Found another instance of 3 day default approval.

+9 votes
261 views

I found another pending merge I proposed that has default approval after 3 days.  See this previous thread:

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/591820/someone-propose-complete-without-either-managers-approval

The information you need is: I proposed this merge while working on a duplicate spouse suggestion.  I proposed a number of those merge proposals that day while working on that suggestion.

I looked at my pending merge list this morning and found this one.

  1. William Cutliff (Cutliff-13) and  William Cutliff (Cutliff-8)    compare
    Proposed by Karen Lorenz.
    No response for Cutliff-13. Default approval. 
    No response for Cutliff-8. Default approval. 
    You can complete this merge after a final comparison
          You might also see the comparison report on WikiTree+.  
          If Cutliff-13 and Cutliff-8 are different people, reject the merge. 
          Arborists and Leaders: If there's been an error, remove the pending merge.  
    Last updated 2018-04-24 18:27:29.

Since I now know that this is a known bug, I did not touch either profiles after finding this issue.

 

in WikiTree Tech by Karen Lorenz G2G6 Mach 6 (67.1k points)

I was reading over the Help:Merging page and I noticed that it said:

When you propose a merge you are giving permission for others to complete it. You are also giving temporary permission for five generations of ancestors of the profile to be merged. 

I wonder if any mergers were approved on this line previously (not sure what timeframe "temporary" means in this case), that would bypass the normal the 30 days process?

That was proposing a merge in the quote from the help pages.  I proposed the merge but the default approval came in after 3 days.  That shouldn't happen.

What I mean, is that if another ancestor was recently merged, would that explain the 3 day merge process?

As an example, Person-1 and Person-100 are merged through the normal process (30 day wait, etc.). Cutliff-8 (Person-1's grandfather) comes up for merge with Cutliff-13 some days later (the one you proposed).

Since this is within 5 generations, does "temporary permission for five generations of ancestors of the profile to be merged" mean that Cutliff-8 and Cutliff-13's merge does not need to wait the full 30 days?

If this is the case, it could explain the shorter default period. It would help to have clarification on the wording on the Help page and what (and how) this "temporary permission" means and is used.

I agree on the clarification on the Help page "temporary permission" wording.
The 1st sentence of the quote is only true if you're a TL member, not a third party.

The 2nd sentence I have never understood.

4 Answers

+4 votes
 
Best answer
The merge message on Cutliff-8 says the merge was proposed by you, Karen, 14 March 2018.

I think that what has happened here is that on April 24 somebody has tried to complete the merge, which would have default approval by then- not sure how the defaulting works works when one of the profiles is green locked. Anyway, because of the green lock it couldn't be completed.

The date of merge proposal resets when somebody starts to complete/try completing the merge - there were discussions about this over a year ago, haven't seen any recently.

All in all, there are a bit too many ifs and buts in the process.
by Eva Ekeblad G2G6 Pilot (391k points)
selected by Karen Lorenz
You are probably correct, Eva.  I was working on a lot of merges that day and maybe tried to complete the merge and couldn't.
+5 votes
Thank you Karen!
by Jamie Nelson G2G6 Pilot (318k points)
+3 votes

I found another merge that was default approved after only 1-1/2 to 2 days. I initiated the merge on 29 Oct. One profile is orphaned, fine.  The other has a PM.  Here is the text. 

 Jane Brock (Brock-4226) and Privacy Level 60 Jane Brock (Brock-1197)   Compare compare
Proposed by Karen Lorenz.
No response for Brock-4226. Default approval. 
No response for Brock-1197. Default approval. 
You can complete this merge after a final comparison
      You might also see the comparison report on WikiTree+Help 
      If Brock-4226 and Brock-1197 are different people, reject the merge. 
      Arborists and Leaders: If there's been an error, remove the pending merge. Help 
Last updated 2018-10-29 13:07:12. Pre-1700

by Karen Lorenz G2G6 Mach 6 (67.1k points)
Thanks, Karen.
+1 vote

Another instance of merge approval before 30 day default.  Here is a merge I proposed last evening that is showing up as approved to be merged.  One manager has approved it, the other is showing as default approval.  I know I did not initiate this one a month ago.  

  1. Privacy Level 60 Benjamin Butterworth (Butterworth-741) and Privacy Level 60 Benjamin Butterworth (Butterworth-118)   Compare compare
    Proposed by Karen Lorenz.
    Approval from Cathi Gross for Butterworth-741 has been recorded. 
    No response for Butterworth-118. Default approval. 
    You can complete this merge after a final comparison
          You might also see the comparison report on WikiTree+Help 
          If Butterworth-741 and Butterworth-118 are different people, reject the merge. 
          Arborists and Leaders: If there's been an error, remove the pending merge. Help 
    Last updated 2019-02-25 01:20:38.
by Karen Lorenz G2G6 Mach 6 (67.1k points)
maybe the system knows the other PM has not been active since early 2017, and knows that he will not respond in the next 30 days.
I don't think that's it.  I've got some still waiting for the 30 days to be up, where the other PM hasn't been active since 2012.
Butterworth-118  has a message from you, Karen, that is the proposed merge, dated Jan 24 at 19:39 GMT.  I checked your contributions and the merge is shown at that time.
Thank you.  It was the first merge when sorted on my "Most recently added " list and the default merges that take 30 days appear on my "Oldest on Top" list.  (Same list, different sorting)  It appeared that it was just initiated yesterday.  It would be nice to see the date that the proposal was made next to the person who proposed the merge's name.
It must show as an update date or something, not the initial date.  I guess we have to check for the messages on both profiles.  I wish that the messages were seen on both profiles, instead of only one of them.

Related questions

+2 votes
3 answers
+5 votes
2 answers
140 views asked Apr 24, 2018 in WikiTree Tech by Susan McNamee G2G6 Mach 4 (44.4k points)
+5 votes
1 answer
135 views asked Sep 16, 2019 in WikiTree Tech by Robin Lee G2G6 Pilot (671k points)
+6 votes
2 answers
163 views asked Jun 26, 2019 in WikiTree Help by S Stevenson G2G6 Pilot (101k points)
+4 votes
1 answer
96 views asked Feb 12, 2017 in Genealogy Help by Kathy Sullivan G2G4 (4.5k points)
+3 votes
2 answers
67 views asked Jul 8, 2017 in The Tree House by Karen Lorenz G2G6 Mach 6 (67.1k points)
+3 votes
2 answers
90 views asked Apr 6, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by Ros Haywood G2G Astronaut (1.1m points)
+5 votes
1 answer
84 views asked Dec 3, 2017 in WikiTree Tech by Ellen Smith G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...