
Jason Scott Wills
That is an outrageous suggestion! Please withdraw it.
Jason, I have been very patient with you, responding politely to your brusk demands over the past few years.
The reality of this incident is that it was you that placed the IV suffix into the first name field and it was you that put the title Byzantine Emperor into the suffix field.
All I am 'guilty' of is responding to the Consistency Check which broke your incorrectly placed inputs.
I think an apology is due.
Regards
Will
Private User
Jeff
I agree with the first part of your solution but not the second 'I'll add code that ignores the warning if a suffix already exists'. As in the case of Jason, even experienced Curators put key information in the wrong place and I'm inclined to feel the default assumption should be that whatever is entered could be valuable and it is a safer option to combine the two in the suffix field (something which could be edited later. What happened in the issue I reported was that one item of key data overwrote the other so I didn't have an opportunity to correct it. As I explained at length to Jason in separate correspondence, I have a special affinity with the Byzantine Empire and there is no way that I would have removed the title (or not replaced it) if I had known it was there.
Cheers
Will
Jeff,
I tried your suggestion in https://www.geni.com/discussions/167766?msg=1175289 and it does seem to help a bit. but it does not seem to fix things like "van Der Velden"
(which should be "van der Velden")
For a single page, this could mean some 40 the same corrections.
Private User
Jeff
Here is another example where 'fixing' the inconsistency in the first name field would wipe out the 'title' in the suffix field.
Alexander III, King of the Scots
Jeff,
just to put this out there, the double-quotes character also causes problems for the consistency checker. For example, the profiles around here, Private, "contains incorrect use of uppercase/lowercase" in the names. What is interesting is that these profiles do NOT have anything in the English fields. If you press the "fix it" link, SOME of the Hebrew data gets copied into the English fields.
The consistency checker should probably not be doing much checking of non-English text, but I suspect it's the bleed-through that's contributing to the issue here.
v. 4.3.8 Odd consistency check:
Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the United States of America
Declares birth before marriage, when there is no marriage date (as it is with a 'partner', not a spouse).
An idea just occurred to me that might be an easy time saving fix for the inconsistency that doesn't recognise, England, Scotland and Wales as bonafide countries. I say time-saving because if you take a look at https://www.geni.com/family-tree/index/6000000000112134028#60000000... you will see how frequently one can be faced with this issue.
My suggestion is to have a click-fix that will insert 'UK' as the country when the inconsistency is precipitated by a 'region' named England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (NI).
Will Chapman (Vol. Curator) -- that takes us into the issue of what the criteria are for place names in the older profiles.
Though Wales and Scotland and Ireland got subsumed earlier, nobody was actually born into the United Kingdom until 1801, when that title became official..
So the problem is, do we enter the place where people were born, or do we enter the place where you would go now, if you wanted to see it?
Anne - so much revolves around being able to prove / substantiate our information, isn't the most likely place for information is where it is maintained / stored? Would that then not necessitate calling a place by its current name? If the original name had any consequence then it could be noted in the about section.
We had tried that in Colonial America and gotten other curator objections. :(
I use it in the “place” field.
For example
Place: Newtown, now
City: Cambridge
County: Middlesex County
State: Massachusetts Bay Colony*
County: Colonial America
* this is anachronistic as it wasn’t a state yet ...
For Australia Private User you may not have the same difficulties reaching a consensus