This is a draft of changes proposed for Help:Project-Managed_Profiles.
Three questions proposed for addition to Help:Project-Managed_Profiles.
The purpose of this proposal is to clarify existing policy regarding the scope of profiles eligible for project management and to apply WikiTree principles of courtesy and collaboration to interactions between projects and profile managers as equal collaborating partners.
The goals are to reduce project workload by enabling them to focus their efforts where most needed, to make WikiTree more attractive to new members by recognizing that the individual member is the foundation of our collective strength, to add checks and balances to the power of projects in coopting profiles, and to improve the health of our shared Tree by promoting maximum freedom to collaborate.
Please post comments and suggestions at this G2G thread.
- The purpose of the first question is to clarify existing WikiTree policy. The Help pages use the term 'scope' five times to describe the range of profiles of interest to a project, but never define the term. (See below, under 'Help Pages Mentioning Project Scope.') The only description offered in the Help pages is the three-part definition here dubbed 'primary scope.' Most projects apply their internal criteria ('topic scope') without regard to the WikiTree definition. This question aims to integrate the two concepts. Please discuss at G2G.
Which profiles should a project manage?
Each project has a defined role to play in the management of profiles that meet specific conditions. Project role is subject to a two-level hierarchy consisting of primary scope and topic scope.
Primary scope is the WikiTree-defined mission of topical projects to manage
- Controversial profiles of
- Historically significant and
- Widely shared ancestors.
Only profiles meeting all three of these conditions qualify for management by any project. Not everyone will agree about whether a profile meets these criteria. Therefore, careful consideration and collaboration is necessary both within the project and between the project and profile managers to decide whether a profile qualifies. It is also important to recognize that applicability of these criteria may change over time. A profile not considered controversial today might become so through an influx of new members or updated information (or, perhaps rarely, the reverse).
Topic scope narrows the focus of the project from all profiles fitting the primary scope, to only those that meet additional criteria. Topic scope criteria are determined by basic facts about the profile, such as:
- Participation in a historic event (e.g., Puritan Great Migration, 1776 Project),
- High political office (e.g., US Presidents),
- National or ethnic origin (e.g., Acadians, Irish Roots), or
- Meeting Wikipedia notability standards (e.g., Notables).
Most project pages only discuss their topic criteria, which should not be interpreted to mean the primary criteria do not apply. It is important to understand that fitting the topic scope may not suffice to qualify a profile for project management. For example, a member of an early pioneer family in the US South fits the topic scope of the Southern Pioneers Project. If that person had no descendants, he or she is not a widely shared ancestor and would fall outside the primary scope. Similarly, a profile fitting the topic criteria might never incur any controversy (multiple duplicates, disputes over identity or sources, etc) and therefore fails the primary scope tests.
- The purpose of the second and third questions is to define rights and responsibilities in interactions between projects and profile managers. They are meant as a logical extension of normal WikiTree policy and practice in collaboration between members. Project Leaders are given the power unilaterally to add the project account as manager of (to coopt) a profile in certain circumstances. The goal of these additions is to apply our Honor Code principles equally to projects and profile managers, and to provide profile managers some protection against arbitrary exercise of the profile-coopting power. The goal of these questions is to increase understanding and manage expectations in project-PM interactions. This should result in overall reduction in project workload by reducing the number of cooption-related complaints and by creating an incentive for projects to add only qualified profiles. Please discuss at G2G.
What rights and responsibilities do profile managers have when working with projects?
Managers of potentially controversial, historically significant, and widely shared profiles must be aware that one or more projects might become interested in those profiles. A co-manager of a project-managed profile retains all the rights and responsibilities of non-project management.
Profile managers working with projects have the right
- To add a project as co-manager on profiles meeting all primary and topic scope criteria;
- To withdraw a profile from project management, after proving the profile fails at least one primary or topic scope test;
- To remove themselves as manager for any reason.
Profile managers working with projects have the responsibility
- To add a project as co-manager on request, provided the project demonstrates that the profile meets all primary and topic scope criteria;
- To collaborate with the project as described on this Help page.
What rights and responsibilities do projects have when working with profile managers?
Basic profile-management responsibilities, as well as the Honor Code requirements of collaboration and courtesy, apply equally to projects and individual members.
Projects working with co-managers have the right
- To be added as a manager, upon demonstrating that a profile meets all primary and topic scope criteria;
- To refuse to manage profiles not meeting all primary and topic scope criteria, although they may choose to accept such profiles on request;
- To remove itself from management if it determines that a profile fails at least one primary or topic scope test.
Projects working with co-managers have the responsibility
- To treat co-managers as equal partners;
- To retain a co-manager as long as he or she continues satisfactory management performance, regardless of project membership status;
- To accept management of profiles meeting all primary and topic scope criteria;
- To remove itself from management if a co-manager demonstrates that the profile fails at least one primary or topic scope test.
Help Pages Mentioning Project Scope
- "The missions of [topical] projects is unambiguous. They exist to fill out and improve the profiles in their scope." No definition of 'scope' and no link to additional information.
- "In recent years ... topical projects have evolved and expanded their scope to better serve our community. However, the basic role of topical projects in managing profiles has remained the same." No definition of 'scope' and no link to additional information.
- This Help page closes with, "Project management is only appropriate if members are expected to coordinate major changes with the project instead of with an individual profile manager." This statement is consistent with the policy of requiring all project-managed profiles to meet primary scope criteria.
- "The [purpose] information must directly relate the scope of the project." No definition of 'scope' and no link to additional information.
- Under 'Usage,' this page states "Project Boxes belong on all project-managed profiles (PMPs), whether or not they are project-protected. ... If collaboration on a profile does not require interaction with other project members, the profile should not have the Project Box." (Emphasis in the original.)
- Under the current policy requiring all project-managed profiles to have Project Boxes, and all profiles with Project Boxes to have the project account as a manager, this instruction clearly supports the policy of requiring all project-managed profiles to meet primary scope criteria.
- "When we start to get too many top-level projects, some top-level projects may ... need to ... adjust their project name and scope...." No definition of 'scope' and no link to additional information.
- "The geographic scope [of the Native Americans project] will be lower 48 states plus Alaska in North America."
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/753004/how-can-wikitree-members-have-so-much-power-is-this-not-wrong?show=754180#a754180 15 Jan 2019
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/748184/project-protected-problems-please-clarify 9 Jan 2019
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/510196/explanation-removing-protection-profiles-project-accounts?show=510196#q510196 23 Nov 2017
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/498209/how-do-project-managed-accounts-work-for-you?show=498209#q498209 5 Nov 2017
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/398255/why-was-i-removed-as-pm-on-some-of-my-files?show=398255#q398255 25 May 2017
- https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/217605/project-protected-profiles-does-project-profile-have-manager 8 Feb 2016
Tardy-26 22:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
- Who cares about Wikitree? Feb 14, 2019.
- Proposal: Add three questions to Help:Project-Managed Profiles Jan 23, 2019.
- Login to request to the join the Trusted List so that you can edit and add images.
- Public Comments: Login to post. (Best for messages specifically directed to those editing this profile. Limit 20 per day.)
- Public Q&A: These will appear above and in the Genealogist-to-Genealogist (G2G) Forum. (Best for anything directed to the wider genealogy community.)