I created a profile for my aunt who passed away a year ago. I've been the profile manager the entire time.

+9 votes
172 views

I was just notified that someone had adopted her profile. How can this happen? I never "orphaned" the profile or removed myself as profile manager. See [[Miller-33382|Corrine Miller Rodgers]]. She passed away just aabout a year and a half ago, so shouldn't the profile have remained locked with me as the profile manager? I pasted a copy of the change log below.

20 Aug 2017

23:02: Clayton Martinez adopted the profile of Corrine (Miller) Rodgers[Thank Clayton for this]

31 Jul 2016

00:53: You edited the Status Indicators for Corrine (Miller) Rodgers(Add certain checks to dates and places)

6 Feb 2016

23:48: You edited the Marriage Data for Corrine (Miller) Rodgers.

3 Feb 2016

14:52: You edited the Biography for Corrine (Miller) Rodgers(Added bullets in reference list, updated references)21:31: You edited the Primary Photo for Corrine (Miller) Rodgers.

2 Feb 2016

01:13: You created Corrine (Miller) Rodgers.

 

 

WikiTree profile: Corrine Rodgers
in WikiTree Tech by Julie Mangano G2G6 (6.9k points)
I'm not sure how I came to be the profile manger. I adopted the profiles of members of my own family & certain surnames in my family, like Miller, McCall, Anderson, Whitley. I searched the surname & chose a certain amount to adopt. I didn't adopt every profile with a certain surname. But I will add you to the trusted list.
Clayton, just so you know I have and had no problem with you being her profile manager. It was just such a surprise to find that someone so close to me, managed by me, was adopted by someone else. My note to G2G was because I wanted to know how the file became adoptable in the first place. You and I have already resolved this, and you have been brilliant to work with and did nothing wrong. I am more than willing to take the blame for removing myself as the program manager, I just don't know how that happened.

1 Answer

+4 votes
Clayton Martinez has been adopting hundreds of profiles today. I think he must be doing them in bulk - because I am sure that one cannot adopt 40 profiles in the space of one minute. I checked his contributions for 20 August 2017. Names such as McCall. Miller, Anderson and Whittle - just on that one day alone.

There is a comment on his profile from Debi Hoag (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/McGee-1611)  that says that He is cleaning up her GEDCOM up-load - which makes sense if it was a large GEDCOM.

I can only suggest that you send a message to Clayton and ask him why he and how he took over a profile that was NOT open and available for adoption.

But I think the BULK adoptions may have had something to do with it.
by Robynne Lozier G2G6 Pilot (835k points)
Don't be too rude, the signs are that the profile was up for adoption.

The log says "added as manager" when there's a manager already, and "adopted" when there isn't one.

Evidently Julie was removed at some point - question is, when, why, how, and why isn't there a log entry for that.  4 questions.  And who by.
Please note: I am not saying that Julie removed herself. But if you remove yourself as manager or from trusted list, there is nothing in the change log. There probably should be.

Although I consider Anne the ultimate authority (and my go-to person) for all questions of either genealogy or style, in this case I have a criticism of her last sentence.  I would have said "There ABSOLUTELY should be", despite knowing full well that WikiTree only tracks additions, not removals.

I'm not going to argue with Gaile's comment
To correct what I said, I think it sometimes says "added as manager" when there isn't one.  But I don't think it says adopted when there is.
I have just found someone who was "Added as a manager" to one of my open profiles. I am still listed as Profile manager and this person, whomever she is, is NOT on the trusted list.

I have sent off a PM asking her how she is related to my ancestor, because there has been no new relatives added to his tree.

I know we are supposed to be collaborative, and I dont mind finding new relatives, but the thought of an unknown manager being added to my ancestor makes me nervous and wary!!
There are many strange-nesses about how people become managers and the lack of tracking of manager removals only adds to the confusion.

Theoretically, if a profile is not orphaned then ONLY a current manager can add someone to the trusted list and/or make someone a manager.  An exception to this is that leaders have the capability to add themselves as manager of any profile they wish, although most don't ever do this unless the current manager asks them to.  I have no idea if there are other ways that people can get added as manager without either knowledge or consent of a current manager, but the existence of other "back doors" in the system would not surprise me.
it's OK Gaile, I have discovered what she was doing. She was helping me to get my ONS set up and she said she would add herself as manager and then remove herself as soon as the ONS was set up correctly. She must have forgotten.

I'm OK now that I know what she did and why!!  I went looking through her contributions for the date specified.And yes she is a Leader!!
These are exactly the questions I had. I didn't know that something like removing oneself as profile manager wasn't tracked, so thanks to those who mentioned that. I'm just confused because I didn't know how it happened. Clayton and I have resolved this, and he's been nothing but kind and professional about the whole thing.
Actually she replied to my message saying that she did remove herself - but since removals are not tracked, the last activity she did stays on the profile. So I have just added a quick note to the profile and added the following phrase to the Changes box - "Name" removed herself after setting up the ONS.
I have also had leaders add themselves as a manager when my profile person (relation) is part of "protected" from that time forward; for instance the relative might be from prior to 1700's and be part of the "Mayflower" project too. If there is conflicting information on wives or such and it should not be "tinkered with" without utmost care and changed back and forth. (I had this happen to a relative of mine that was a "governor" and his wives were listed more than one way when profiles were merged. He was prior to 1700's. Also the "surname" issue involved patron names for children and wife. (By the way I was glad for the extra concern and "control" set in place to keep changes kept an eye on by someone besides me-I am just a novice).

Related questions

+6 votes
2 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...