Future 'thons and GEDcoms: Discuss

Question

The use of GEDcoms in various WikiTree community events, such as the Connect-a-thon, or the most recent amazingly organized first ever WikiGames, has been discussed in the past, but there has never been an official ruling about it.  The purpose of this G2G post, and the ensuing responses that I hope members of the WikiTree community will provide, will help shape a decision that echoes the community's goals and be what is best for the Tree.

BACKGROUND

Before going any further, though, let me be clear that there has never been an official rule against using GEDcoms during a 'thon, just as there is no rule against using them to load ancestors into the tree itself during any other time.  There is a process in place that has developed over time, and while not easy, or perfect, it can work.  People who have found that using GEDcoms was the most efficient way to add people have not bent the rules, or cheated, and should NOT be the targets for derogatory comments or harassment.

However, despite that, there have been some negative reactions and, even if not directed at individuals, there have been some community members who have been left with a feeling of unfairness that the high scorers did "pull a fast one" and got away with doing something the easy way. This is a common type of reaction after a competition, even a friendly one, and very natural to have. But, as mentioned above, there has been no rule against this method, and to use GEDcoms is in fact far from easy.

PRO argument - in favour of allowing GEDcoms

* To use GEDcoms in a 'thon requires quite a bit of planning and organization.  This level of detail should result in good news for the Tree. Someone has to export the names and dates and places from a tree they have elsewhere on the web, or home computer, and then import it into WikiTree.  Following the import process, they then have to go through the GEDcompare process to validate each person in the file. This is not a process for the weak of heart!

* Why do this? The primary reason that using GEDcoms during a 'thon is attractive is that this allows users to add a person quickly with the names, dates, and places already entered. The data is entered automatically and without typos (assuming the original database was correct).

* Sources still need to be added - at least one per profile

* Many people who use GEDcoms spend a good deal of time preparing for the 'thons in advance to ensure high quality as well as quantity for their contributions during the weekend.

* Some have also indicated that they spend time after each 'thon to revisit their profiles created during the event to further clean up and enhance them.  

* This process can be an efficient way of adding to the tree and the quality of the profiles can be consistent with WikiTree standards.

WikiTreers who are PRO re: use of GEDcoms would suggest you vote YES to this proposal.  Register your vote by Up-Voting the Answer below that says YES.  Additionally, if you would like to leave a note there as well, click "comment" below that YES answer.

NAY argument - against the use of GEDcoms

* Albeit the time and preparation required to use a GEDcom in a 'thon, there is much room for abuse and sub-standard profiles as a result.

* There are already many profiles on WikiTree that have GEDcom junk in them, and an army of WikiTree volunteers are constantly working their way through those to clean them up.  We don't need more of those created during a 'thon.

* With the advent of and latest features of the WikiTree Sourcer extension, you can quickly and easily create a WikiTree profile based on an existing FamilySearch profile or Ancestry person profile.

* As well, you can also copy over any or all of the valid sources from either of those existing profiles - OR - from a myriad of other supported sites.

* The WikiTree Browser Extension also has many features that help you speed up the data entry / editing of profiles including the Auto Bio / Auto Categories features, the Bio Check logic built into it, the Notepad for storing commonly used text, and more.

* It is arguable that you could be as quick and efficient using these extensions as with importing GEDcoms, without the hassle of the prep work, and the headache of the cleanup needed afterwards.

WikiTreers who are NAY re: use of GEDcoms would suggest you vote NO to this proposal.  Register your vote by Up-Voting the Answer below that says NO.  Additionally, if you would like to leave a note there as well, click "comment" below that NO answer.

Register your vote by up-voting one of the Answers below - YES / NO / MAYBE if you're not sure.  Do NOT click the comment button immediately underneath this post, but do add a comment underneath a specific answer if you wish to elaborate there.

This post will close on September 30th, 2023.

Note: Even though this involves up and downvotes, that doesn't mean the one with the most votes is the "winner". We're following this process: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Developing_New_Rules.

Comments

If or not to use a GEDCOM all comes down to the quality the individual puts into it. If the individual does a poor job sourcing the profile before creating the gedcom, then I expect the manually created one will be just as poor.

It takes a lot of time and effort to create a good profile with either method. I personally will never participate in a Thon as I have no interest in a race to create profiles. I still have over 5,000 people to source and at 100 per month it is going to take many years.

---

I add gedcoms and have had some come out a mess that needs cleaning up. Others I've matched to existing profiles, and some new profiles are absolutely fine.

Personally, I'd sooner not have gedcom entries to the challenges as they exist now. But I think it would be fun to have some just for gedcoms.

---

For reference I link the previous voting: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1445450/you-think-gedcoms-should-used-allowed-during-connect-thons

Answer 1

YES - I think we should allow the use of GEDcoms in future 'thons.

Comments

I've been thinking it over and I say we should be allowed to use Gedcoms but with one cavéat. People should use them only if they intend to go back and fix up some of the things they've uploaded.

Check out Danita Zanre and others who have done uploads for the thons. Some do chunks at a time and go back and source. Others do not.

Granted, there are users who upload and never go back and check. But, why punish those who don't go back and check their work? I say let people upload if they promise to spruce things up like Danita and co have.

---

@Chris Ferraiolo,

(Edited to address to the correct Chris)

Just an additional question, do you want people to use them during a Thon, because that’s the discussion.

---

Yes. As long as they're used with the intention of going back and clean things up like Danita and co have done.

---

Okay thank you for your answer. Then we could better change the names of the Thons for everybody that would like to participate in this fantastic event.

---

No matter what type of thon or challenge we are working on, part of the standards should be that everyone goes back to fix up what needs done when the challenge is over. There is way too much dumping in profiles and leaving the clean-up to the Connectors, Sourcers, Data Doctors and GEDCOM Cleaners. As someone who works on those improvement tasks, it's a never-ending problem. That's why I do not like challenges that reward people based on total numbers. While many diligently clean things up after, many do not. The stats don't lie. I think the "Suggestions" list doubled or tripled after the last thon.

---

Yes. But:

1. Dividing participants in 2 categories: gedcom / not gedcom. (Assuming we can identify gedcom profiles created from “compare gedcom” tool)

And/or:

2. Only for new wikitreers (just registered / with no profiles created)

---

@Vicki
I could live with that suggestion: dividing the participants into gedcom / not gedcom. If this doesn't work by profile, it could be added by user, who would register with gedcom /not gedcom. And then the winners could be the top 5 gedcom and top 5 not gedcom.

Only for new wikitreers (just registered / with no profiles created)
Why would new wikitreers be allowed to use gedcoms and I would not be allowed, even though I'm still trying to add all the nearly 10'000 profiles since I joined WikiTree? To clean up and make good gedcom profiles needs some experience and I actually suspect that many of the new bad gedcom profiles are from new members who try to add their research, but then find WikiTree too complicated and leave before cleaning up. But that's just a feeling, same can also happen by copy-pasting.

---

Sure, I get your point. As you say, wikitree’s adoption process can be hard for many users. I feel gedcom import during a big event might increase the chances that the new users stays to clean their mess up :)

Point 1. for me is the key. Point 2 is optional.

---

Even if GEDCOMs were disallowed, there will always be a gap between the participants who heavily plan and prepare beforehand, compared to those who don’t wait for a Thon to enter their research. This happens in the Source-a-Thon too, because participants can simply prepare a document on their computer beforehand with all their sources then copy and paste during the Thon. Without GEDCOMs, participants can still create an Ancestry tree and import each profile during the Thon using Sourcer, or prepare the data beforehand in a document on their computer.

I think it is important for the team leaders during the Thon to check in with their team members and see if anyone needs reminders about cleaning up their GEDCOMs (or at least confirm that they’re planning on doing it shortly after the Thon) or adding proper sources.

---

I like Vicki's idea of having 2 different categories, one for gedcom users and one for non-gedcom.

Answer 2

NO. I think we should disallow the use of GEDcoms in future 'thons.

Comments

I concur with the majority here. GEDCOMS should absolutely not be allowed in 'thons. We should all be entering profiles one at a time.

Frankly, I don't think GEDCOMS should be allowed, ever. It's too much mess to clean up. I've been here since 2017, and I still stumble across GEDCOM junk in the tree I initially uploaded! It's not an exaggeration to say that it's almost weekly when we find *another* branch that needs cleaning. It's too much to hope for that we ban them outright, but at the very least we should disallow them in 'thons.

---

Good grief, NO.  We have enough problems cleaning up gedcoms as it is.  Why on earth would we ask for more?

---

Maybe my opinion is influenced by seeing the large number of old, old profiles on the site that were created with GEDCOMs and still remain waiting for even minimal clean up.

There are other methods of "prep" available that will allow for efficient work during an event, and result in better-quality starter profiles.

---

No gedcoms. It's not done in the spirit of nor the confines of the timing of the actual thon period, so it's people gaming the event for their own personal/ team gain.

---

"GEDCom imports also have the very nasty propensity to dump things into an existing profile that has been recognized as a duplicate, creating a mess in some profiles that had a well written and sourced bio already.  Thus creating more work for existing PMs etc."

I think we (or the programmers) should improve this part. When I to the merging before adding new profiles from my gedcom (imported from a genealogy software), never something was added to the existing profile. The existing profiles are just left as they were before, but connections can be made more easily, eg. if the parents already are on WikiTree and I add a child, the connection is automatically made (same process as if a profile is manually added, the profile of the other parent can be ticked or not).

Today I saw a few profiles that were imported from FamilySearch a second time (last change: "Imported data from FamilySearch Family Tree") and those have the full biography doubled and some sources too. This second import was from last week. So here something is not working correctly. Not the gedcom import generally.

---

Why do we keep blaming the mess on the GEDCOM import?  The gedcom is just a tool. It is the people using the tool that are the problem. I can import a gedcom, match it to an existing profile and make some additions to the profile in a way that would hardly be noticed. it is the WT USER that is at fault. NOT the tool. It is the same issue with manually created profiles that are also a mess.

---

Dave, the importing function itself leaves a lot to be desired.

---

I think this thread is going Way Off Topic - the question posed is should we allow GEDCOM uploads to count as multiple profile creations during the 3-DAY THONs ?  Not whether or not GEDCOM uploads are good or bad, per se.  

My point is that a "Thon or Games" competition where there are Time Limits should have an "even playing field" where everyone follows the same rules.  The analogy of a bicycle race that suddenly allows motor-scooters to compete is valid.  

Perhaps have 2 scoring levels:  one "traditional" with individual research & creation & at least 1 valid source (to be clearly defined!) and a 2nd one for GEDCOM uploads might be a solution.  For me it's hardly "fun" to be in a race or competition where some people are equipped with motor bikes so that no matter how hard or long I peddle (within the time limit!), I will never equal their performance.

---

Agree Chet. I so hope that the two techniques will be separated. I suspect that there are folks working almost around the clock, during the Thon Days, giving it their all, and are so far down the score list that they can't get even a nod of appreciation for their efforts, while the ones that have been working on the Thon for months get all the glory.  I'm not one of those high scorers, but love cheering on the hard workers, no matter what team they are on.  It is no fun when I know that those hard workers get no praise.

---

I agree with Chet. The issue at hand is whether or not to allow GEDCOMS in 'thons. The only fair answer is NO.

Answer 3

MAYBE - I am not sure whether we should allow the use of GEDcoms or not in future 'thons.  Colour me "undecided".

Comments

"Can someone point me to a list of ten good ones so that I see what people mean when saying that they have created good profiles through a Gedcom import?"

These are just some that I grabbed that I added during the July Thon - they were a single family that was mostly added onto as a group during the process.

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-153 (he was from April, and was probably the "addition" anchor for other family members added)
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Capitelli-30
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-159
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-158
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-159
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-160
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-161
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-150
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Borzoni-162
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Barbieri-766

 

Start there - this entire family was all added via Gedcom (as are almost all of the profiles I add).

It's fairly representative of how to add a number of people with multiple sources without having to rekey anything.  It sometimes needs minor cleanup, and these are all actually family members, so I go back and look at them from time to time, add additional sources, etc - USUALLY by editing from a modified Gedcom.

---

I mean, those Borzoni profiles look awesome now, but you've taken the time to go back and edit them. Some people never go back and clean then up.

---

Danita's profiles are NOT the problem. All of her profiles that I have seen have been fine, but her gedcom profiles are not what the average gedcom profiles look like.

---

“Danita's profiles are NOT the problem. All of her profiles that I have seen have been fine, but her gedcom profiles are not what the average gedcom profiles look like.”

