Question of the Week: What is on your wishlist for 2020 WikiTree improvements? [closed]

Question

Hi WikiTreers,

What is on your wishlist for 2020 WikiTree improvements? If there could be just one new feature or change, what would you want it to be?

Happy holidays!

Comments

Great question! Hope you generate some good suggestions from the community discussion.

---

Why does G2G keep doing this to me? I click "answer", fill it in, and submit, but now suddenly somehow it's a comment. You can convert an answer to a comment, but not the other way around.

---

How to deal with pre-existing transcription errors, mainly from commercial sites like My Heritage and Family Search?  For instance, in the 1881 Canada Census for Halifax, Nova Scotia, under children of James Francis Rodgers there is a son whose name appears to be labelled Zarene,  and so cited in a Family Search file. Well, "Zarene" does not exist, never has, but lives on in the world of pixels. The name of that individual, it turns out, is "Lawrence", documented through Nova Scotia archives, but misspelled "Larenc/Larens" on the handwritten original and OFFICIAL Census for Halifax, in the 1881 census. Someone misread the capital L in longhand for a Z and Laurence becomes Zarene, all over the place. . . I can make the notes and enter the correct information in my Wiki tree, but the OTHER non-wiki files preserve and spread the error(s). Meanwhile, in that same document "Hugh" is "Huie",  Patrick is "Batrick", Margaret is "Magie", Jerome is "Romi/Roni", Matthew is "Mathiu". It is beyond frustrating.

---

(Nitpick: FamilySearch is not a commercial site.)

Marilyn, first, don't mistake the finding aid for the historical record. What's in the index doesn't change what's in the record; it just makes it slightly harder to find.

Second, the 1881 Canada census is among the collections that now allows editing of names in the index on FS. This means that you can correct "Zarene" to whatever is actually on the image: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MV6P-MQZ (For what it's worth, I think it says Laranc.) And you have always been able to correct names on FS's Family Tree: there is absolutely no reason for his profile (https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/L81P-WK5) to still say Zarene.

---

I really really, sincerely wish the Categories box would be visible "inside" the profile area, ...not at the very bottom of the page where they dont even seem relevant, ...way under the Memories box, ...way under the Comments boxes, ...way under the Matches and Merges box, and even ...way under the x degrees from random people connections box.

Please seriously reconsider this improvement which would improve nearly every profile I create and work on.

Thank you and, Happy New Year to all our amazing volunteer teammates!

---

I took a walk through this thread and collected what I like to see and added a few things that were not mentioned before:

1. In the Private Profile view there are buttons to "add child", to add the parents and to add one spouse. Considering how many people married several times because the spouse died, there should be an "add spouse" button as well.

2. I would love to have an optional modern day location field. This is important especially for the German roots profiles, because there were so many administrative changes in the German areas, that a modern day location field can show in which country a document has to be ordered, which archive is "responsible" for the person etc. etc.

3. Remove the middle name fields. I showed my reasoning in the respective thread

4. Eliminate the "unsourced tree" as source. 

5. Give us a "between dates" option. This can further narrow the dates of an event.

6. The "edit the section" button on FreeSpace-pages helps loads when you have Pages that have a ton of names on it.

7. For the internationalization of Wikitree a polyglott interface is paramount. I know of many not English-native users who complain that they have problems to use the site because it is only in English.

8. Restore the Categories to the top. Down there on the botttom they are virtually invisible.

9. Bold threads that have changed since a user was logged in the last time. This is simplifying the usage of the G2G-forum.

This is my quarter Dollar to add to the thread.

---

Regarding #1, Jelena, when editing a profile, on the right side under spouse, you can add as many spouses as needed.

---

I know, I do that all the time. But why do I have to go into the Edit menu for spouses, when I don't have when I want to add children?

---

Sounds like the transcriber was a drunk monkey. They let you add corrections on ancestry for stuff like this there must be a way on other sites surely?

---

Would love to see GG better organized or explained better for beginners... I constantly have trouble locating specific thre ads...

---

I agree. It used to be at the top. After the change when they were moved to the bottom and weren't clearly visible I contacted a project manager and told her a bunch of categories were missing from all the profiles we had added to, and if they had been removed because they no longer existed. Thinking that was a lot of work for nothing, lol. She informed me they were now at the bottom of the profile.

---

I know it would be quite some work, but would it be possible to follow up on the responses given here and give an overview of which ones are still open, which ones are not going to be implemented and which ones have been granted?

I am assuming there will be a new call opening soon

Answer 1

Wow huge feed to ready through, so many great ideas!

I'm going to follow what someone else did and list each one separately.

1. On the upper right the drop down menus for "My WikiTree" "Find" etc. they are all in white. I find it difficult to read them as they drop down into more white background with black text. Would love the drop down menus to have a light beige/tan color to help separate them from the page you are on.

Answer 2

Another SAVE button above the scratch pad on navigation view of profile. There's one on the bottom but mine is so darn long that I always have to scroll through infinity to the bottom to save anything on it!  

Answer 3

2. DBE 109 & 110 WikiTree Policy "Profiles of people who were born over 150 years ago or who died over 100 years ago must be Open.

This is a Policy and not a suggestion/error. All profiles should be automatically opened when they reach the age for born over 150 years ago or died over 100 years ago.

Most people I contact come back with a response of why doesn't WikiTree do that automatically. Those that don't answer have not been active on WikiTree for a while.

3. When adding a "NEW PROFILE" must have at least one date (dob or dod) and one location entered to be able to add the new profile.

4. Format the == Biography == and the == Sources == <references /> within the text box and do not allow them to be deleted or changed. And not allow another <references /> to be added. This would completely eliminate missing <references /> tags or duplicate tags. And maybe once a <ref> tag is entered immediately have a </ref> pop up.

5. I like the orange drop down box for entering places helps me keep things spelled correctly. Would like to see it allow for County's also. With all they typos for locations I would not allow the option to get rid of the orange box and that everyone has to pick the locations, which are accurate and spelled correctly. It would eliminate a lot of typos and wrong places. Possibly have it check for ex. USA error based on date.

Edit: Add #6 do not let a profile be created unless the gender is selected.

Comments

Some great ideas here - didn't realise that #2 wasn't done already!

---

I've been hoping to clean up what's there by the new year but not going to quite make it! And if they don't change it then it will be step 1. the long process of posting and contacting PM then update status step  2. send request to open profile and update status and step 3 receive notice of profile being opened so update status to profile open.

Of course once the profile is open, it's so old and has other errors and a lot of GEDCOM clean ups which of course I can't resist trying to fix.

Then you have the complaint here on G2G about how data doctors just fix one thing to run up their numbers for challenges or to reach 1,000+ for the month. Big gulp... you do the DBE 109 & 110 and then let me know!

---

I mostly agree with your suggestions. On number 5, if you are suggesting that location suggestions from the drop-down box be mandatory, I disagree with that. There are many valid locations that are not on the list. For example, I just finished entering a list of children whose births are recorded between 1777 and 1783 in the records of Fayette, Maine. But Fayette was not incorporated until 1795, and there is no choice on the list for Starling Plantation, Lincoln, Massachusetts, which is the contemporary name for the place they were born. I also recently entered a 1755 birth from Amherst, New Hampshire. The list would force me to choose Amherst, Hillsborough, New Hampshire, even though there were no counties in New Hampshire until 1769. I do use selections from the list when they are accurate, and I appreciate the convenience, but I would not want to be limited to them.

---

Stu, I don't really want it mandatory but an example is what you just provided and let it be added to that drop down menu with the dates. We have the DBE 603 example to early for USA. Then we would be getting more historically correct locations.

I don't see why the computer, since it does give us the error codes for locations, can't just not let an entry be made like the DBE 603. So now I'm guessing yes mandatory but with the caveat that people can submit historically accurate locations.

When I work on DBE 603 and I'm removing the USA, I also know that more than likely the place did not have counties back then either.

I was just hoping we could get locations to be as close to historically correct as possible and thought this may be a way.

It also helps with typographical errors....

Don't know if I'm making any sense, feel like maybe I might need to think it through a little more or does it make sense what I would like to see accomplished.

Edit: Re read a couple of times. Maybe let you add the correct location and the location have a box to check if it's new. Then after you enter the profile something come up with new location checked please provide source and have someone check it for being historically accurate??

---

Louann, the drop down menu of locations is "borrowed" from FamilySearch and is never added to from what we put in the location fields in WikiTree; it's a one-way thing.

You can get corrections and addition if you can get the ear of a volunteer over at FamilySearch.

For locations in Sweden (and possibly much of Europe) it is very unsatisfactory - like, for example, way too many location names of the form "Village, County, Sweden", when the parish is what is crucial for finding sources in Sweden.

I was very grateful for the option to turn the automatic suggestions off, when this functioonality was introduced.

---

Eva, so far it's holding true that I learn something new every day! Did not know that WikiTree was using Family Search for locations.

Still doesn't eliminate adding a button for new locations and then providing a source.

The powers that be could discuss with Family Search about getting more historically accurate locations for around the world.

---

2. YES for auto-opening profiles!

3. No - dates & locations are just not always known! Sometimes all you have is a name!

4. Yes this would be nice if it could be easily programmed.

5. No, so many variations with locations especially over time. I even have seen a valley location identified, which would not be a township or town or city, and its within a county. Options need to kept open and can always be edited or even corrected later when more sources are found.

6. No - sometimes all you have is a name (or sometimes not even a name for an infant who died) and gender isn't certain or known...especially with some infants who died at birth records, we will never know their gender!

---

About the location suggestions: For Germany during the Holy Roman Empire, the locations don't exist in the suggestions.  I always have to fill the territory manually. Or the suggestions show "Germany" for the time before 1871, which is wrong. But actually those suggestions are delivered from FamilySearch.

---

For #3 although a date can be estimated (e.g., before or after) others have noted the location might not be known. Perhaps this could be a one time warning at profile creation.

For #6 gender might not be specified in the sources, particularly for an infant. This is already addressed by a warning when you create the profile.

---

As for #6 having not thought of the infants then gender could be male - female - infant

#3 As for those saying a location is not know how about knowing what continent someone was born in.

Someone said only having a name to enter a profile and I wish I understood why anyone would enter a profile with only a name. To me that's insane. I truly oppose adding more people for the sake of having more people on WikiTree. Does WikiTree want quantity over qualitly? Personally I'd rather build WikiTree on reliable sourcing over quantity. If the quality exists I believe that in the immediate future that slows WikiTree but in the long run more people will come.

---

Louann, I don't want to repeat everything I said in the comments of the first answer of this thread (when Kay Sands wanted a requirement of location). Please go there and read the whole thread (and I mean the whole thread with around 40 comments). Then you may be able to understand why a continent is not enough and why a mandatory location is not good for Wikitree.

---

Thanks Jelena, I will

---

Louann, I agree on every point !

Answer 4

For 2020 I would like to see projects be easier to make. I suggested a Greek Roots project ages ago and nothing came of it. We really should get on the ball and start churning out more roots projects.

Comments

If you offer to be coordinator of your suggested project I bet a good chance it would happen! Leaders dont want a bunch of projects set up but then nothing at all done in them, and no one volunteered to work in them since that's not productive in any way

Answer 5

A "WikiTree for Dummies" I believe I have said many times that the average person will not stay and/or will create many errors. So something that would cover the bare bones basics;

1. before entering someone look to see if they are already on WikiTree.

2. Maybe a whole other way to enter, something that prompts them for what to put in next.

3. Really just give them the text box with the == Biography == filled with the normal so and so was born. They were the son/daughter of so and so. They died on such and such.

4. Then == Sources == and <references /> prompt them for what is the name of your source ex: Genealogy Book. Census Record, Certificates (Birth, Marriage, Death, Baptism), Draft Card, etc.

5. Details about the source ex which census and all the census info, book add author, publican, version, page number

6 add a url if they have it.

I think this kind of gives and idea, it just really needs to be "SIMPLE". Then as they look around and maybe join the groups, start using the G2G feed and start searching the Help they will get more comfortable. There are a lot of people that fear asking a question either out of looking stupid or because of pride.

Answer 6

Suggestion... how many people really check and or even know to check their Suggestions.

Perhaps it should be a tab on the page with the edit, images, changes, privacy, "SUGGESTIONS"

Also on the right side their is DNA, Collaboration, and Research. Again add one for "SUGGESTIONS" reminding people/PROFILE MANAGERS are responsible for checking and if needed correcting any suggestions that are actual errors. With some kind of button to post to the G2G feed filling in all of the right tags for the Profile Manager to get help from Data Doctors if needed. A note to check it weekly or monthly.

I think if someone has more than 50 or 100 suggestions they should not be able to enter any more profiles until they get their suggestions cleared up.

Comments

Louann another awesome idea!

Answer 7

I would like to be able to search my contributions.  I have been rather active in the past and added and worked on significantly more than the persons who are currently persons for whom I manage profiles.  If I come across a "Smith"--or whatever--that I think might be related to a Smith I once worked on, it would be nice to be able to search my contributions for just those Smiths rather than search all Smiths.

