For most of my One Name Studies, each worksheet covers one data set (ThePeerage.com, Wikipedia, my own Watchlist, and, in the case of Slades, a site called Slade Genealogy). Except that, for Slades, I ended up with so many from the Peerage.com that I split off the Peerage Slades who are still living or did not have Slade as their Last Name At Birth into separate worksheets, to make it a bit easier to navigate the main worksheet for Peerage Slades. Then, I have a "Dashboard" worksheet that pulls in the values for various things I'm counting, does calculations on them, and generates the charts.
Each row is for a given person. The columns in the main Wikipedia worksheet are:
- Given Name(s)
- Last Name
- Year Born
- Year Died
- (I put ~, <, or > before the year if there's some question about it, which would mess up the sorting if I were to sort by year of birth, but I don't usually change my default sort.)
- WikiTree ID
- Wikidata #
- Sourcing Level
- (This uses a formula to enter a "1" if the Sourcing Level value is higher than 0.5.)
- Wikipedia as Source
- Template Applied
- Slade is not LNAB
- In Peerage too
- In Slade Genealogy too
- (These all take a "1" if true, and "0" if false.)
- (This uses a formula to insert a "1" if the Given Name(s) cell is not empty, and a "0" if it is.)
- (This uses a formula to insert a "1" if the WikiTree ID cell is not empty, and a "0" if it is.)
I don't try to track everything in the spreadsheet. It's not an attempt to replicate the data in WikiTree. It's just a tracking tool to help me see which profiles need more work in various areas, and to generate charts to give me an overall picture and track progress on the values I'm measuring. (I should probably say right out that a lot of this work stems from my suggestion for a WikiTree Dashboard a few years ago.)
In the case of conflicting or ambiguous data, I either cover that in the Biography section or add a Notes or Research Notes section, depending on the issue.
I haven't actually come across any pedigree collapse in the trees I've been working on. If I ever do, I probably wouldn't bother doing anything special about it. It should be obvious to anybody who looks at the Ancestor lists.
For adoption, I'd add both sets of parents (if I could find them), marking the adoptive parents as non-biological, and then explain the situation in the Biography section.
I don't track photos at all. Sadly, I've got almost no photos up in my family tree. (For notables, I grab the photos from Wikipedia where I can.) I do have a scanner on my wish list, so maybe if the Great Pumpkin considers me particularly sincere this year, I'll be able to do something in that department.