Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m concerned

"Odd" individual/person, who I can confirm, that I have NOT accessed at any time, in any way, suddenly appear on my "Recents" list.

"Official 'FamilySearch' Representatives"

Of late, I have noticed the "Odd" individual/person, who I can confirm, that I have NOT accessed at any time, in any way, suddenly appear on my "Recents" list.

And, I can confirm that the individuals/persons HAVE NOT been accessed by "Me" in the "Branches" of the "Tree" for any User / Patron that I have "Helped".

In the past, I had simply "Deleted" them from my "Recents" list without accessing.

And, in the past, I had not taken note of the individual/person ( ie. PID ).

Since raising this problem / issue in a previous post, "Unrelated people in Recommended tasks" ( https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... ), I have taken note of the PIDs.

It appeared from the "Reply" in the previous post that by the poster of that post, 'Melissa L -dl-', was experiencing the same situation as I have outlined.

Two (2) examples of the "Odd" individual/person, who I can confirm, that I have NOT accessed in any way, suddenly appear on my "Recents" list areas follows:-

(1)

Name: Jagena. Bancrofte
[ ps: which includes the "Full Stop" / "Period" in the middle of the name ]
Dates: Deceased
FamilySearch Person Identifier: MD1P-DLZ

(2)

Name: Francois Or Kichara
[ ps: which appears to be without a 'Family Name' / 'Surname' ]
Dates: Deceased
FamilySearch Person Identifier: MJV2-2CR

I have subsequently NOT accessed the individuals/persons; and, I have also NOT "Deleted" the individuals/persons from my "Recents" list!

I would really appreciate a reply/comment from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" as to possibly WHY individuals/persons who I have NOT accessed, at any time, in any way, in my own right or as a "Helper", SUDDENLY appear on my "Recents" list!?

'Thank You'.

Brett
1 person likes
this idea
+1
Reply
  • Did these show up at the top of your Recents list? What time frame did these two occur?
    If they showed up June 13 and you were using the product then, then there was a bug that might have caused that behavior.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • Joe

    'Thank You' for your response in this post.

    No they did not show up at the 'Top' of My 'Recents' List.

    They were down a few; but, I suspect that they were not on top as I access and work on a number of PIDs each day; and, before, I even went to access My 'Recents'List.

    The first example was from x4 Months ago; and, the second I noticed today, this morning.

    Certainly well before and after 13 June.

    Again, 'Thank You'.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m concerned
    Joe

    Here is another one that must have showed up last night while I was working in "Family Tree".

    It is the Fourth ( 4th ) one on my "Recents" list when I access the "Recents" list this morning.

    The three before it were some of the ones that I was jumping between last night.

    Bartolo De La Cruz
    Deceased
    M2ZS-4X6

    I can confirm, that I have definitely NOT accessed this individual / person, in any way, shape; or, form.

    And, I have not, either, deleted; or, attempted to access, "Bartolo De La Cruz" ( M2ZS-4X6 ) this morning in the "Recents" list.

    So, it appears that the "Bug" of the "13 June" has not been fixed; or, that there is / are factor(s) causing the problem / issue / error.

    Submitted for your information.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • That's odd. But I don't know that the engineers have enough info to recreate the problem. They are aware of this but probably not a high priority. So for now you'll just have to dismiss them from your recents list.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Joe

    'Yes', it is a little hard to describe the process of creating the problem/issue/error when you do not know how you did it in the first place; so, 'Yes', hard to see how the 'Engineers' can recreate the problem/issue/error.

    Any, chance you/the engineers could take a quick look through the background of my "Recents" List to identify how they were, accessed; or, not!?

    I will leave that last one ( M2ZS-4X6 ) there in my "Recents' List until is simply "drops off".

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • Brett, I notice a dismissed hint on https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/L1HC-5BC where that  Recents PID is in the Reason statement. Can you remember why you mentioned that PID? Thanks.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m still concerned.
    Joe

    I just had a look at that Dismissed "Hint".

    I DID NOT mention that as a PID, I mentioned that as a CoupleID.

    Wow, I did not notice that, there is something interesting:

    That the "FamilySearch Couple Relationship Identifier" for that Couple is the exact same identifier as that "FamilySearch Person Identifier" of a totally separate individual / person!?

    I did not think that that could ever be the case - a "FamilySearch Couple Relationship Identifier"; and, a "FamilySearch Person Identifier", being the exact same!?

