A policy to become an Inactive Manager

+8 votes
The inactive PM discussion got me thinking, Is there a policy on how to become an Inactive Manager?  Here what I mean: I have about 5000 profiles, and will probably add another 4000 before I am done.  So at some point I would like to just make the info available to my descendants "forever", keeping my name as the profile manager.

Hopefully at that point all the profiles should be Genealogically complete, leaving only the Bio that could use improvements made.

All my profiles that can be open are open, the rest have minimal privacy that I can safely use.   Hopefully as the clock ticks on these profiles will become open also.  (I am thinking 100-200 years into the future ) Like I said hopefully wiki is here forever.  I will be leaving my e-mail address and password available to my descendants, so if any of them want to pick up the torch they can.  The only thing that an active profile manager for is to approve mergers, and change LNB.  First one occurs in 30 days for a non responsive PM, and LNB (Unknowns) can be changed my merging, again an active PM is not needed.
asked in The Tree House by D Z G2G6 Mach 1 (15.2k points)
retagged by Maggie N.

>>All my profiles that can be open are open,

Isnt that enough?!?!

I found a section Digital Afterlife that I copied to my profile

It may seem morbid, but in the event of my untimely demise I want to be sure that none of my hard work on WikiTree ends up being deleted. In the event of my sudden death I hereby give permission for all of my private profiles to be transferred to any of the following slightly-active WikiTreers in my family, whether or not they are currently on the trusted lists:

Would be better if we had a template for this so we could find profile wuth this one easier
|Michel Laji

Thank you for sharing. I believe this should be a new requirement.
And if there are no active genealogists in the family, much less even slightly active on WikiTree?
@Rosemary then you have to hope WikiTree will be alive and someone care...

If you have children I guess publish everything in a book is the best...
No children (unless you count felines). My niece may very well be interested but not at this stage in her life. We are the nerds and very similar in our talents.
So basically what you are saying is: I want to be the sort of unresponsive profile manager that upsets everybody because they can't do what they want to do because you have become a 'guardian from the grave'.  Because they certainly won't be able to send you a PM! *scratches head in puzzlement*
Some WikiTreers have it noted on their profiles of other WikiTreers who have agreed to assume management of their private profiles if anything were to happen to them.

Absolutely.  (I have this notice on my own profile.)  But what he is saying is that as well as that, he wants to have his name up there as profile manager.

"I have about 5000 profiles, and will probably add another 4000 before I am done."

The guidance is to not have more than 5000 profiles on your watchlist:


3 Answers

+10 votes
Best answer
Doug has a valid point. We volunteer genealogists do care about the work we do and the legacy we leave behind for all who follow. A permanent,  non-removable acknowledgement section memorializing all managers of a profile could be added, probably easily,  and would make a lot of volunteers happy.
answered by Edie Kohutek G2G6 Mach 5 (52.1k points)
selected by D Z
Excellent idea - a 'permanent, non-removable acknowledgment section'.  Better than keeping your own name as the profile manager, which would be problematic at best.
+5 votes
If one truly treasures one's work, then one should take the necessary steps to protect it.

Just recently a good friend of mine passed away. I tired for years to get her to write a will. She always told me, "I'm not finished living, I have to much to do." She was 87 years old, ran multiple businesses, art galleries and loved to paint. She passed just after the first of the year, since that time, I have spent numerous hours with judges and lawyers trying to settle her $27 million dollar estate, because she had to much to do to take care of her own business.
answered by Loretta Corbin G2G6 Mach 5 (59.7k points)
edited by Loretta Corbin
Finally got my 87 year old husband to get his affairs in order. It took a major health scare to do it.
+6 votes
If someone is no longer around to manage the profile why shouldn't some other interested person be able to adopt it and actively manage it? Profile managers aren't just there to block merges and LNAB changes. They are also supposed to answer questions and lead collaboration. Like you said, the biography could still be improved, so shouldn't someone be watching the changes made?
answered by Jamie Nelson G2G6 Pilot (195k points)
It is a privacy issue. There is a statement about it on WikiTree Help, just couldn't remember where exactly.
He was talking about open profiles too.
'Unresponsive Profile Manager' process.
Maybe I just misunderstood the original post? Isn't he saying he wants there to be some way to remain the manager forever, even after he becomes unresponsive?
I think he does - which I think is rather selfish, actually.  He is basically saying 'I want to be a roadblock forever', when it would be much better to allow others to adopt the profiles, whether they are his blood descendants or not.  Then there would be no obstacles like the one he would create if he remained the Profile Manager, but was unable to be contacted because he was dead!  Otherwise, he is going to get the 'Unresponsive Profile Manager' slammed on him by some frustrated WT member.
No I do not want to be a roadblock, and I am not currently a roadblock. You are missing the point go back and carefully read what I said.

Its like I spent a lifetime researching and writing a book, now you come along and want to erase my name from the book and add yours.

All the profiles are open, so everyone can add info, and sources, and Bio info.  Merges will need to happen because of duplicates being mistakenly being added, through out time, Remember I am talking about the next 500 to 1000 years.  think ahead.
Your your name will always be attached to your contributions in the change history and the new manager could put your name in the acknowledgements section.

I did read carefully what you said.  You said you wanted the information to be available to your descendants 'forever', which is wonderful, but that you also wanted your name to show as the profile manager.  If you had written a book, of course I would not want to erase your name from it.

But I am sure you are aware that, because of the way WikiTree works (i.e. NOT like a book), that having a deceased person as a profile manager would block someone else from, say, putting in the correct LNAB which you had not been able to find during your lifetime.  And because you would not be 'active', you could not keep an eye on potential bad merges and head them off before they happened.  You would be unresponsive in the largest sense of the word!  The whole point of a profile manager is to keep an eye on the profile.  How could you do that from six feet under?

But as Nan points out, we aren't supposed to Watch more than 5,000 profiles, and since we have about 15 million, and counting, we'd need 3,000+ active users Watching the full 5,000 each, with no overlaps.

In reality, we already have millions of profiles which are only Watched by an Inactive user, who might be dead for all we know.  This is the system we live with daily, and nobody wants to change it.
For close family members, appoint a placeholder PM, and ADD them as a PM. This would leave your name as PM, as well as a living person to take care of the day-to-day doings of the profile.
Perhaps someone should write this up as a policy that all PMs be required to designate how their profiles should be handled if they become inactive?  

We would need to define what inactive means.  

We should give choices of what would happen to their work...

In answer to a question above, for a profile to be open (Black and White open lock) Please read this WikiTree Policy. Any profile of a deceased person without any sensitive information in it or real privacy concerns should be Open. Profiles of people over 200 years old must be Open. Open is not an option for living people.


I'm not making the equation here.

We have many PMs who've done no work on their profiles.  And we have many people who've done a lot of work on profiles they don't manage, which they have no say over now, let alone when they're dead.

It's not good for a wiki to be so obsessed with personal territory.
Remember It was just asking a question,  trying to get some thoughts on the subject,  If you follow wiki policy of the 5000, most profiles on wiki would not have a PM, they would be open for adoption.  Which works, many times I came across profiles that needed work, and merging, I adopt, fix, and then re-abandon them.
I was replying to Laura's point about PMs saying what should happen to their work.

Related questions

+4 votes
0 answers
+77 votes
3 answers
+10 votes
5 answers
+9 votes
4 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright