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

Too many red "Data Problems" icons for non-standardized places

When I recently logged on to FamilySearch, my tree is suddenly full of red "data problems" icons. Why did not having a standardized place suddenly become a data problem? Some places I copied from the record on Ancestry.com, and wasn't sure which place on the list that FamilySearch considered "standard" was the correct one, so I leave the place as Ancestry.com lists it, rather than get it wrong. Please, go back to just having non-standard places listed as something to check in the research help box on the person's page.
1 person likes
this idea
+1
Reply
  • The purpose for having a standardized date is that then the system actually knows what that date is, and then can give you much more intelligent feedback concerning dates that are unreasonable. Without letting the system know that, for example, by 12-1-1900 you mean "January 12" versus "December 1", there is a pretty large margin of error.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • 1
    I believe the purpose of a 'standardized' PLACE is to enhance the search function.

    Virtually anything can be written as the "place", but the green "standardized place" (which triggers the data problem warning) should be selected which mostly reflects the proper place of the action.

    It's not a "new" warning, but a recent program update may have tighten up the parameters.

    Your tree in Ancestry has whatever YOU put in.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • If your tree was suddenly full of red error icons that were not there before, it is possible that the server that deals with checking data standardization is having problems today. That has happened before. Check again in a few hours and you might find that all the red icons are gone again.

    If they remain, then post a couple of ID numbers that have a red icon and didn't before so the programmers can see what is going on.

    If you find the concept of standardization in Family Tree confusing, you are not alone. If that is the problem, I'd be happy to explain.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • Thank you all for your suggestions. I do understand about standardized dates and places, and why and how they are used. I don't have a problem with standardized dates, all my red "data problems" icons are for places.

    If I find a record on Ancestry that is not on FamilySearch, I enter the information into the tree on FamilySearch. Ancestry seems to use different standardized places, so there isn't always a match in FamilySearch's standardized list, and since it is German places, I don't always know which is correct, so I say "none of the above" in the standardized list, and leave how it was written on Ancestry. It also flags it if there is a church or cemetery name in front of the location.

    There has always been a warning about what isn't standardized in the research help box on the individual's page, but it wasn't a "data problem", triggering a red icon on the tree view.

    I logged on 3 days ago, and my tree was full of red boxes that weren't there before, and still are there now, after logging off and back on.

    For an example, see the family in the tree view of:
    Heinrich Friedrick Georg Bitter
    K66P-LHP
    • view 1 more comment
    • The cutting and pasting you describe is exactly equivalent to just clicking on the yellow bar and choosing the first place name on the list. That first one is usually correct but not always.

      The standard Rea probably wants is seventh on the list so after clicking outside of the box, she would need to click on the green box to re-open that menu and pick the correct standard name.
    • I wrote that process for the "not always" situation.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • At one time, what is now https://www.familysearch.org/research... was part of the BYU labs group, which was involved with developing new apps for what was then newFamilySearch.org. One of them involved standard places and developing a comprehensive standards list.

    When FamilySearch switched on the https://www.familysearch.org/research... standards, there was absolutely nothing run between the standards list and the places in FamilySearch FamilyTree.

    A number of us complained and asked that a routine run between the places in FamilySearch FamilyTree, but that request was basically ignored and so you have what you have. Basically, instead of running a relatively easy routine to encode, they dumped the whole thing on the patrons.

    In my mind, someone really didn't think through the fact that many places were correctly entered from the old labs sites and matched the standards places.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • So I wonder what happened to your entries? It's always been the case that if the green bar is not set, you get a red error icon.

    The example you gave should have been showing the red error icon ever since the the red data error flags were started last year.

    For the search routines to work properly, you really should click on the yellow bars and pick the best standard available. I don't have family in Germany so I don't have to deal those centuries of boarder changes, but my guess is highlighted here:

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

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

  • Rea is correct. Something changed about a week or so ago in in the criteria for setting the red exclamation point "Data Problem" flags. I've been following the process I described above to clear them up. I don't like seeing red exclamation problems!
    • view 3 more comments
    • Now this discussion is turning into something the engineers can start to track down.

      1) The red icons are functioning normally in the majority of cases.

      2) Something happened within the past few weeks to turn some standard bars from green to yellow.

      3) Something happened within the past few weeks so that, rarely, a red icon shows even though the standard bar is green.

      Any more hints for the engineers? For example, did the people seeing these problems, which at this point appear to be few in number, recently sync information with a third party program? We've been notified of maintenance upgrades the past couple of weekends. Did this occur after one of these?
    • I have not synced information with any third-party programs.

      It is quite possible that this problem started after one of the maintenance upgrades.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • I have placed two posts here recently (both updated yesterday) about the red exclamation marks suddenly appearing for no valid reason. I would hope a FamilySearch employee could put comments against this thread and those at https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... and https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... to advise if these are bugs or what is going on here.

    My main problem is in getting these warnings for STANDARDIZED places.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • 1
    As a side note which is connected to the whole concept of how FamilySearch uses place names, is the standard for the birth place in Rea's example correct?

    Currently, that entry has Grauenhagen, Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Prussia, Germany standardized as Schwerin, Regenwalde, Pomerania, Prussia, Germany. Is that correct? Wikipedia is getting really confused, but it seems to say that Mecklenburg-Schwerin, Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and part of Pomerania were combined into Mecklenburg-West Pomerania only after World War II.

    Also, again admitting that I know far too little about German history and geography to be commenting, is it ever correct to use Prussia, Germany, for an event in 1822? According to Wikipedia, the German Empire was first created out of the various Germanic states, including Prussia, in 1871.
    • FYI - I have just discovered "Meyers Gazetteer", the 1912 edition of which is online at https://www.meyersgaz.org/index.aspx together with rather nice maps of similar vintage for each place. The Gazetteer aimed to cover all place-names in Imperial Germany. Its unfortunate "feature" is that the images of the Gazetteer entries are in Gothic Script - fortunately the main items of jurisdictional data are transcribed. Good job - I would never have guessed what "k" appears as, for instance.

      As for "Germany" - it is absolutely not correct to use it in pre-German Empire place-names. That's my view. Before that it is a geographic and cultural idea only. And it is of indeterminate scope - did it include Austria, for instance, pre-1871? What's even worse, and fundamentally ludicrous, is that, so far as I have found, no German place-names use "West Germany" or "East Germany"!

      As my need for German place-names is so small, it might be that some other place-names are more accurate.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • I've noticed this problem also but I believe where only seeing the tip of a much larger issue. Red data problem warnings are showing indicating problems with source duplicates that need to be resolved. Also within source linker when I've tried to attach the hint. Sourcer shows the left side as being attached while the right is blank. When then checking the source has already been attached. But not showing as attached in source Linker. Seems this all started with last system upgrades. Seem as my Father would say "Murphy's Law is still alive and well.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • Confirmed. A week ago, work was completed that allowed data problems and research suggestions that were already shown on individual person pages to be consistently shown in all pedigree views, as well. The unstandardized 'problems' were always there, and are now just uniformly visible. I agree that it would be nice to run a data fixup for dates and places that *do* match a single standard.

    As i understand the categorization in place, the reason non-standardized places are a data problem is that a place entered without a standard cannot be localized for other FamilySearch users in the growing list of languages supported. With the focus of FamilySearch being on a single, well-sourced tree, if other users cannot understand the data in it, that is a problem.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • This reply was removed on 2017-08-28.
    see the change log
  • 1
    PID: 26LW-865 ​ Isaac Huber


    PID: K8QZ-F2Z ​ Maria Hess Huber


    I did not attempt to correct the problem. This is definitely some kind of bug that needs to be examined, root cause determined, and corrected.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • Clif

    Another problem is that the data problems now showing in the pedigree / landscape views are NOT appearing on the individual person pages.

    You say the work was "completed" but if you view the problems here, and at two recent posts I've raised*, I think you'll find there's a lot more work to be carried out.

    * See https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea... and https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea....
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • I’m annoyed
    I am now getting the red "data problems" icon on my pedigree as well. It seems that most of mine are from putting the cemetery information before the place in the burial field. I would very much like that to be seen. I don't mind seeing the red icon in the research helps box on the individual's data sheet, but on my pedigree I would prefer to only see the red box for real data problems, like mother died before child born, for example. I understand the reasons for having a standard, but why does it have to make red icons on my pedigree? Where would I put the cemetery information where it can be seen if not in the burial field? I would suggest that the non-standardization of data be put in the purple icons as a research suggestion, not a data problem.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

  • Sorry for all of the drama, everyone. Our developers are aware of the issue of misleading data problems being shown, and are working on getting a fix out that will work well for everyone. Stand by.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

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

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

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