This discussion has a lot of “gedcoms are junk profiles” comments from people who are arguing that they should not be used in a Thon for the lack of quality. The merits and dangers of using Gedcoms in general have started hijacking the purpose of this poll. The poll is should Gedcoms be used in the Thons. It’s been demonstrated that Gedcoms are not necessarily bad profiles. They are just fast. 

So the real question is should the speed of the process be banned. Someone mentioned that it was like a bicycle race where motorcycles show up. I’ve been doing the Thons for about 2 years. I will admit that my first Connect-a-Thon I was baffled as to how some people were racking up so many profiles. But I’d been using Gedcoms for a long time, and sussed it out. So the second time I was ready. I don’t see it as a bicycle race. I see it more akin to Wacky Races where there are vehicles of all kinds and drivers of all skill levels. Now the question remains as to whether the Gedcom folks are Penelope Pitstop or Dick Dastardly. 

---

My gedcom created profiles might be of more average than Danita's so I also post a few:
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Freiburghaus-41
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Schaad-440
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Schaad-442
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Schaad-441
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Caruso-952 (and all relatives)
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Verillo-6
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Mercurio-196
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Caruso-1010
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Caruso-953
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Colanardo-1

No gedcom junk.

---

The consistency of GEDCOM imports can be very variable. For those who need to spend time finding records, it can make adding profiles quicker and with good sourcing, so will benefit the tree.

Everyone works differently and for some this may be how they prefer to work. How different is it to making a list of profiles to add along with their citations or adding from a tree on Ancestry or Family Search. During the WikiTree games I used the Sourcer app to add from Family Search, as I am sure others did, and it is much quicker. I know I could have put in more if I had spent more time doing the additions. But I have a life outside WikiTree and other commitments requiring my attention.

---

I'm going to agree with the analogy that we have more of motorbikes vs bicycles when it comes to GEDCOM versus manual entry.

If the thon is a come-one-come-all wacky race, why do we reward the person(s) who ends up with the most the fastest? What's the point? Why not award the most colorful profiles? The best biographies? The most well-sourced? We don't do that because it would take more work and judges. Using code to track the totals makes it is so easy to declare a "winner" and then laud and reward them for how good they did. The whole thing is ugly, IMO. If I hadn't found the Toddlin' Tortoises I would have quit thons altogether.

---

Laura I tend to agree with you and the small Welsh Dragons are just so laidback that we all enjoy what we do without the pressure. Being in a small team unlikely to win but being around to help one another.

---

I participate with Team Massachusetts, which is similar to Toddlung Tortoises in its style.

---

There are several projects / Thon teams that state Quality over Quantity.   Maybe those teams should be separated from ones that don't use that Motto!!

Answer 4

You might want to explain what an "upvote" is better. I didn't do this right, and someone had to explain to me

Answer 5

A competitive thon where you already know who the winners are from the beginning was discouraging for me to learn.  I actually thought i was helping a team!  But helping WikiTree as a whole is the main thing, and I'm glad of that.

Why not have a GEDCOM Thon...then there is an even advantage between those members. Also they could enforce the quality!  And the winner should only be declared after spot checking their work to see if they didn't cheat!

Answer 6

Maybe the situation around gedcoms would calm down a bit if we didn't have 3 Connect-A-Thons in one year, but again a Clean-A-Thon in addition, in which we improve old profiles? Even though there may be new profiles with gedcom junk, they are mainly old profiles when uploading many profiles at once was still possible. That is no longer the case.

Comments

Suggestions that need to be cleaned are not just from profiles from old gedcoms. Of 93,000 profiles created in July Thon, there are over 25,600 suggestions that have still not been cleaned up. That doesn't count the ones already corrected. Of those, there are almost 2,000 that are because bio text with citations was added in the Sources section. That indicates there is or was a problem in how some people created profiles with sourcing.  

That is a lot of suggestions generated from one recent event. Suggestions are not just old profiles or old gedcoms.

---

Oh, I didn't know that :-(

Maybe this needs a speparate thread to discuss and improve this specific issue. Are those gedcoms from other online trees or from desktop softwares? The old ones with inline citations seem to come from Ancestry? Then maybe that specific import would need to be improved.

In my opinion, this would also speak for a Clean-A-Thon and less Connect-A-Thons. Or more Thons in any way that improves the existing tree, until we cleaned up the mess from the past few Connect-A-Thons?

