There are 2 Mourning Hogg profiles need to be merged, since 2014

+5 votes
there are 2 profiles for Mourning Hogg that should be merged i noticed it was suggested since 2014 the profiles are Hogg-900 and Hogg-934 i was wondering who can merge them ??
WikiTree profile: Mourning Denton
in Genealogy Help by Janine Isleman G2G6 Mach 1 (14.5k points)
recategorized by Jillaine Smith
Someone came along and set it as an unmerged match, it went into Purgatory until someone (you) noticed it.  I removed the unmerged match and initiated a new merge.  I've said it many times, if people can do nothing with merges other than set them from default approval into an unmerged match the profiles are better to be left alone until someone is ready to merge them.  The 30 day clock is ticking once again...
thank you .. i wasnt sure what to do ..
I hold a different opinion than Vincent on this matter.

Unmerged matches do not go into pergatory; a list of them can be accessed through Find: Pending Merges, then selecting Unmerged Matches. I can find either ALL Unmerged Matches or those that I initiated or that are waiting on me. Just like other merges.

And one can always do as Vincent did-- remove, then re-initiate the merge if it's been sitting around a long time and appears to have no reason to remain an unmerged match. (I also probably disagree with Vincent about reasons for unmerged matches-- if the two profiles have conflicting information and the proposer doesn't help us understand how to resolve those differences, or the narrative and comments aren't otherwise clear, it's completely reasonable to select Unmerged Match...)

I *do* believe that Unmerged Match would be much more useful if we could include reasons for choosing it, just like we do when we propose a merge.

But both of these drums have been beaten repeatedly without resolution of either opinion or tech fix...

Here's a profile in Purgatory.  Check the change log.  :D
This is a perfect example of why the comment should appear on BOTH profiles. When the proposal was marked Unmerged Match, and a comment left, that comment did not go onto one of the profiles. Therefore, the profile manager of that profile NEVER SAW THE COMMENT. And therefore never had an option to address it.

This is not a problem with the use of Unmerged Match as an option; it's a problem with the technical fact that explanations for choosing that option don't show up on both profiles and so cannot be acted upon. Hence: purgatory.
I take that back-- at least for this case (but I think the argument still holds); it was the PM of the "empty" profile who selected UnMerged Match. She's the one who wrote the comment that only appeared on the other profile.

But the problem would still exist if someone selected Unmerged Match who was not PM of either profile.

1 Answer

+2 votes
Best answer
I came across this post, so spent some time this afternoon researching Mourning Hogg.  I entered the information and sources that I located on her profile, as well as that of her husband.

The two profiles are definitely the same person.  I didn't locate anything to have a definite date of birth, so I think they should be merged and a note can be placed in the biography of the varying DOB.
by Darlene Athey-Hill G2G6 Pilot (421k points)
selected by Maggie N.

Related questions

0 votes
0 answers
0 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
96 views asked Mar 18, 2018 in The Tree House by Kay Knight G2G6 Pilot (395k points)
+8 votes
4 answers
181 views asked Nov 28, 2017 in Photos by Margaret Ferguson G2G Crew (400 points)
+8 votes
1 answer
237 views asked Jun 24, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Vic Watt G2G6 Pilot (329k points)
+7 votes
1 answer
220 views asked Mar 28, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Scott Hogue G2G Crew (340 points)
+3 votes
0 answers
99 views asked Oct 25, 2013 in Genealogy Help by anonymous
+4 votes
1 answer
+4 votes
0 answers
210 views asked Aug 17, 2012 in Genealogy Help by anonymous

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright