Why are project managers not consulted in additions to profiles?

Question

Project manages, those on trusted list, that have worked to build a profile should be respected despite the fact they do not own it. I am encountering proifiles that are radically changed and involves many family members of one of my maternal lines.  I am curious why data doctors, editbots and such make judgment calls about information that obviously, have tunnel vision--see a date they question but do not look at sources/references given for that data in the body of the biography.  On the latter was told no source for birth date.  because different from Findagrave memoral--which for the most part is an unscourced.(Honor Code ???)  I know this is a fact I created many under another name and informed the person of that fact.  The birth record was in the source/reference for the person in wikitree.  I have begun to add sources to those in Findagrave I created 859 and manage 915 so it will take a while.

Answer 1

That sounds like an education opportunity for that data doctor, honestly. I have seen suggestions for major changes that include adding a comment pointing to a free space page with the suggested change, so that it's easy to review and decide if there are any objections.

Answer 2

I agree with you 110% that profiles should never be blindly changed to match FindAGrave, and should never be changed without thoroughly reviewing the information that is already there.  When someone has made changes like this to profiles I manage I have had good luck contacting the person privately and asking about the source for the change.

But, I think requiring a consultation with the profile manager before any change would add way to much overhead and hamper many desirable improvements.  Just look at how long it takes to get most merges through, or to change an Unknown LNAB.  Of course it is a good idea to consult with the profile manager before making major changes, and there are some profile that benefit from project protection.  

One way to discourage Data Doctors from editing profiles you manage is to regularly review your suggestions list.  If you can't "fix" the suggestion you can add a comment as to the further research needed before the suggestion can be resolved.  For discrepancies with FindAGrave data, I like to also add an explanation to the Research Notes section of the profile.

Comments

If you have a source for your date and there is not a source with the FindAGrave date, you can mark it as a False suggestion also, which should take it off the books for the process. I would NOT mark suggestions as False simply to get rid of them, it's an indication that there is a valid reason for what we have on wikitree.

---

If you need to find sources for the discrepancy,  you can leave a 'comment' type on the Suggestion that research is being done.  That will also let you know which ones you had looked at and decided more research was needed.