---

That isn't the gedcom suggestions. That is suggestions from last connect a thon profiles.

---

Would it be possible to consider the (automatically counted) suggestions as a NEGATIVE when determining the winner of a THON?

For example: a user (or team) gets x "plus points" for creating the desired new connections or profiles or whatever, but gets some number of "minus points" deducted for any open suggestions (perhaps grouped by severity) left on those profiles at the end of the THON.

---

All the suggestions generated span 2 weeks of generations.  In that timeframe, many people will have corrected the suggestions generated in the 1st week, especially for ones like 'too early' for using USA or United Kingdom.  Some of us work on those weekly, so they wouldn't be there the following week.  I like your idea though!!!

Unfortunately the Team has stated that they will not do a Clean a Thon again, leaving the clean up work to the projects and Data Doctors.

---

Hi Linda,

I'm not sure I understand your comment about the weeks. When I look at my suggestions, they are filtered by project manager and identified by profile. My thought was that there might be a way to identify suggestions created by the "quick and dirty" approach to a "THON" - particularly in light of the discussion surrounding the (user-dependent) quality when a Thon-participant uses the GEDCOM tool. Perhaps there is a relatively simple and transparent way to determine whether the newly created profiles / changes had also created new suggestions (perhaps a "before and after the thon" count for profiles managed by or last changed by each participant). In the "connect-a-thon", there is obviously some magic going on to allow the new connections to be counted for each participant - maybe similar magic could be conjured up to be sure points aren't racked up at the expense of others needing to "clean up" later.

---

Ales takes a data dump on Sunday, before the Thon is finished.  He generates the suggestions from that dump, therefore, the suggestions he generates on the 1st week after the Thon ends do not have all the profiles and related suggestions that were created on Sunday / Monday of the Thon.  Those profiles and related suggestions will not be available until the following week when the next data dump is taken.  

The Suggestions that were generated from a Thon are not always from Gedcom generated profiles.  They are generated from people creating the profiles manually or with the assist of the extensions. The suggestions are not always easy ones dealing with location. They can be for any reason.

Ales had created a query to bring up the profiles created by the July 2023 Thon, so that suggestions could be reviewed from those. Running that Query now, it shows 92,655 profiles were created and there are currently 21,329 suggestions on those profiles.  Remember the Suggestions may be with profiles that have not been Edited since the Thon or they could have been changed and now the Suggestions are being generated

I revised the Query to check for profiles that have never been edited from that Thon.  That shows 65,040 profiles that were not edited after the date of the thon.  There are 16,988 Suggestions, so I would 'assume' that is a fairly good number of Suggestions that still exist for the ones created and never touched since the thon.  As a good example, there are almost 1300 suggestion for inline citations existing after the references tag.  Those are profiles that were not created properly because at least some part of the bio was put into the Sources section. Many of those profiles still have PM.

The count of profiles created during a Thon is determined by the profiles created as a relative of another profile during the time period of the Thon.  Suggestions cannot be created for that same time period, because they use the Sunday Data dumps.

---

Hi Linda,

thanks for taking the time to provide all that great background info!  I see a couple of points:

a) The timing of the data dumps / suggestion generation routine. Your point is that the weekly (Sunday) data dumps can't capture either "just before" or "just after" the Thon. I guess if it is important to have an instant determination of a "winner", then that would kill the idea entirely. In the interest of (a) de-escalating the GEDCOM issue and (b) promoting "clean" THON results no matter what method is used, perhaps some "grace period" might be useful - something like "suggestions remaining on THON profiles after two cycles (perhaps allowing a full week AFTER the first "post-THON" data dump for participants and teams to do as much clean-up as possible). I just found a whole stack of new suggestions because I had copied and pasted a suggested Sticker syntax which contained double "pipes" (||) - never would have caught that without Ales' help!

b) not all suggestions are GEDCOM (or easy): Again, I was hoping that the double goal of de-escalating the "prohibition" discussion and considering quality when declaring the "winner" of a THON could be addressed. I think that, if the THON team recognizes and accepts the responsibility to leave their profiles as "clean" as possible, then most teams will have similar chances for dealing with the various types of suggestion which can come up. The requirement should not be "absolutely zero suggestions" - but as few as possible, since all suggestions would detract from the overall score. Team members (and ultimately data doctors) could be encouraged to help individual participants if necessary. My main intention was simply to include the "quality aspect" when judging the results.

c) the stats are pretty devastating. A "suggestions to profiles" rate of over 26% for the last THON is MUCH higher than I had expected. I can see why our hard-working data doctors cringe at the thought of an unmitigated "quick and dirty" approach.