Answer 8

I would like the posters of new profiles thanked as well as the editors. There would be nothing to edit if there were no posts!!

Answer 9

Fix the bug described here: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/913013/unmarried-flag-remains-after-marriage-added

Answer 10

Create a Source: Namespace and move all of Rick Pierpont's (and others') great source pages there. Make it searchable.

Answer 11

Increase the size of the Watchlist allowed when searching with the “Name on Watchlist” box. I am working on a Civil War regiment and this was useful for finding family relations between the soldiers until my list got too large.

Answer 12

In addition to greater ability to search, I'd like for there to be a generic surname other than "Unknown" --I would propose Unknown African American--that is specific to pre-reconstruction African Americans/slaves for whom no surname is known.  Mixing them in with all unknowns--particularly when most will end up as Unknown Unknown--is an excellent way to discourage capturing at least what little information we have about these people.   The designation I propose should be used only as a surname (not as a given name) and should only apply to persons pre-civil war for whom no surname is known.  For example, a slave named in a will as being bequeathed.  

At minimum, this issue should be studied along with any proposals that would facilitate African American genealogy.

Answer 13

The ability to know how many profiles I have created...I recognize this doesn't improve anything overall but I have created many profiles, and once sourced, I orphan them. Just my curiosity.

Answer 14

A printer friendly tab/version for profiles, like what Wikipedia has. A few members have asked for this over the years but it just never happens .... Please Chris and co, can we finally get that. It seems such a little thing to ask for, and it would be truly awesome to be able to print out our work and the ancestor lines, and create booklets.

Answer 15

Everybody's favourite surely - include current profile in lists of siblings

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/961254/suggestion-include-edited-child-list-children-during-editing

Answer 16

Everybody's other favorite

Add a "clear" or "none of the above" option to the radio buttons so that Uncertain and Confident flags can be returned to the default state.

Comments

Yes please. Have had folks click Certain on profiles. If they had made that choice concerning a sourced entry they had added, fine - but a couple times someone just came through doing nothing by click the status Certain, and traveling so fast, they couldn't possibly be confirming the accuracy of the data they were marking Certain.

Answer 17

*if you agree with my wish suggestion here, please vote up this answer!

I really really, sincerely wish the Categories box would be visible "inside" the profile area, ...not at the very bottom of the page where they dont even seem relevant, ...way under the Memories box, ...way under the Comments boxes, ...way under the Matches and Merges box, and even ...way under the x degrees from random people connections box.

Please seriously reconsider this improvement which would improve nearly every profile I create and work on.

Thank you and, Happy 2020 New Year to all our amazing volunteer teammates!

Answer 18

Hi. My wish list would include

#1. The ability to do a mini search to find a profile inside my family tree. Like a family tree search instead of the Wikitree search.  Currently Wikitree searches bring up too many results that I have to scroll through or I have to back track through my Ancestors to get to a relative's profile.

2#.  I  keep wondering if separating Military and Religious ranks/titles into their own field instead of grouping them in the Prefix field would help with the number of errors they cause with the Prefix field.

3#. An invite link (mentioned in a previous post) located at the top of a profile would be wonderful.  I hate being required to create a profile for someone I don't know and am very distantly related to in order to invite them to Wikitree.  It seems somehow invasive...

4#. This wish has evolved from watching 2 toddlers under 2. I would really love to have a Sources area where I could type in a Source and select a group of profiles that I want the source to populate on. This need arose because the parents of these two toddlers allow them to constantly play with their phones.  Unless I want to deal with a screaming fit, I cannot use my phone,  tablet,  or laptop in front of them. I need a quick easy way to source multiple profiles at one time. I  have about 20 minutes during nap time and I can't use a lap top.  :(

Answer 19

In  another thread @Jelena_Eckstädt made the following  statement :
<< The word "issue" is for me just as not fitting in the context of location, sources, dates etc as the word "obnoxious" for bad sourcing or "offenders" for genealogists who just learn to use Wikitree. >>

I can but wholeheartedly agree.

My wish for 2020 to ban these words from the discusssions on Wikitree, people here are not criminals for making mistakes or failing certain standards that some of us impose on themselves.

If someone is not working up to standard help them, educate them, that is what collaboration is about 

Comments

Derek, I can feel your passion for those that are not up to whatever "standards" some feel that everyone should be at. I continually try to get WikiTreer's to understand that so many get discouraged enough with how much there is to learn about WikiTree and then feel they get scolded either here in the G2G feed or some of the comments that are left on someone's profile.

