WeRelate talk:GEDCOM review

It appears that the greatest need right now on the wiki is for GEDCOM Review. I am very new, but am a careful researcher and have worked on projects like this in the past. I am volunteering my services as a GEDCOM reviewer. Let me know when and where to start.

Ron


Hello, I responded in private email. --sq 23:57, 29 September 2012 (EDT)

Topics


GEDCOM upload from Jan 2012 (living people) [19 December 2012]

A GEDCOM was uploaded (and subsequent information added) from this user back in Jan 2012. I cannot find a page they've submitted that contains any vital information and I suspect many may still be living. The user has not responded to requests to add additional info to pages or delete those that are living. Is it possible to delete their tree? --Jennifer (JBS66) 11:34, 19 December 2012 (EST)


Volunteering [22 January 2014]

I am willing to help with GEDCOM reviews. Please contact me if this is an area which needs the help.--Khaentlahn 07:20, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

Responded on User's talk page. --Jennifer (JBS66) 17:24, 5 May 2013 (EDT)

Is there a place to read about what skills are necessary for GEDCOM review? I am wondering if I have what it takes to become an admin to review my own uploads. About how long does it take to review a GEDCOM and email the member if necessary? --janiejac 14:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


Hello, First read over WeRelate:GEDCOM_review. This is basically the protocol for checking gedcoms. If you would like to help out, I would have you check gedcom upload on particular days. On the first few days, I would explain why certain gedcoms were acceptable and not. After we have encountered the most common problems, I would have you look over the gedcoms first and email me with your analysis. After you're comfortable, you would do it on your own. Depending on the day, doing gedcoms takes 15 mins to 30 mins. You would do as many as you feel comfortable doing on any one day. Heather and Jennifer and I would welcome your help. The more people help out the lesser the load. It also means if someone is out for a few days, the gedcoms are still uploaded. I look forward to hearing from you. Let me know and welcome to the team. --sq 05:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


Hi Janie, I just want to add one thing to what Solveig has said. You mentioned "I am wondering if I have what it takes to become an admin to review my own uploads". Are you considering joining GEDCOM review solely to review your own files and speed up imports? In that case, I would probably caution against it. Optimally, volunteers would be reviewing other users' GEDCOM files. If that is what you intended (to help out in general), then.. it would be great to have your help :-) --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, yes the motivation for the question was to be able to review my own uploads. But once I learn how it is done and how much time it will take to do, then possibly I could do it for others also. If you could teach other users to do this, wouldn't it help relieve the load from the current reviewers? Is there a concern that users would let bad info be uploaded? One of the reasons I like to upload even small gedcoms to WeRelate is that this program catches my errors. But I do understand the need for caution and don't know how much time I would be willing to put into this. It looks like it would take a good bit of time/effort on your part just to train me; so perhaps this isn't the best use of our time. --janiejac 15:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)


Family Matches [5 September 2013]

I'm just following up on an issue with a recent GEDCOM. After the file was uploaded, Amelia noticed a number of duplicate family pages in recent edits. Since the file is already imported, I can't determine the cause exactly, but I suspect the Family Matches were inaccurately marked as "Not a match". We may want to add a quick check before uploading GEDCOM's that the Family Matches weren't willfully marked "not a match" in haste. --Jennifer (JBS66) 06:47, 5 September 2013 (EDT)


Gedcom for User:Run4fun [12 November 2013]

Hi Dallan or SQ, since there have been recent problems (Letters, Numbers and Special Characters in the name field) with two Gedcoms for User:Run4Fun, I took a look into a recent Gedcom and inadvertently "claimed it". Jennifer (JBS66) suggested I leave a message here so one of you could complete the approval process. I didn't see anything similar to the two previous Gencoms.

Best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 14:50, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


Is there a place to report poor quality GEDCOMs? [27 December 2013]

I've been helping out on the duplicates page recently and just spent the last 4 hours untangling some very messed up records that were added by this user in Jan 2012 (info copied from Ancestry.com public trees, and apparently quite indiscriminately). I enjoyed the puzzle-solving, so that's okay, but it makes me concerned about the quality of the rest of the GEDCOM. I noticed that Jennifer (JBS66) had asked this user to review and clean up duplicates the day after the GEDCOM was uploaded, but I can't tell if anything was done.

What is the appropriate action to take? If the GEDCOM is deleted, we lose the work I just did. Even if you keep the records I touched, there are related ones (which might or might not be accurate) that I did not touch.

BTW, in case someone wants to delete most of the GEDCOM, this is what I fixed:

Samuel Griffin (7), his wives and children (but not his parents or grandchildren
everyone in the tree of Granville Jenkins (1) (which is now disconnected from the rest of the GEDCOM)
everyone in the tree of Daniel Jenkins (15) (which is now disconnected from the rest of the GEDCOM)
Willie Griffin (4) - I disconnected him from his parents (wrong family), which leaves him orphaned. I did not validate his info - maybe his record should just be deleted.--DataAnalyst 19:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)