The problem I am having as an FTDNA project administrator is that my confirmed branches in WikiTree cannot be given the "DNA confirmed" indicator because the source citation syntax that goes with it seems to require YSearch IDs, and at least one of the two critical DNA participants does not have their data on YSearch.
YSearch is just a public database, it is not in itself a study. It simply allows public validation of a relationship between a count of like markers. And results don't flow into it automatically. The participant must authorize their results to be copied out of the FTDNA project into the YSearch database. Project administrators cannot authorize that on their behalf. (Nor should they.)
So I feel like "DNA confirmed" is a misnomer. It is roadblocked by YSearch IDs, not by confirmed results. So:
1) Should the "DNA confirmed" indicator really be named something like: "DNA can be validated on YSearch" ? It would make more sense given the current rules, though it's a bit wordy.
2) Should the rules be changed so that YSearch isn't required by the citation, providing that a valid project has confirmed the connection via one of the major studies such as FTDNA? In such a case, the indicator becomes valid as-is, and the citation would use - let's say - FTDNA kit numbers instead of YSearch IDs. (The problem with this is obviously that the project administrators would have to be trusted, since the public cannot validate the citation.)