    If they can; then, I can, to some degree, understand why "Bartolo De La Cruz" ( Deceased ) M2ZS-4X6; therefore, shows up in my "Recents" List: but, even so, that should not be the case as the one I accessed was a "Couple Relationship Identifier"; as opposed to, a "Person Identifier"!?

    Me thinks there is a Flaw / Fault in the "System" in either case.

    (1) I would have thought that a "FamilySearch Couple Relationship Identifier"; and, a "FamilySearch Person Identifier" should NEVER be the same.

    (2) Even if, a "FamilySearch Couple Relationship Identifier"; and, a "FamilySearch Person Identifier" CAN be the same: If I access a "FamilySearch Couple Relationship Identifier" that should not imply that I accessed a "FamilySearch Person Identifier", when I DID NOT.

    Food for thought.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m still concerned
    Joe

    FYI

    I just had a quick look at the first two "FamilySearch Person Identifiers" that I mentioned in my original post.

    (1) MD1P-DLZ:

    Is ALSO a "FamilySearch Couple Identifier".
    ( As well as a totally separate "FamilySearch Person Identifier" )

    Whereas,

    (2) MJV2-2CR:

    Shows no Couple; but,
    Indicates / displays the Error Message: "! Unable to load the list of changes. x"

    AND,

    Furthermore:

    'Yes' even though I accessed M2ZS-4X6 and MD1P-DLZ and MJV2-2CR directly as Couple Relationships ( and not as Persons / Individuals ), they now appear at the "Top" of my "Recents" List as Persons/Individuals I accessed, when, in fact, I did not.

    Definitely an issue / problem.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • IDs are unique and independent within a domain. The FT Person is a different domain than the Relationship. It's like state license plates: each state is independent and xya123 in California is a different plate that xya123 in Nevada.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m still concerned
    Joe

    Here is another one; but, this time the ID does not ( also ) apply to a Couple Relationship that I have accessed.

    Cesare CORSIATTO
    ( 1902- 1984 )
    MDQD-886

    The Couple was

    Laurentius Gruber ... AND ... Eva Baungartner

    I have certainly not access "Cesare" or "Laurentius" or "Eva".

    Curiouser and Curiouser!?

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I think I reproduced the bug. To trigger this you have to go to the "Show all info about the relationship" link on a spousal relationship. That relationship PID will now show up as the second entry in Recents, under the primary person you went to after closing the relationship screen. Does that sound right? It only shows on certain relationships - probably ones that have the same id in the Person domain.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m NOW really concerned.
    Joe

    Even another one.

    But, ...

    I will not broadcast this one, as the Couple Relationship ( ID ) relates to that of my wife and I.

    If you want the the details please e-mail me directly.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m NOW still really concerned.
    Joe

    Sorry I missed your last post as I was working though " "Odd" individual/person, who I can confirm, that I have NOT accessed at any time, in any way, suddenly appear on my "Recents" list. " ( https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... )

    And, we must have been posting about the same time.

    'Yes', what you say sounds correct.

    So, the PID and the CoupleID are in different domains ( ie. I assume different "Databases" )!?

    So, the ID's are in different domains ( ie. I assume different "Databases" ); but, ARE NOT "Unique" - Hm!?

    Wow, I would have thought that that would be difficult to Code for; and, even, potentially, dangerous, later on down the track!?

    Well, it certainly has raised its ugly head now.

    ==========

    BUT, ...

    That does not apply to:

    Cesare CORSIATTO
    ( 1902- 1984 )
    MDQD-886

    The Couple was

    Laurentius Gruber ... AND ... Eva Baungartner

    I have certainly not access "Cesare" or "Laurentius" or "Eva".

    ==========

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Actually the ID is just a value underneath 0010010011100101001010... It couple be displayed at decimal, hexadecimal or what you see XXXX-XXX. You can consider these a primary keys in a database table and the primary key 123 for the Person table is a different primary key for Relationship table even though they both appear to you as 123. The code error is probably adding to the recent Person table a coupleID.
    • Joe

      'Yes' understand what you have said.

      Especially, where the PID and the CoupleID are the same.

      But, still a little concerned about:

      Cesare CORSIATTO
      ( 1902- 1984 )
      MDQD-886

      And,

      Couple

      Laurentius Gruber ... AND ... Eva Baungartner

      I have certainly NOT access "Cesare" or "Laurentius" or "Eva"

      And, I had NOT accessed CoupleID until it appeared on my "Recents" List.

      Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated