Over ambitious WikiTreer taking family's place stressing me out during the holdays! [closed]

Question

Without going into details, in less than a week I'm being pressured to complete merges requiring LNAB changes (some of which I'm not sure about) which were proposed after Dec 20. My questions made as comments remain unanswered, uncollaborated changes to profiles on my watchlist - info has been deleted ... Courtesy mentioned in honor code has been lacking ... Too much, happening too fast, many contributions seem to be blank or attributed to wrong person, comments going unanswered when another is complimented for promptness.This occurred even after mentioning that I work on the merges as quick as health/computer issues would allow. I feel like it's time (maybe, even a bit pass) to "stop, drop, and roll". But can't bring myself to start the process during the holidays.

Instead I would like to take a holiday from working on these Wilke/Wilkie merges till after the new year when, hopefully, after a cooling down period of week or so, I can return in better health and get the job done as quick as possible.

Would there be any reason that I shouldn't proceed with this option as an alternative to "stop, drop, and roll" which will still be an option if situation continues.

My computer doesn't have functional e-mail, however I can periodically check my husband's computer, when its available. I'll try to check back here for any comments.

Not sure what tags to use!

Comments

You are a volunteer here at WikiTree.com (like the rest of us) and are free to use YOUR time as you see fit.

If a fellow member becomes too pushy, review the Problems with Members help page and possibly file a Mentor Intervention Request.

Collaboration, communication, and courtesy are 2-way streets. If you've met your obligations but the other member hasn't, then mentor intervention is appropriate.

Answer 1

Pat, great question.

Some members work at different speeds and if you ever feel like you're being pressured, it might be a good idea to just email the other member and let them know that the merges are a bit much and you would like a little more time to review them.  If it is an LNAB change and you don't feel that there is enough info on hand right now to establish the correct LNAB, there is nothing wrong with changing the merge request to a match and annotating your reasons and the additional information you're looking for in order to the reinitiate the merge.  If the other member can present enough sourcing to convince you, then let the merge proceed.  If not, let the search begin.

Another thing to continue, if you don't feel there is enough info, change the merge to a match and then post a question on G2G, "What is the proper LNAB for so and so?"  Open the question and ask all descendants, profile mangers, trusted list members, and other interested Treers to offer their sources and/or advice and give an appropriate amount of time for everyone to reply.  This by iteself should buy a full month + the month for the merge would put the final decision out to February 26.

Merges should be done but only when the correct LNAB can be determined.  No one should feel overly "rushed" and the best way to solve this is with open and frank communication.

edit: typo

Comments

Thanks for the star Maggie 

---

Great answer as usual SJ

---

Thanks for the star Julie, again 

Answer 2

Just a suggestion: put the {{Absent}} template on your profile.  The person shouldn't pressure you into doing merges, but if the worst happens and they complain you are not responding, then having the Absent template proves that you knew you weren't going to be available, and said so.

Comments

I'm not going to stop volunteering here. Just taking a break from working that particular family in hopes that things will calm down and everyone will abide by the honor code.

---

Good point, I have that template. Thanks.

---

Slow and easy is the way to go, Pat. Thanks for the suggestion of the template, Ros.

Answer 3

Agreeing to a merge doesn’t mean you have to do it straight away or at all. The other profile manager can do it and change the LNAB if necessary.

Comments

At the present, I am PM (by adoption) of the profiles with the wrong LNAB. The way I see it I have a few more weeks to study them to make sure merges should be done. Once I get a response to my comment, I'll I will handle them. If not response then i'll add them as unmerged matches. At first I was told that all the variants were used interchangeably during that time period and the consensus was for Wilkie. But then was told that was not the case. Now the question is what do the sources use ... I've seen sources use Willkie for profile that has only 1. ... It's a waiting game ...

---

The merge should go to the correct LNAB.  We should not get into the habit of approving merges with the idea that we can change the LNAB versus doing the research before the first merge.  Please see the Merge redirects problem:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Project_Protecting_and_Merging#Background:_The_multiple_redirects_problem

---

SJ, Thanks for the link. First time I looked at that page. Much on that page was familiar. New about the redirect issue but that link does a good job of explaining what was only a vague concept to me.