Any changes in the RULES will inevitably take time - but perhaps Team captains could help raise their members AWARENESS and VOLUNTARY ATTENTION to the quality issue - perhaps there could be a (delayed) prize for "best suggestion to profile ratio after 14 days" ?

---

I just want to state that if a gedcom is used properly, the gedcom process does not generate any suggestions, unless the actual data is wrong. I know this because all my profiles are added via a gedcom. The only way a formatting issue could happen is that they are being edited or an automated process is being run against it after the fact.

I will say that I very seldom merge a gedcom into an existing record as the different formats usually don't work well and they are very hard to merge/edit.

---

@Dave

Your point is very well taken! My sense is that there are two, very distinct, issues which are motivating the push to ban GEDCOMs from the Thons:

a) the idea that GEDCOMs result in poor quality profiles.

b) the idea that GEDCOMs gives an "unfair advantage"

Many contributors to this thread have pointed out, as you do, that (a) is a misperception, probably based on annoying and well-known problems with some of the early GEDCOM uploads. The bottom line is that GEDCOM is a tool, which may be difficult to master and requires a LOT of careful preparation and attention to detail. Used properly, using GEDCOMs can result in very efficient, high quality additions to the common family tree. In the context of the THON rules, it makes no sense to ban use of GEDCOM out of a concern for quality. If quality norms are considered important, they shold be applied to results - regardless of method.

The issue of an "unfair advantage" seems to discount the fact that a lot of work goes into creating and preparing a GEDCOM before it can actually be used to add or connect high-quality profiles. WikiTreers who "practice" their craft regularly for years on end also have a considerable advantage over "newts" when it comes to quickly adding profiles and connections manually. Preparation, training and skill - no matter what tools you choose - will always result in an advantage for any (even very friendly) competition. That is part of what the competition is all about!

That said - the THON idea is, in my novice opinion, not primarily about competition, but about coming together in a "fun" community event to make visible progress improving the common tree. It may be worth considering some rule changes to ensure that the "fun" part remains in focus.

I would vote AGAINST a general prohibition of GEDCOMs in THONS, but suggest that other rule changes might help restore that focus.  In other posts, I have made some suggestions about recogizing different "categories" of competition - and about considering quality when determining a winner.

Answer 7

I vote YES for the the use of the GEDcoms during the Thons.

*I tend to do a lot of research prior to the Thon and verify my research.  I don't mind the process once the Thon begins.

*For me, the other process of not using the GEDcoms is much more difficult.  It is more like writing computer programming and that is nothing that I am very good at.  Rather, I find that to be SO frustrating and most of it beyond what I understand most of the time.  I realize that it is a learning curve.  But, honestly some people are just better at this type of thing than others.  IF it was programed that I could add the source and then update, OR somehow make things more simple, then I would have no problems not using the GEDcoms.

*One of the arguments was that not using the Gedcoms might help to eliminate the need for so much clean-up.  But, isn't that part of what we do?  I find that as I learn more about our tree and add more people to my personal, off-site tree, I am finding more discrepancies on both sides, mine and that of Wiki contributors.

*I have no issue or problems with any person having high scores or points during challenges or Thons.  If they can get high scores, better for WikiTree.

Comments

"One of the arguments was that not using the Gedcoms might help to eliminate the need for so much clean-up.  But, isn't that part of what we do?"

No, it's something we HAVE to do because people don't clean up after themselves. 

---

Please see my suggestion above: rather than arguing about which tools and methods should be allowed, why not make sure that THON points are reduced if the result is profiles someone else has to "clean up later"? As long as the rules don't encourage "quick and dirty", then whatever you use to be "quick and clean" should be celebrated as a win-win for the common tree.

Another idea would be to have separate categories of winners: Programm-assisted (GEDCOM- or AI mass processing), Standard (as fast as possible using manual methods), and Profile Perfection (each profile touched left as "perfect" as possible). The teams could self-define which category they wanted to compete in, and the tree would benefit. (sort of like a regatta with different prizes for the different classes, or world championship boxing with different weights)