Dear Data Doctors and everyone else who goes around adding dates and data to profiles,

Question

I am appreciative of what you are doing. I even do it myself.

But I have two complaints.

1. If a profile is only a few weeks old would you mind hanging back and let the profile manager continue. There are many profiles five years and older that would welcome your attention.

2. I mainly work with New Zealand and Australian profiles. Please do not put an ANCESTRY source on these profiles. Vital Records for both countries are freely available. Please use them.

Comments

There have been several times that I just had to stop and go to bed instead of finishing up and I wake up to edits, which is a bit of a waste of time from that person but usually harmless.

---

Really? What are the URLs for Vital Records for Australia and New Zealand? I've never stumbled across them, and they'd be a huge help in the assorted profiles from Down Under that I've been working on.

---

I would also like the URLs for Vital records for Australia, I have quite a few Australians to add here, but not very many sources for them xxx

---

@ Karen .. which state/s?  Send me a PM if you'd rather.

---

Jean, if you would like to propose a new rule for our community that only the person who creates a profile can edit it for the first two weeks, here is how you would do it: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Developing_New_Rules

That would be a major change for our community.

---

Here is an example of an Australian event that I need to source: Marcus Hennessey Slade's death in Fremantle, Western Australia in 1869.

---

https://bdm.justice.wa.gov.au/_apps/pioneersindex/default.aspx

That's the main one. There are of course numerous supplementary sources.

---

@ Greg .. I sent you a PM.

---

Seems you already have this

https://bdm.justice.wa.gov.au/_apps/pioneersindex/default.aspx

Cannot find a death notice but do check "Trove" - there are lots of references to Mr Slade 

Jean

Answer 1

Generally agree about not editing fresh records, but Ancestry’s scanned Anglican registers are really good for NSW info - mother’s maiden name, etc. The Ancestry BDM indexes have some pretty nasty typos and assumptions of course.

Answer 2

Ancestry sources can be a problem. I don’t have a subscription with them, so I appreciate those who not only add the source but put a full rundown of what it contains.

Comments

Thanks for the star Chuck.

---

Ancestry.com is a great starting point for me to bring up the sources that they offer attached to the persons profile.

Now take that source ancestry shows, and google the heading by copying and pasting that in your browser.

That page info ancestry has added now has taken me to the whole book on archive.org or google book.

There is your complete source. Hopefully, as long as the book wasn’t a complete fabrication.  The hardest thing that a genealogist faces is that after all the work that is put in to a family genealogy is to find out someone tell them, “ Haven’t you heard?” “ The Authors Made the whole story a fabrication”.

We all have to start somewhere right. Just hope that start is the best one.

---

Therein is a further problem, Googlebooks is not available to many in Australia.

Answer 3

Dear Jean,

The list of Unsourced Profiles does not care if a profile was created 7 years ago or 7 weeks ago if a profile has the {{Unsourced}} template. I will continue to source the profiles I find sources for, no matter if it is from 2011 or from last April.

Comments

Jelena, The complaint is not about adding sources, except for using Ancestry sources, but more about dates and other data items.

---

I must disagree, Dale. The complaint is specifically about adding dates and data to profiles that are only a few weeks old. Presumably to give the creator some breathing space to work on their creation.

---

Edie, Jelena is talking about Unsourced profiles and if a profile is over 1 day old then it should be sourced but the question does not mention unsourced, in fact the only line in the question about sources is requesting that you do not add Ancestry sources when there are other locations for the source that are FREE. In my opinion Dates and Data have very little to do with sourced, yes any change should be sourced but it is against policy to create any profile that has no sources so sourcing an unsourced profile is a very different matter.

Unsourced is a very different suggestion than no dates.

---

I am not referencing Jelena's comment about Unsourced profiles, but to Jean's specific complaint under number 1 in her question.

---

Edie, you mentioned my name and I made no comment about complaint 1 but rather Jelena's comment about Unsourced, I am confused why you are referencing me when I was only referencing the defense of adding sources to an unsourced profile when that action does not exactly apply to the question.

---

The Sourcerers belong to the Profile Improvement Department. Data Doctors belong to the same department (also Profile Improvement). This is visible by having a look which categories refer to the respective sites. So when Data Doctors are mentioned, Sourcerers are also mentioned, which is why I referred to the list of Unsourced Profiles. And no, I still won't wait 5 years before I source an Unsourced Profile when I find applicable sources.

---

Sorry, Dale. I guess I misread your comment.  Actually I think I was repeating what you said.

Answer 4

People mean well, mostly, and it is a crowd sourced site. Rarely is a profile change intended to be taken personally, and so I don't. Changes can be easily reversed or modified, and I feel no guilt whatsoever in doing so if doing so improves the profile.

If I am constructing a profile over time, I usually put an "Under Construction" note on it, with a very short bullet point of what the status is. I find it helpful for myself, and I have not generally been bothered by officious changes.

Comments

I really appreciate seeing an Under Construction type note on a profile because I know the PM intends to do more.  It isn't hard to put that note on at the top.  I take care not to touch it then, except for when that note is several years old LOL, which is more often the case.  With a note, a couple of weeks, or even a number of months, is a free pass to me.  Several years, not so much.

Answer 5

I'm not a "data doctor," but when I find a profile on a line I am working on and I can add well-sourced data, I am going to do it. Why would a profile manager object? Isn't this supposed to be a collaborative site?

Comments

indeed it is.

---

Collaboration goes both ways.  It may be that someone has a particular style they are working on and if they ask you to give them a little time to set the style and add the information why would you not respect that?  Surely there is enough to work to do on WikiTree that you can move on to another profile.

---

I'm not talking about a profile where the PM has indicated it is under construction.

If I have information to add to a profile that isn't marked "under construction," am I expected to remember to come back to it after whatever period to see if the profile manager has already included it? How long am I expected to wait? Two weeks? Two months? Two years?

I personally don't get my nose out of joint if someone contributes something to a profile that I created. I also am much more concerned that profiles I create and manage are complete, correct, and well-sourced than I am about the "style" of a profile.

---

Shrug. Nor does it get my nose out of joint to check the date on a profile and wait a couple weeks before diving into a newly created profile.

---

So if you have information that isn't on a newly created profile, what do you do? Keep a list of profiles to go back and check later?

And I'll ask again, how long should one be expected to wait?

---

Long enough that the profile manager has a chance to decide how they wish to format the information they have.

Instead of jumping in on a newly created profile to add whatever to it, why not send the information to the PM via private message?  You can also leave a message on the profile saying that is what was done, so future editors can see if the information was added or not.

While I welcome assistance on profiles I manage, I would be somewhat offended if I had just created a profile and someone jumped in and added information I already had, but had not yet added.  It wastes my time to have done all the research and be getting it ready to be added, only to find someone else has jumped the gun and added their own version.

Also, it is most unlikely most newly created profiles are going to have "under construction" placed on them.  I have only ever done that to a couple of profiles on which I was working .. and then only because I had set up the profile and was then waiting for a merge approval (and one other where I am still working out how to present the information I have).

---

"Long enough that the profile manager has a chance to decide how they wish to format the information they have."

How long is that?  Not being clairvoyant, I need some guidance here.

Personally, if someone can do anything at all to improve a profile I manage, I welcome it. I drop them a thank you. If it's not in my preferred format, I edit it and move on. Life is way too short to get myself in a wad about who did what to a profile - as long as the addition is accurate and properly sourced.

---

If there is a source with (an approximate) date or location, those should be added as soon as possible, preferably when the profile is created. Otherwise we are just asking for duplicates....

After a week, it certainly seems appropriate to me to add date/location with a supporting source if necessary. I do agree that is too soon to start writing a biography or changing style...

---

@ Stu Bloom .. it seems to me that you are looking for validation for jumping in on new profiles before the PM has decided what and how to do things for themselves.

I'm not going to be one who gives you that validation.  I think a profile manager should be allowed time .. an unspecified amount of time, depending on circumstances .. to add whatever they have in mind to the profiles they manage (gedcom dumps excluded).

If you have information for a profile and it was created in under, say, one month .. send the information to the PM and move along.  They will choose to use it, or ignore it.  That's up to them. 

If you should chance upon that same profile six months, a year, on and nothing was added, then jump in and add whatever you think supports the facts for the profile.

As I find your posting "style" aggressively argumentative and off-putting .. I'm out of this argument.

---

Stu is correct. This is a collaborative site. No WikiTreer should ever feel they have to wait a month to contribute to our shared tree.

---

I apologize if I have been "aggressively argumentative and off-putting." That was not my intention.

---

I added a source to a profile and was chastised for not using their 'style'. I answered "so fix it."

---

Courtesy is part of the honor code. Creating work for someone isn't collaboration.

Generally, if I am adding to a profile that appears to have an active manager (and a relatively new profile would fit into that category) and I have not contacted them first, I (1) take the time to study the profile to see if there is something I am missing (maybe the relationship isn't what I thought, maybe the situation is complex, click a couple of the linked profiles to see who's who and what's what); (2) conform to the established style of the profile to the extent of my ability; and (3) leave a note as to why I took interest in the profile and the basis on which I made the change. Nobody has taken offense.

---

as you said: People mean well, mostly, and it is a crowd sourced site. Rarely is a profile change intended to be taken personally, and so I don't. Changes can be easily reversed or modified, and I feel no guilt whatsoever in doing so if doing so improves the profile.

