Born more than 60 years after a sibling

Question

Upon saving this profile, I get an angry red banner saying that someone shouldn't be born more than 60 years after a sibling.

I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is in this instance. The family is quite well documented from parish register entries, and there's no doubt that the same guy who fathered his first child out of wedlock, before he was confirmed, also fathered a child when he was eighty years old. He could have been the grandfather of his second wife.

I can't see that this error is flagged and generates a "suggestion", which I think is just as well. I wouldn't like to get Data Doctors all over this profile. I wonder, though, if there's anything I should do to prevent the profile from being "fixed"?

Answer 1

Hi, Leif.  I, too, have an ancestor who had his last child at age 86, so there was over a 60 year span between his first and last child.  (He went through 4 wives!)  

I just mark the suggestion as false, and document the births of his children.  

In your case, leaving research notes would help, too.  If it's a continual problem, put a note in big letters at the top of the biography.

Hope this helps.

Karen

Comments

The whatsit for "big" is directly from the Wikitree recommended Wikipedia pages, so I wasn't game to mess with it by adding or removing anything.

.

Y'know .. I never thought about using an image for this kind of thing .. and I should have.  Thanks for the reminder!   

---

Hmmph!  One more example of the way the help pages are such a labyrinth that when they change the rules, they don't manage to propagate the change through all the pages that have instructions that need changing to conform.  I guess they figure it's not important because nobody will ever find them anyway.

PS A "whatsit" is a "tag".

---

My comments about the CSS code were not directed towards Melanie's code example but merely to her comment that CSS is "tolerated."  And in that context, I took her to say that "unapproved" CSS is "tolerated," and it is to an extent, but I was adding that it is discouraged.  If misunderstood, I appolgize for the mixup.

Regarding your second point, I think we are closer in agreement than shows.  I am not against having a strongly worded and catchy notice near the top of the profile.  I am only saying that this shouldn't be the default response every time we have a profile that generates a false red banner.  I believe top bio warnings are only needed for profiles that have been edited incorrectly or are contentious in some other way; a research note works in most cases (married with a mark of "False suggestion (hide forever)" in the suggestion report).

Regarding one line in your last comment:

... are such a labyrinth that when they change the rules, they don't manage to ...

They is you and I.  Gaile and SJ and thousands of other WikiTreers.  It is a Wiki: they is really all of us.  When we see a rule we don't like or don't agree with, we start a discussion about it and if the community agrees, we file a rule change request.  I've done it two or three times (submitted a formal rule change request) and at least twice, the changes are now part of the help pages or similar.

---

I thought research notes goes above the biography heading? That's where I put it anyway.

---

See https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Research_Notes

---

@ Gaile .. I prefer whatsit.   It's much more funner.

---

SJ, I was not referring to the decision making process preceding the rule change, only to the change itself.  That is announced in G2G and also the help pages impacted are supposed to be changed.  You and I do not make changes to the help pages … maybe, as a leader, you are able to do that, but ordinary members are not.  I had the impression that those who implement the rule change are supposed to "clean up" by ensuring that the appropriate help pages are updated to match the new reality, the same way whoever completes a merge is supposed to clean up the concatenated free text from both original profiles.

This is usually done, but only for 1 place - other places that mention, discuss, or redundantly specify something different from the new rule very often don't get changed.  I will grant that the help section is so convoluted and so disorganized that the reason everything impacted is not changed is most likely that whoever did the changing didn't find some of the other places where changes were needed.  The result, however, is that members receive contradictory instructions when they look at different help pages.  The example Melanie gave is a prime example.  She found instructions for the <big> tag that includes use of the style attribute, which is no longer permissible.

---

Anyone can submit a rule change proposal.  As most of the rules are codified in the help pages, a successful rule change will change the help page.

You wrote:

I had the impression that those who implement the rule change are supposed to "clean up" by ensuring that the appropriate help pages are updated to match the new reality, the same way whoever completes a merge is supposed to clean up the concatenated free text from both original profiles.

If you find something in the help pages that is not clear or could be written better, you can submit a rule change to modify it.  If it is a simple fix, say a gramatical error or a convoluted sentence, you could forward a suggestion to info@wikitree.com

You wrote:

... other places that mention, discuss, or redundantly specify something different from the new rule very often don't get changed.

On what data do you base the argument that these rules don't often get changed?  Have you made a formal request to change them?  It is a Wiki, we can complain that things aren't fixed or we can dig in and fix them.  If you find where something can be improved, please make a suggestion (through channels) to improve it.

---

Sorry, SJ, but apparently I'm just not making clear enough statements.  I will try to do better, but this is the last time I'm going to - I just don't have the time.

This has absolutely nothing to do with rule change proposals or the process that ensues, sometimes culminating in a new rule or a change to an existing one.  I said nothing regarding the frequency of rule changes, which has nothing to do with anything at all, here or anywhere else.

Yes, when a rule is made, it is documented in the help pages and when a rule is changed, existing help pages or parts of them need to be changed to correctly document the new conditions.  Perhaps the most recent changes to formatting rules predates your joining, but there was extensive discussion of the changes at the time.  After the new rules were implemented, a few new help pages were added to document them.  These help pages included links to each other, as well as to the previously existing pages that document coding.  Some of the previously existing pages link to a how-to page by Rob Ton, a member who made the page for non-geek members to learn to do it more easily than it was set out in the help pages.  Some previously existing pages (and maybe the new pages - I don't remember for sure) linked to a Wikipedia page documenting wiki code.  This set of pages can serve as Exhibit A of what I'm talking about.  It is a convoluted mess, with something said here contradicting what is said there and links from all these pages to each other that end up taking frustrated users in never ending circles.

Please don't tell me to make a suggestion to improve the help pages - on this in particular or in general, since this is but one example of the problem that I find rampant throughout the help section.  You are wrongfully assuming that I did not do so in the past - several times and in several different ways, all through proper channels.

---

"Proper channels" means a rule change proposal submitted via G2G.  I only see one rule change that you suggested: changing the open date for profiles from 200 years to 150 and that was approved successfully.

If you see a help page that is convoluted or confusing, write a replacement text and submit it for change.  Help page suggestions are made all the time and are updated and improved.  "They" is "us" and it is up to us to make WikiTree better by making change suggestions.  And not just "I don't like this page," but, "This page says this, it is confusing, it should say this."

Answer 2

So it does happen that siblings are born 60 years apart, but it is rare. It may still warrant a warning - but it should definitely be orange, not red.

Comments

Yeah, an "Are you sure the birth date is correct?" in orange should be enough.