Can we add a tic marker for Find-A-Grave when displaying a populated descendant list?

Question

I know many people do not like Find-A-Grave for a source, BUT  If we get enough people to continue the cleanup on FG, WikiTree and Find-A-Grave can work quite nicely together.   

What I would like to suggest is a "Tic Marker" to be displayed (when viewing the descendant list from the profile page).  This visual marker should look like a grave, and resemble the Yellow DNA Confirmed Marker that is placed when viewing the populated list.   Showing the FG marker (which could hyperlink (Or hover to display the link) would  confirm a source of parent-child relationship is linked and presumed as CONFIDENT.  Those profiles left (without the marker), could then be prioritized by profile managers to find, or create and then link parent-child relationships on Find-A-Grave.  The marker would give a visual priority to get some profiles reviewed and revised  from unknown confidence to confident???

This should help the project team on Find-A-Greve with linking, confirming, and review of FG sources that are attached to profiles and cleanup of errors on said profiles..

Small ask, and maybe difficult to squeeze into the descendant listing..   Thanks!

Comments

Hi Kirt, I gotta say this proposal does not appeal to me.

The only time a FindAGrave profile is a primary source is if it bears a legible picture of a gravestone. In my experience, the vast majority of ancestors have no extant, known, legible gravestone.

Generally, I don't see the presence of a FindAGrave source as particularly indicative of a well-documented profile. Unless someone has an extant gravestone, I don't think they should even have a FindAGrave profile, and if they did, there would be no particular reason to cite it.

So, I'm not particularly excited about new ways to encourage people to link to what is usually just an under-sourced or unsourced secondary source, and I don't want little markers related to FindAGrave showing up in Wikitree.

What I would prefer is guidance that directs people ''not'' to cite FindAGrave as an authority ''unless'' it has a photo of a gravestone that can be demonstrated to be that of the profile person.

---

I understand many refuse to see the value of FG.  Yes, errors exist, as do with source records with incorrect name spellings, dates, etc.  But the value of a visual marker showing burials, and surrounded by additional family members also with a burial record does assist with building out trees and new discovery. Sometimes attaching some low hanging fruit can lead to new discovery.  It's just working on a few possibly insignificant puzzle pieces that jump to a new discovery of more relations thru blood or marital family members.  It certainty would not hurt.   I'd like to see an example of groups of FG "Tic Markers" on the descendants listing...  This marker could have color coding that would show a red outline for an error with respect to a Data Doctors Find-A-Grave errors that links to a profile and needs review to clear the error????

---

I'm not sure I understand what you're suggesting, Kirt, but if it is to include markers based on burial, that would seem to require new database fields containing burial information. Addition of such fields has been described by the Team as highly unlikely to happen. See

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Christening%2C_Baptism%2C_and_Burial_Fields