Why can't I see a pending merge?

Question

I want to follow up a merge, when I look at it via the profile I get this message - Thomas Richards (Richards-1218) and Thomas Richards (Richards-1429) are already connected in a proposed merge.

When I browse 'all pending merges' and limit the list to RIchards' it tells me the list is empty?  Not 'Yay"!

Any ideas what I am doing wrong, or is it a glitch?

 

Comments

Have you looked at the bottom of the profile?

• Richards-1218#matches
• Richards-1429#matches

See also video

---

The merge is initiated on may 17, so it has to be approved by both profile managers before the merge can be completed. And if not done by the managers you have to wait until June 17. I guess you will also have to wait until June 17 before it will show up on the list.

---

I did look at the bottom of the profile, but missed the date the merge was proposed.  Seems ages ago!  I had thought that the pending merges page told you that it was waiting for action 'by x', but I must have been mistaken. I wanted to see if either profile manager had approved yet.

---

You also has an entry in the log Special:NetworkFeed&who=Richards-1218 when a merge was proposed...

---

I now see that you have initiated an unmerged match beween [[Richards-1218]] and [[Richards-7307]]. That match does not show up in the list.

Answer 1

I've found that it can be tricky to get exactly the right combination of selection parameters in Pending Merges. When I can't find a particular merge on that list, I usually discover that one of the parameter settings is different from what I thought I had selected.

When I select "All of WikiTree" and "All pending merges," then llimit the results to surname Richards, I do see that merge: http://www.wikitree.com/index.php?title=Special%3ABrowseMatches&order=dateup&type=pending&canAct=0&requested=0&s=Richards

Comments

Thanks Ellen.  I had thought I had found similar ones before.  The trick seems to be to step down through each of the parameters, rather than just selecting pending merges, going from larger to smaller.  Makes sense, but not that intuitive!