Should this be the official rule for adopting Pre-1500 profiles?

Question

I spend a lot of time doing (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Unresponsive_Profile_Managers) Unresponsive Profile Manager requests to free up Pre-1500 profiles so that coordination is simple for those of us with (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Pre-1500_Profiles) Pre-1500 certification.   But, as it happens, someone with no certification adopts an entire lineage and I never know if they have sources and want to help, or they just adopted the profiles just because of a name, place or potential ancestor.   I then spend my day explaining the Pre-1500 process and the importance of the role of a (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Profile_Manager#What_is_a_profile_manager.3F) profile manager.   For older profiles, the manager is a leader for the genealogical collaboration.   Usually, I find out that they had no intention of improving the profiles or leading the collaboration, they just "adopted" them because of "some reason".

I would like to suggest that a person without a Pre-1500 badge cannot adopt Pre-1500 profiles.

Comments

I understand the reasoning given in the previous post, I have no problem with people being on the trusted list.   It is having the person as the Profile Manager when a LNAB needs changing and they do not respond, or there is some other major data/relationship change needed and they do not respond.   I understand we can use the Unresponsive Profile Manager Process, it just seems like it would be easier if a person without a badge could not "adopt" the profile.

---

I concur. It's also VERY weird that someone who adopts a profile and becomes a profile manager can't edit that profile.  So why do we allow them to adopt a profile they cannot edit?

---

Was'nt there a discussion to get the 20k or so pre 1500 profiles into projects exactly to solve this?

---

When I first joined, before I knew about rules about pre 1500 profile I adopted a few.  Anyone want to apopt them from me?

---

I joined wikitree before the pre 1500 came in, I wanted to go back as far as possible and as quick as possible I did have sources but left that for later, then the pre 1500 came in and some of my pre 1500 ancestors were stranded without sources. So that is why I am a manager of  some pre 1500 profiles without the pre 1500 certification  I have since added some of the sources in the comments because this is the only place I can put them, but if I discover a mistake, I cannot change it. All the pre 1500 profiles I have my name on are my own ancestors, just recently I had to ask for help to add another child for  a pre 1500 profile which I manage.

---

Dash, You are obviously a responsible member and I applaud your willingness to find these profiles homes. It is okay if they are orphaned. Most of yours will fit in the UK project, England subproject. I’m not very familiar with its current organization but I suggest you contact the leader. See the link below. The others need further development before a project can be identified because there is too little information. I will see what I can find.  

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Project:England

Answer 1

Proposed this back in February, got loads of positive clicks, but the answer was no:

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/564762/proposal-not-pre-1500-certified-dont-adopt-pre-1500-profiles

Comments

Unanimously supportive in fact. But it was put down by the Team (via Abby) for the sole reason that uncertified profile managers get daily alerts to changes and merge requests and could therefore still participate in decision making (presumably through comments and g2g since they can't approve merge requests or edit the profile directly).  

If they were downgraded to TL, they'd not get merge requests and only get weekly alerts via their activity feed.  

This "benefit" of retaining uncertified folks as PM and allowing them to adopt pre-1500 profiles is too costly as described by the various responses that overwhelmingly call for change.  What will it take for the Team to change its collective mind on this?

---

"If they were downgraded to TL, they'd not get merge requests and only get weeklyalerts via their activity feed."

Jillaine, are you saying TL members don't get merge requests and only get weekly alerts? I'm pretty sure I get merge requests and immediate alerts when I am on a TL, just like when I'm a PM. 

---

Actually Abby's reply said they weren't making a distinction between PMs and TL members.  That is, if they changed the rule, it would say you couldn't be a TL member without a badge, so you wouldn't get any activity feed at all.

---

No hang on, there was a second reply that takes a different line to the first one.

---

Chase, the help text is vague.  It says this:

Changes to profiles in your Watchlist appear on your Family Activity Feed and in your weekly e-mail updates.

As you see, it says nothing about merge requests.  I'd appreciate confirmation from the techies who know.  

Answer 2

Sounds very sensible.

Answer 3

I agree Robin. I can see a request to be on a Trusted List so that they are aware of changes made. To adopt profiles that they cannot fix themselves doesn't make sense. If someone wants to contribute, they can send the information to the person that is managing the profile. WikiTree is all about collaboration!

