William de Warenne, 2nd Earl Surrey - Please merge with master profile for William de Warenne

Pamela Bigelow Johnson - can I ask why you are adding duplicates and requesting merges ?

If you feel you must be a manager (instead of following the profile), why don't you request to be added as a manager?

You are very knowledgeable, so you must know that when users add duplicate branches that have to merged in, it takes time away from other work AND very often can introduce errors. Curators spend way too much time merging duplicates into what we call the historical tree (existing branches from 200+ years ago with scores or hundreds or thousands of descendants).

I'm asking because it's something that curators have been discussing and trying to find a way to help Geni by reducing the amount of time we spend merging in duplicates.

What is the purpose of duplicating existing, historical and often curated and MPed profiles?

Thank you.

Частный профиль

Because I have found so many mistakes on Geni, particularly with my own family. It is they who I want to be correct. It took over 2 years of my own correct work being erased over and over for my 9 th great grandfather John Warren of Watertown to finally have a correct profile. Geni curators were using a flawed data without cross checking it. All that would have been ok if the curator would have been responsive in any way. I do work with a couple of curators now who are responsive.

I am putting citations on all my family work. Does that answer your question?

Thank you for responding but why don't you ask to be added as manager and contribute to the existing, curated profile? This is a collaborative site.

I do not see how duplicating a profile or profiles and having them merged in achieves your goals. Directly communicating with the manager and the curator and starting a discussion as you have done for other profiles is preferable I believe.

It's merged in now. I sometimes end up doing what you did, but only for a profile or two and I first find and add links, sources, and an About Me if I am adding new information (usually).

i know how long it takes to merge in the trees that new users create before they understand that for historical times and well known families, there are existing profiles.

Glad you are using discussions and links to the profile. It's a very good practice that Erica Howton convinced me to use :)

Thanks I appreciate your help very much!

Thank you for working on this line. There are a lot of issues with the de Warenne family still to be addressed it appears to me. My 9th ggf, Richard Williams of Taunton, is supposed to be a descendant but that is not showing anymore and I am not sure if the lines are still correct or if the original lineage was flawed. Or both.

See the Richard Williams project. We should be cousins through the Warenne family although we are anyway because a Whitney married a Bigelow.

Hatte,
The Warenne line should be very clear, and so using Ormerod ( summarized by Craig Thornton nice and neatly) is how I originally had it. Then others came in with flawed family website information. This went on 2 years. I think we should use the Ormerod information for the backbone of de Warenne. Since they are well documented and relative to the kings and many other noble families, cross checks can be made with Craig Thornbers ' other, and very accurate, summaries for the Massey, Legh, Savage, Brereton and other 13th century Chesire lines. Ormerod, although not completely up flawed, is considered the best source by Chesire historians.
Then we can find cross checks on ORIGINAL family genealogies and historic notations ( fought in battle XYZ or litigating) which have extra info on wives and children. Other than Craig Thornber, I don't think that any modern resources should be used unless they relate to hard evidence somehow.