---

Thank you Ellen :) I like the importance you place on courtesy, communication, and explaination, also, that you make an effort to keep with the established style of a profile. Your way is very much appreciated ~

Answer 6

I have two conclusions from the responses to my question.

The first one is never ever ever have two points in a question as 90% of the responders will answer the one that you are really not interested in.

So Data Doctors, Sourcerers, and everyone else who trips over a profile I am managing - go ahead and add something.

Comments

So Data Doctors, Sourcers, and everyone else who trips over a profile I am managing - go ahead and add something.

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but if the "Data Dcotors, Sourcers, and everyone else" have validly sourced facts to add or errors to correct in conformance with Wikitree style and procedure, I agree they should. But those making the changes should please explain why they did what they did if it isn't obvious, and why they are interested in the profile. That's collaboration (which isn't for everybody).

Answer 7

My second question was the important one and some people did see it.

So here it is again - do not use a secondary index when you can use a primary source. So, for New Zealand Births Deaths and Marriages, Ancestry is just an index. To get the actual date use https://www.bdmhistoricalrecords.dia.govt.nz/

For Australia, please use Google and remember that Australia has States. 

Both countries have newpapers online - try Trove and Papers Past 

Comments

I absolutely agree Jean, and feel for your frustrations. I don’t know how many profiles that come across with Ancestry, FamilySearch, Geni, and Find A Grave, as the only sources when more accurate primary sources are readily available. Many times the Ancestry trees, and others, also contain errors.

Let’s agree to keep working to replace such unreliable information wherever we find it!

---

As somebody from England who uses both the New Zealand Birth Index on Ancestry and the free one on https://www.bdmhistoricalrecords.dia.govt.nz/, please could you explain how to get the detailed date and place information from the free index?

For example the wife of my 3rd cousin twice removed Agnes Miln(e) Horne, who was born in New Zealand in 1881.

Information from the free index:

Reg Number Family Name Given Name Mother Father

1881/3387 Horne Agnes Milne Elspeth Esplin David Mitchell

Information from the Ancestry index:

NAME: Agnes Miln Horne

BIRTH: Apr 1881 in Waipukurau, New Zealand, QuarterOfYear Apr-May-Jun

At the moment if I want the quarter of registration, the place of registration and the parents names then I have to use both indexes, but if there is a way to get all that information from the free index that would be much better.

---

I have found that due to "transcription" differences, sometimes a person finds a record on Ancestry.com that you cannot find other places.   You can always ask on G2G about an Ancestry.com source.

---

Paul, you can work out the dates of vital events from the official record if you keep narrowing down the search date. The Ancestry records are derived from something else, and they do give the place, but the registration number is needed to order the printout. (More info than a certificate.) There are also records on FamilySearch which are useful if spelling is inaccurate. I agree with Jean that the official record number and other details should go on the profile. Thanks Jean for highlighting the wonderful FREE Australian and New Zealand newspaper sources. For NZ there are all sorts of things on both FamilySearch (wills especially) and on Archway (Police Gazettes and Military Personnel files etc.)

---

Paul you can narrow down the dates at  BDM site if you really want to find the date - but I find that the year is more than sufficient.

But what you see (and what you have posted)  is what you get for free. If you want the exact date for any event, you will have to purchase the record.

As to why Ancestry has the exact date - I hope they are not breaking any laws in NZ to get that information. NZ has pretty strict laws about releasing personal and private data.

If I need to use 2 sources to get both an exact date as well as the parents names, then I will post 2 sources. I have no problems with that.

---

Other sources to get details such as dates and so on, I use Papers Past for NZ newspapers and the Ryerson index for death announcements in Australian newspapers

Answer 8

Hello,

I am a Wikitree Data Doctor and do a lot of work on profiles. I try to not touch any profiles (unless I am asked to help) that have been created during the last month. However sometimes it is hard not to add sources when there are none on the profile and the source is freely available.

I never create a profile without providing some sort of source. For example if it is a parent and I have no BDM / Census etc source for the parent, until I find a source for that parent,  I add "Named on birth  death records of linked child / children" as the source for the parent. Of course this statement must be correct and the parent is named on the child's birth or death source.

If I have created a profile and have not completed adding all the information I have available I add this message.

'''WORK IN PROGRESS . . . I'll be back soon ... followed by 4 ~ (this automatically adds your name Wikitree ID and the date.

Of course I make sure I go back as soon as possible. I also have a Wikitree  free space profile for my To Do List and add profiles here that I need to do follow up work on (in case I forget!)