Answer 4

It's a bit messy because there are several ways of becoming a PM.

Also, at present, if you want to join the TL of an orphan, you have to adopt it and unadopt it.

Actually that could be fixed.  Perhaps it would help if there were a direct way to add orphans to your Watchlist without actually adopting them.

Comments

Yea, verily: The ability to watchlist a profile without being joined to the Trusted List would be a wonderful thing that would help solve several long-standing problems here.

---

That would be a whole different thing.  All I meant was, a way to add yourself to the Trusted List of an orphan without adopting it.

---

Both of those options are needed.

Answer 5

I completely agree. But it's been discussed here before, with no resulting action.  *sigh*

Answer 6

Whilst I very much agree with the proposal, there is a simple solution to the problem: compile a list of orphaned pre-1500 profiles (thre must be one somewhere, right?) and get a pre-1500 person (or a group of people) to adopt them.

Comments

Got a spare Watchlist or two (or three) lying around?  I did a search for pre-1500 orphaned profiles (and of course, these are only the ones who are actually marked as such), and here were the results: 14,897.

15 cen - 6551
14 cen - 3729
13 cen - 2219
12 cen - 1265
11 cen -  622
10 cen - 184
9 cen - 124
8 cen - 55
7 cen - 33
6 cen - 24
5 cen - 29
4 cen - 21
3 cen - 13
2 cen - 11
1 cen - 17

---

Thanks for the information!

There are 311 wikitreers with the pre-1500 badge. Let's suppose we could persuade 1 in 3 to participate, that would be 150 each. Sounds quite manageable?

---

I am not sure what problem orphaned profiles give? This does not seem to be the concern being discussed in this thread?

---

It is not really a solution to the problem, unless you consider it a proactive approach i.e. adopt all those pre-1500 profiles before anybody not-certified does.

It does not address the countless thousands of profiles which have already been adopted by non-pre-1500 people, which was the original problem raised, I agree.

---

If there are no orphaned pre-1500 profiles, then you won't get uncertified people adopting them!

---

That deals with the orphaned ones.  Now, what about all those pre-1500 profiles which have *already* been adopted (or even created back in the day) by non-pre-1500 people?

---

@Ros - one step at a time!

But as you asked, we need a second list of all the pre-1500 profiles who don't have a PM with pre-1500 certificate. Then we need to persuade people with the certificate to become a co-PM.

Answer 7

There seems to be a unanimous agreement with you that only pre-1500 certified people should be profile managers.

The main objection is that people on the trusted list don't get the same communications as people who are profile managers, and that people without the pre-1500 certification would like to get the notifications that profile managers get.

To me, the fix to this is simple:  Change the level of communications that people on the trusted list get. Maybe it's time to re-think what the differences are between profile manager and trusted list.  I know that we already have a precedent for "downgrading" people from profile manager to trusted list -- it happens automatically when a profile manager merges a profile into a PPP'd profile.  I know I don't like it when that happens, and I think there's less cause to downgrade a person in that situation than in the pre-1500 situation where you have a profile manager who is not qualified to manage.  

A preliminary fix to this would be a simple computer change so that when you click on the list of orphaned profiles available for adoption, profiles which you are not eligible to manage would not appear.  That wouldn't change profile management that already exists, but it would reduce the number of new problems occurring.

Answer 8

Robin, on this, you're right, and the team is wrong.  If the issue is that non-certified people would like daily notifications of change made to a pre-1500 profile, the solution is to change the trusted list notification process, not to gum up the profile management process.

As you know, I've taken on pre-742 profiles.  Periodically I check the orphaned profile list and adopt any with birthdates before the year 742 (Charlemagne's birth year).  I just checked and adopted another 100.  THESE now cannot be adopted by unqualified people and I'm happy to turn them over to anyone who can work on them.

It appears that with this lot, however, I'll have to bone up on my Arabic!

Answer 9

Seems to me allowing someone without credentials to adopt a pre 1500 profile is like giving someone with a scooter licence a bus to drive .

Is there not a way to enable joint PM’s automatically for pre 1500 profiles, where one must have credentials?