The average person that comes to WikiTree will not stay if they are not encouraged or things explained, even the basics, in a simplier way.

When I do some Data Doctoring some will come back with I don't understand what you're asking me to do. Most have stayed with me as they may still do not understand so I have started taking pictures and showing them step by step what it looks like now and how to get it to look like like when they have fixed a suggestion/error. I love when I here someone has that "lightbulb" "yay" moment that they get it.

Answer 20

Urgh, I added a comment instead of an answer. So here it is as answer

I took a walk through this thread and collected what I like to see and added a few things that were not mentioned before:

1. In the Private Profile view there are buttons to "add child", to add the parents and to add one spouse. Considering how many people married several times because the spouse died, there should be an "add spouse" button as well.

2. I would love to have an optional modern day location field. This is important especially for the German roots profiles, because there were so many administrative changes in the German areas, that a modern day location field can show in which country a document has to be ordered, which archive is "responsible" for the person etc. etc.

3. Remove the middle name fields. I showed my reasoning in the respective thread

4. Eliminate the "unsourced tree" as source. 

5. Give us a "between dates" option. This can further narrow the dates of an event.

6. The "edit the section" button on FreeSpace-pages helps loads when you have Pages that have a ton of names on it.

7. For the internationalization of Wikitree a polyglott interface is paramount. I know of many not English-native users who complain that they have problems to use the site because it is only in English.

8. Restore the Categories to the top. Down there on the botttom they are virtually invisible.

9. Bold threads that have changed since a user was logged in the last time. This is simplifying the usage of the G2G-forum.

This is my quarter Dollar to add to the thread.

Comments

Jelena,

#2 is a great idea, especially modern rather than current, as administrative names will continue to change. Obviously I don't have experience with these difficult locations as you do. What do you think of a warning, only at profile creation, if none of the BMD or Modern location have been supplied? Something like the no gender warning but without the subsequent suggestions report.

#4 YES. Also "remembered by" for a profile that meets criteria to be open (more than 150/100 years ago)

#9 it would be great to be able to find unread threads, unread answers, and unread comments.

---

Kay, paramount is that the location field (no matter if then-time locations or modern locations) doesn't get mandatory. I showed my reasoning often enough and in a zillion variations in your thread. I could live with a warning that there is no location delivered, as long as the system gives me the button "Save anyway". But we need Wikitree free of the obligation to fill a location field to be able to create profiles. 

---

Jelena, I agree, optional.

---

Jelena,
I would like to disagree with the Unsourced tree,
I have a tree with about 4000 entries, which I inherited from my parents.
when they started just over 20 years ago soiurcing looked totally different and had a different purpose.
I man of my entries would be reference like
"BS Antw, Geb. 1813/2555" and it represents a source,
However that source which could be consulted in at least 3 archives with 55 km from my residence, is now unavailable at those archivelocations.

All documents post 1918  i can collect in paper/pdf format from municipal records but i need a court licence to request any paperwork of people outside my ancestors, descendant or my proper siblings, o now have a private archive of both paper and digitized documents, and so all those references need to be modified to reflect the private archive.

The modern referencing techniques which refers to online documents  in use here has 2 consequences
- a) my tree with sources is now - in reality - an unsourced tree

-b) this requires me to redo most of the work aourcing work and collect digital photographic evidence of the documents either by down loading it or requesting it from an archive

---

@Derek - what you are talking about is probably different from what Jelena noted. Although I have no idea about your BS Antw (I could guess maybe birth in Antwerp), I think what Jelena is referring to is the use of "Unsourced family tree handed down to xxx" as the only source, with no further details.

---

Derek,

when you source your tree with the document number (like "BS Antw, Geb. 1813/2555) the source shows clearly which document in Antwerpen shows the birth of your ancestor. The same is valid for the document number of the marriage of my parents. When you have a look at profiles from New Zealand, many of those are also documented with the ongoing number of the year and the year the document was issued. So there is the possibility to see if the facts you state in the tree are correct. The problem with data protection is a completely different issue, but theoretically and if there was the legal allowance, you provide the source of where to find your information. So your tree wouldn't count as unsourced. (At least I wouldn't count it as unsourced.) 

Edit: I sourced some of my Serbian relatives with a Serbian book I only found on a Serbian version of Ebay and needed my 1C1R to get to it. It isn't even available in bookshops in Serbia anymore, but if anybody wanted, I could send him/her a scan of the page with the mention. And this counts as source.