Do you get irritated when recipients of help don't add the information to wikitree?

Question

This isn't a proper question I just feel the need to rant!

I help answer a steady stream of G2G requests, mostly for British records. Some can be dealt with quickly but on others I get interested and end up putting in several hours of work, using my repertoire of tricks, and unearthing data they would never have discovered on their own, or correcting mistakes in their existing profiles. Unfortunately, when I check back some time later, I frequently find that the profiles have not been updated, links not added, missing people not created, and errors remain uncorrected. Where possible I just edit the profiles directly but this is not always possible and I don't want to start creating missing profiles in someone else's tree. How can we nudge people receiving assistance to put it on the tree for everyone?

Comments

"I don't want to start creating missing profiles in someone else's tree.." 

Remember that it is "our tree", not the individual's. If you've got the time and interest, go ahead and create those profiles! (After giving the person adequate time to do it themself.)

---

I sometimes do this, and then orphan the profiles so they may be adopted by people closer to the research/family.

---

That's a good solution. I did it recently on three missing children ... I just checked and the three little 'orphans' are still there.  How hard is it to just click a link and adopt them?

---

they're only adoptable by non-Leaders if they're already orphaned.

(I was talking about creating new profiles, then orphaning them.)

---

Yeah, if they don't, I do. Facts are facts.

---

Backing Jilliane- Sometimes create new profiles and then "orphan" them so others closer have a chance to adopt them. Gives opportunities to others, and helps to keep my watchlist manageable.

---

Yes, I find this frustrating too, so I always let a period of time go by and make the edits myself. As Ben said, facts are facts.

---

Yes, that irritates me enormously, as do all displays of ingratitude:  not saying Thanks, not following up on questions, dismissing solid facts because Aunt May said different, not using the hard-won info, and generally acting like G2G owes you time and effort.  My philosophy is "I'll help anyone once."

---

Could a reasonable middle ground be to add source possibilities under the "Research Notes" heading? I do this when I think a source might apply, but I haven't had time to validate it? Also, this is an area where you can enter the source at the same time--so if it's validated it's easy to copy/paste.

---

If I think it's possible that it's relevant but I'm not sure, that's what I do, put it in a research note.

Answer 1

The Wikitree Integrators try to follow up and encourage the links between G2G answers and the appropriate profile updates. Perhaps that is something you might be interested in.

Comments

Eowyn, Thanks for the best answer star.

Answer 2

Guilty as charged. In my defense I do try and check the sources others suggest but I do not always add them. There are many reasons for this, too many to go into here, but it comes down to trying to be sure the sources are for the person I am working on and how much time I have to work on profiles. I do try and thank people for their help, again I am sure I missed some, but I also strive to be the most accurate I can and sometimes the "help" has proven wrong, shoot try sourcing John Smith sometime.

Comments

Dale you're a huge contributor to the site! Your comment makes me think of another gripe though, those 'helpful' people who dump a huge number of records in every answer where (at most) only one of them is correct. I don't blame you at all for not including those sorts of links but my suggestions are properly sourced and specific.

---

I sympathise with that last gripe Matthew. Some folks seem to think that it is acceptable to just respond with any records of the same name rather than trying to elicit what the questioner actually needs.