Should the guidance that all Research Note Boxes are temporary be deleted?

Question

The current guidance on Research Note Boxes states that: 

A Research Note Box on a profile should always be considered temporary, at least theoretically. WikiTree should have a mechanism for completing the research and removing the note. Of course, in many cases conclusive research is not possible.

See Help: Research Note Boxes, Purpose.

I think this statement is incorrect, as some Research Note Boxes are intended to be permanent and others likely to be appropriate indefinitely. For example, if there is a theory of a person's parentage that is common on online trees but that has been disproven, a {{Disputed Parent}} research note box would be appropriate as a permanent fixture. Due to an absence of relevant records to definitely determine an issue, it is likely that many other research note boxes would be appropriate indefinitely and perhaps permanently.

I do not believe any replacement language is necessary, since it goes without saying that if research note box is no longer applicable it should be removed.

Proposal: That the three sentences quoted above relating to research note boxes being temporary be deleted, with no replacement language added.

Answer 1

Upvote this answer is you think that the following guidance regarding research note boxes should be deleted:

A Research Note Box on a profile should always be considered temporary, at least theoretically. WikiTree should have a mechanism for completing the research and removing the note. Of course, in many cases conclusive research is not possible.

Comments

In theory, I believe the intent is that you would have a definitive source, and it would not be changed, because it is properly cited. So in that case, all researcher notes are temporary. If you have conflicting records or no source to disprove it, then it would remain until someone finds the definitive source that puts the question to rest.

So for this reason, I believe they are temporary, and at some point the question or issue will be resolved.

---

@Jimmy - While a definitive source may be found for that allows removal in some cases, we know that in many, many cases no definitive source will ever be found. In fact, the sentences admit that and go on to say that as a practical matter many of the boxes will be permanent because conclusive research is not possible. If we know that many of the boxes will be permanent, why say they should always be considered temporary? Also, as I noted in the original post, if there have been conflicting claims regarding a person's parents, the {{Disputed Parents}} box is appropriate even after one of the claims has been proven to be false and the other true.

Answer 2

Upvote this answer if you think that the following guidance on research note boxes should be retained:

A Research Note Box on a profile should always be considered temporary, at least theoretically. WikiTree should have a mechanism for completing the research and removing the note. Of course, in many cases conclusive research is not possible.