Start a new topic

**Forum and Ticket Buzz Heavy Users and Clean-up Volunteers -Normalized format- AI-O

One user sent this in " I noted that half of the Queens County cemeteries are under Queens and half are under Queens County in NY.  That ought to be normalized .  Same issue here in VA.  Fairfax and Fairfax County are listed and are the same place.  I'll bet it's all over the site.  Whatever you folks decide on for the format is what should be there.  That's an old database standard that helps searches, data normalization.--kolbfred

2 people like this idea
1 Comment

I agree with that user - there is a lot of variation/replication in the geographic sections of the site map. It happens when users enter a new cemetery and the geographice/address part autofills from Google system. That data is not always correct, but that user does not know to look and correct inconsistency. I have spent a lot of time over the past year correcting and locating cemeteries and clearing duplicate from the site map. A lot of those are likely caused when someon adds a duplicate before checking that the cemetery is already there, and the duplicate clutters up the cemetery index with an alternatve address location. See it all the time. 

But... the resolution is not so clear at a global level. In the US we have clearly defined states, counties, townships and municipalitys. It would be fairly easy for BG to define and restrict the actual terms that could be entered. In other countries the geographic drill-down is not so staight-forward. In British Isles, some are still writing the old County and Shire names and others are using the newer administrative "counties". 

The same problem exists for country names - the English name, the local language name, and the local alphabetic version, are int he site map for the same country. And some of the names in the site map are not even countries but geographic or administrative units, such as the British Overseas/Outlying Islands, or semiautomonous "colonies" or former colonies. 

I don't know if BG planners have decided to let all this work its way out with user definitions, or there is going to be some effort to tame this tiger. It will only get more cumbersome as BG continues to grow, and I would be happy to  be on a user team to help with this issue. 

Would be very interested in views of others on this topic.


1 person likes this
Login or Signup to post a comment