ATTENTION Curators, please assist

Nina, are you trying to do this in the tree? Are these sets of parents the same? If so, you just have to wait out the merge process. If the parents are different, you need to go to the persons profile, "Edit" then "Relationships". At the bottom, you might have to wait a few seconds, but the parents will show up. Put a check mark by the wrong pair and click on delete. Ignore the split the tree warning and delete them then save. Not as complicated as it sounds. If you can't edit the tree then you need to collaborate with the manager and get editing rights.

There's a thread on adoption that discusses how people handle it and whether there will be better tools in the future for representing adoption. If you search on adoption in Search in the upper right of this screen, it will bring up threads on adoption and you'll see the one I mentioned with Adoption in the title.

http://www.geni.com/discussions/87325 may be the thread I was thinking about. Maybe someone remembers a more robust discussion of adoption?

There's a request for better support for adoptive parents at http://help.geni.com/entries/427332-support-for-adoptive-parents

Eldon, I'm not sure if that feature (for editing relationships) is only available to Pro members or not. It used to be Pro-only, unless it's been changed.

Eldon, These are the different pairs of the parents (pair and single parent - the error was in connection of wrong wife. I disconnected all the family except of the last child, which splits the tree).
I did exactly what you told, I made such procedure several times before. The problem starts every time when I recieve split the tree warning, - the Remove button become inactive. It is a far branch of my tree, but I created all these profiles, so I can ask for manager rights only from myself.

When you receive a split tree warning, then you need to post the details here and ask a curator to perform the surgery...:-)

That's ok, now i am finding double loop-de-loops in my direct family line... Joseph MINER
Joseph Miner (Jr) wes either Susanna Keeney's Son-in-law ( Grace Turner's husband) or his father (Sr), Not Susanna (Keeney)Turner's Husband.
I have posted this to the manager, but so far most of my manager posts just sit in limbo.. :( I hope this one gets an answer.
Dea Lowry

Gi'day Nina, I have no Eldon in my family /search so am sure you have the wrong person (in contact) how do I get out of this situation without deleting my family tree, regards Des Miller

Curators, I Desmond Graham Miller would like to get out of this discussion table, if no, then how can I delete my family tree to end it. Des Miller

Desmond, - just click Unfollow at the top, and you also have an option to delete your own messages.

@ K Anderson - Thank you for fixing my Susanna Keeny Turner problem...She DID marry Joseph Minor Sr. His son Joseph Minor Jr (mother = Elizabeth Comstock) then married his step-sister Grace Turner daughter of Susanna Keeny and Ezekiel Turner. No wonder the tree was so messed up at that point. Again, my thanks :)

Dea Lowry, the funny thing is is that I was already working in the Keeney line, because I had worked on the chewing gum guy, Dr. Beeman's tree, and he's a descendant of a Keeney. When I saw your post, I was excited! LOL

Literally, like 2 days ago, I created Dr. Beeman's tree as I built a new project and wanted to add him in. I remembered specifically, "Keeney" so when you posted about Susanna, I HAD to take a peek.

Edwin Eugene Beeman, Doctor Dr. Beeman
http://www.geni.com/projects/Food-Beverage-People Food & Beverage project

@ K Anderson - You are AWESOME!!!Hey, It is great to have such an avid Geneopogist AND curator in my extended family...some day I have to tell you the story of how I got into geneology...You will laugh!

Could someone please complete the following merge:
http://www.geni.com/merge/compare/6000000009719924059?fsession_id=1...

Thanks!

Leslie - Merged!

Thanks Jenna!

My pleasure!

http://www.geni.com/discussions/90131?msg=675153 Would someone more experienced help Ethel with her problem? Thanks.

Hatte. I don't think I am more experienced than you but I was able to start to help Ethel. In particular she said "Elizabeth Winter did not marry a John Morgan". I fixed that, and got a bit further. I got to the point where I thought I would need to merge public profiles which a curator could do but I can't so I stopped because I would not be able to complete the job.

That's great David. Thanks. I was too sleep deprived to want to work on someone else's tree when I read this.

Attention Curators, whoever you are. Your comments are showing up on my GENI home page. I am not a curator nor am I interested in your comments. My family tree has also been hijacked by the powers that be at GENI such that years of hard work are now being superseded by your forced merging of my hard-won profiles, the sources of which I can neither count upon nor wish to have to count upon for my project. It destroys the entire point of doing the whole fucking project if all my "homework" is done for me. Why bother doing the family genealogy if all I have to do is look it up on GENI? I want my family tree restored to its previous incarnation and do not wish to collaborate until I AGREE TO DO SO. Please help me contact the people responsible for this transgression at GENI. Thank you.

Bruce, I'm sorry you feel that way. Please see the wiki: http://wiki.geni.com/index.php/Big_Tree

Bruce, a few of points. YOU control what You see through YOUR settings.
No one can do merges unless you agree, You have the right to control merges on your profiles unless you have given someone else the right to do that.
The curators are here to help, not force merges. They have the ability to changes as requested and resolve some problems but not everything.
On the revisions tab of your profiles, you can see what changes were made and by whom
When you get a request to collaborate you either accept or refuse.

@ Bruce R. Meinsen - I understand your frustration, but not the need for your indelicate language. My grandchildren look at their geneology as do my brother's minor children. Please keep it clean.

Hatte: Understood. I don't think it's as daunting as it sounds. Shmuel has responded in the original discussion saying he will ask our Medieval Curators to take a look at this discussion and the relevant profiles. So this is probably now being taken care of.

I think this is an area where it would be useful to have curator notes warning not to merge with someone else of the same name in another generation. No doubt the curators working on this have thought about that themselves.

As a matter of clarification and in defense of Bruce's dissatisfaction, it is true that curators can (and do) merge public profiles if/when they see duplicates (especially when the duplicates are all in the Big Tree already). They do not need collaborator permission to do so. It's also true that Geni marks public any profile you add above your third great grandparents. So if you're going to build a tree more than five generations over your head, there is the possibility that a curator may be merging those profiles without regard to your wishes, particularly if they do not know your wishes. We're not trying to invade anyone's private space, but having been at this for more than four years now we've made these decisions in the interest of achieving the vision of one global, shared family tree.

Mike- another point that I have noticed is that if you merge a private profile with a public profile the result is always public. Not everyone will notice that.

This happened to me a few days ago - I merged some private profiles of close living cousins with another set that someone else had entered that were public. I being aware of this then went back into each and set them private again. Some sort of warning that merging a private profile with a public profile will result in a public result may be warranted.

We currently have a message on the side-by-side page that warns (in red, at the bottom) when a merge is going to connect two trees that are not already connected -- do you think the same kind of mechanism would suffice for the private/public situation?

The purpose of this site is One WORLD Tree. If people want to keep "their" geneology to themselves and not share with the "Tree" then maybe they don't belong here? Sorry, I just thought that should be said.