Links to BDM websites for Australia & New Zealand

QLD BDM Index

NSW BDM Index

SA BDM Index = Genealogy SA

WA BDM Index

VIC BDM Index

TASMANIA BDM

NEW ZEALAND BDM INDEX

Hope this is some help,

Diane

Comments

Thanks.  Sounds like a good thing to bookmark!!

---

Great links for Australia, Diane. I will have to bookmark those. Thanks.

---

A better link for Queensland is the trio search (births, deaths, marriages, all on the same page):

https://www.familyhistory.bdm.qld.gov.au/

Answer 9

WOW this has gotten very controversial.Like the old saying goes “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time”. John Lydgate Just today I found my self investigating the same line as another member,not wanting to "step on any toe's" I added some of my research as comments on the profile page..I was thanked and invited to edit the profiles my self.(this I appreciated) I have gotten chastised many times for both editing and not editing a profile..Now I try to just add comments then if there is no response or the PM has not been active I will try to get back and edit the profile my self.This seems to work well for me.If I do not get back to the profile at least there is a lead for the next guy.Now before you tell me how wrong I am, remember some one else will probably agree with me.

.

Comments

Just to add...What really makes my day is when I post a link to a source as a comment,the profile manager thanks me for my effort,uses my work to improve the profile then deletes my comment so that I do not have to go back later to do it. oh happy day!  : )

Answer 10

For those complaining about Ancestry links, Ancestry has links that can be shared that are free and do not need a subscription. I have started adding the free links, often referred to as "shared links". The original thread I found it in is https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/792811/creating-a-free-to-view-image-link-from-ancestry-com

In my sources it looks something like this:

1. ↑ Source Citation: Year: 1850; Census Place: District 6, Boone, Virginia; Roll: M432_936; Page: 18B; Image: 278 https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1850usfedcenancestry&h=14881976&ti=0&indiv=try

   Ancestry Link: 1850 United States Federal Census

   Ancestry Shared Link: Griffin E Vickers discovered in 1850 United States Federal Census

2. ↑ Source Citation: Year: 1860; Census Place: Boone, Virginia; Roll: M653_1336; Page: 97; Family History Library Film: 805336 https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1860usfedcenancestry&h=33649409&ti=0&indiv=try

   Ancestry Link: 1860 United States Federal Census

   Ancestry Shared Link: Griffin E Vickers discovered in 1860 United States Federal Census

3. ↑ Source Citation: Year: 1870; Census Place: Chapmanville, Logan, West Virginia; Roll: M593_1691; Page: 489B; Family History Library Film: 553190 https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1870usfedcen&h=11161082&ti=0&indiv=try

   Ancestry Link: 1870 United States Federal Census

   Ancestry Shared Link: Griffin E Vickers discovered in 1870 United States Federal Census

4. ↑ Source Citation: Year: 1880; Census Place: Chapmansville, Logan, West Virginia; Roll: 1406; Page: 239C; Enumeration District: 072 https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1880usfedcen&h=14725995&ti=0&indiv=try

   Ancestry Link: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/6742/4244691-00579?pid=14725995&backurl= 1870 United States Federal Census]

   Ancestry Shared Link: Griffin E Vickers discovered in 1880 United States Federal Census

5. ↑ Source Citation: Year: 1900; Census Place: Chapmanville, Logan, West Virginia; Page: 2; Enumeration District: 0064; FHL microfilm: 1241763 https://search.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/sse.dll?db=1900usfedcen&h=80492924&ti=0&indiv=try

   Ancestry Link: https://www.ancestry.com/interactive/7602/4123457_00719?pid=80492924&backurl= 1900 United States Federal Census]

   Ancestry Shared Link: Griffin E Vickers discovered in 1900 United States Federal Census

Comments

So we who do not have access to ancestry will have to click the SHARED LINK. If they are available.

---

That is great! I hope everyone would do it this way.

---

Juha thanks for the "Best Answer"!

Robynne if you click on an ancestry shared link it is available to anyone.

The credit goes to https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/user/Lewis-24639 Deb Durham for making the original post!

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/792811/creating-a-free-to-view-image-link-from-ancestry-com

---

I use Ancestry PHOTO source links also. Everyone can use them. I create them myself by copying the url while on the photo page, then i paste it into my bio. I delete everything ALL the way back to and including the ?. Then you have a clean link that goes straight to the photo! I am so glad you brought this up. I would rather have ancestry sources than NO sources!  I always go back and look at my bios. I often double and triple check my work. I want to know where EVERY piece of information came from. So if I got it from Ancestry.com, then that is what I am including in my Sources. I will ALWAYS include free sites when available, but often only Ancestry has the information I need. That is why I include the links. I will not apologize for it either. I have made serious breakthroughs with great Ancestry links to actual photos of the original documents.