiles have birth and death date written as 1950s to indicate a decade. So 2017-01-01 is written as 2010s and I don't mark this as an error. But 2020s I can say for sure, that date is in the future.

If this setup is OK with you I can go on and do all error codes like that.

Note that I now name the pages: Data Error nnn: error text

I think to the user it is irrelevant that the data is stored in a database and also that the error was reported as part of a project. The bottom line is that there is invalid data, and that's what the pagename now says.


The page looks ok to me. As you will make them, I will review them and add links to them also on error reports.

A question about dates: do you get the qualifiers (before this date, after this date) in the database dump. If so are they in any way used in the error checking?
I do have this qualifiers, but they are not used in error checking for now. When someone will complain, i will probably add them. Also if month or day are missing, I consider them as 1.1. I will correct this in the future.

If you need any explanation for help pages, write to my email, as I will see that sooner and you will get faster response.

1 Answer

+3 votes

Communication in this thread now focuses on the new and nice db_errors template. Therefore I am afraid the most important part of my question gets no attention:

It would be nice if we could record that a comment was posted, in the same way as currently supported for reporting false errors. That way we avoid processing such profiles again next time. Also a better view of the progress in the project is available then..

by Living Terink G2G6 Pilot (276k points)

I lost track on too many G2G threads.

Here is my discussion I had with Carol over PM. It might be of interest here.

>> Hi Aleš,
>> You are doing such brilliant work here on wikitree, and inspiring a lot of us to help you with it.
>> I'm currently working my way through the duplicates that you have identified under error code 106, for the years 1900-1999. Have raised 67 merges so far, and covered just a small fraction of the errors, so it's going to be slow going. 
>> This is just a suggestion that could go on your 'to do' list and that would help us with the corrections. When you run another DB dump and produce another error list, could the duplicates that have a 'pending merge' be excluded from the list. As I do each merge, I check for duplicates in parents, siblings and spouses etc, so they are all raised at the same time. I'm pretty certain that a lot of these merges are not going to be approved by their profile managers, so they will have to wait for the default approval before they can be actioned, and they will continue to be shown on the error report. It would be far easier to work from the report if it only contained duplicates that needed merges raised. 
>> Don't worry if this is not possible, but thought I'd write and suggest it, kind regards, Carol
>> This message is from Carol Keeling: http://www.WikiTree.com/wiki/Winton-239


> On 16/05/2016 17:00, Aleš Trtnik wrote:
> Pending merges are not part of database dump, so I cannot remove those merges. Downloading page for each user would be very slow so that cannot be a solution. I could add link to hide specific error for xx days (similar to false positive). How many days does default approval takes?

> 2016-05-16 21:24 GMT+02:00 Carol 

> Thanks for the reply, Aleš, that's a pity that you don't have access to pending merges, I thought it was a good idea anyway, and worth asking.

> Profile merges (I think) take a calendar month, so one raised today should get default approval on 16th June. Don't worry about putting the hide link in, I'm assuming that the next error list for 106 will come out in the same order, so I just need to start on the next profile that needs looking at. I'm keeping a spreadsheet of all the merges that I've raised and all the trusted list requests so I can keep track of where I am. 

> Kind regards, Carol

So I could hide the error for a month, to give user some time to repair it (holidays,...) and after that time it would reappear so different actions could be taken.


Yes, being able to hide the error for a month would be of help, so please implement this function!

How many days is timeout period for merge?



I replied from the context of "non-open" profiels, not that of pending merges. Carol answered Don't worry about putting the hide link in so I guess she does not really want it.

Anyway, the help text on merging says:

If a Pending Merge is ignored for over 30 days it will be cleared for any Wiki Genealogist (any signer of the Honor Code) to complete, reject, match, or remove it as they deem appropriate. 

So I would say hiding for 1 month should do, both for "non-open" profiles and "pending merges".

I support the "hiding link" for 30+1 days.
The idea of putting a hide link in sounded like an awful lot of work just for me, which is why I said not to worry about it. I would certainly use it if it were implemented. I assume that once I'd initiated the merge, then I'd click on a 'hide' symbol for the error, and it would disappear from the list, then magically reappear after about 30 days if I hadn't actioned the merge by then. And it would also be possible to monitor how quickly my error list was reducing, which is another bonus that I hadn't considered.

And overnight it's now all been implemented, that was so quick!, thank you, will start to use it immediately

Related questions

+6 votes
2 answers
+7 votes
2 answers
+9 votes
3 answers
204 views asked Jan 27, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by Julie Ricketts G2G6 Pilot (430k points)
+5 votes
2 answers
+13 votes
1 answer
175 views asked Jun 10, 2016 in WikiTree Tech by Dawn Ellis G2G6 Mach 8 (89.1k points)
+9 votes
2 answers
+7 votes
6 answers
+2 votes
0 answers
95 views asked May 5, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by LJ Russell G2G6 Pilot (195k points)
+9 votes
2 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright