Locking pedigrees.....ugh!

General discussions about the technical aspects of the site -- generating reports, reading reports, uploading information, forum techniques, etc.

Moderators: Roguelet, WaveMaster, Lucy

User avatar
the Ol'Line Rebel
Maiden Special Weight
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: MD
Contact:

Locking pedigrees.....ugh!

Postby the Ol'Line Rebel » Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:56 am

I understand the principle of locking up pedigrees, but in truth, this is a site anyway potentially riddled with errors, omissions, and duplications.

When working on ancient horses, e.g., many old horses are locked. However, they need more information, often.

Today - "Hoome's Shark Mare". She is locked now, yet how important is it to note that she is a foundation mare, of American Family 46? It is very important! And there is no A46 currently noted at all in the PedQuery DB!

This is very frustrating. Maybe we can get by with just noting extra info in the "comments". But not being able to connect to a female family directly - seems ludicrous.

On top of that, it would be nice to be able to compress alot of these old horses into 1 entry (with others only used to note alternative names - maybe those alternatives could be locked so no offspring could be added). Hoome's Shark Mare could be used as just "Shark Mare" (which is her basic designation, anyway), and hence, in reality should could already have offspring noted under another name - and then they can be erroneously duplicated. Locking these things up makes even "compressing" like this often impossible, too.

Sam
Chef de Race: Intermediate
Posts: 4194
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:51 pm

Postby Sam » Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:44 am

You think it's bad here, you should check the allbreed board. The "Wagonner Mare" (which, apparently there were almost 20 of with different peds and no other name except "Wagonner Mare") is the bane of my existance.

User avatar
Lucy
Moderator
Posts: 2158
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 5:44 pm
Location: Watertown, MA

Re: Locking pedigrees.....ugh!

Postby Lucy » Wed Jul 26, 2006 1:47 pm

the Ol'Line Rebel wrote: She is locked now, yet how important is it to note that she is a foundation mare, of American Family 46? It is very important! And there is no A46 currently noted at all in the PedQuery DB!

This is very frustrating. Maybe we can get by with just noting extra info in the "comments". But not being able to connect to a female family directly - seems ludicrous.


Sadly, creating a female family is something only Miles or one of the other tech guys can do. I created an entry for 'american family forty six' and locked it in as her dam, but I can't make the family number show in the pedigrees. Sorry!

I'll try e-mailing them and see if that helps.

the Ol'Line Rebel wrote: On top of that, it would be nice to be able to compress alot of these old horses into 1 entry (with others only used to note alternative names - maybe those alternatives could be locked so no offspring could be added).


As far as I know, the way this DB is currently set up it does not allow for such things (I'm assuming you mean an alt. name search that would bring up all possibilities; correct me if I'm wrong). I agree it would be handy, though. :wink:

User avatar
the Ol'Line Rebel
Maiden Special Weight
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: MD
Contact:

Re: Locking pedigrees.....ugh!

Postby the Ol'Line Rebel » Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:25 pm

Lucy wrote:
the Ol'Line Rebel wrote: She is locked now, yet how important is it to note that she is a foundation mare, of American Family 46? It is very important! And there is no A46 currently noted at all in the PedQuery DB!

This is very frustrating. Maybe we can get by with just noting extra info in the "comments". But not being able to connect to a female family directly - seems ludicrous.


Sadly, creating a female family is something only Miles or one of the other tech guys can do. I created an entry for 'american family forty six' and locked it in as her dam, but I can't make the family number show in the pedigrees. Sorry!

I'll try e-mailing them and see if that helps.

the Ol'Line Rebel wrote: On top of that, it would be nice to be able to compress alot of these old horses into 1 entry (with others only used to note alternative names - maybe those alternatives could be locked so no offspring could be added).


As far as I know, the way this DB is currently set up it does not allow for such things (I'm assuming you mean an alt. name search that would bring up all possibilities; correct me if I'm wrong). I agree it would be handy, though. :wink:



Hi Lucy,

No, actually I was simply referring to another reason the "locking" would be nice to eliminate. I'm too used to the non-search capabilities of this DB to even think about your interpretation!

But agree, I'd love it if the DB was capable of "wild-card" searching so that all names containing a string would pop up. The current "precise spelling/format" regimentation is extremely rigid in that 1 might think the simple core version of an old horse's name is the correct (e.g., Bellair), but it won't turn up because someone entered the horse precisely (as "Tayloe's Bellair Second" [which I would argue should be "II", not "second"]). Hence people who don't know the ropes will enter the same horse again under a different name, and on down to additional/duplicate progeny. Nightmarish. A wild-card search would bring up all entries containing "Bellair", and hence maybe eliminate all the duplication.


Thanks for you reply! I myself put in "American Family XXXX" but I know that in itself won't flag the code to put in the applicable family code. That's OK, as long as something indicates the family!


My core problem is that we can't do these things when horses are locked up as if nothing else can be added to their information! Wrong!

User avatar
Lucy
Moderator
Posts: 2158
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 5:44 pm
Location: Watertown, MA

Postby Lucy » Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:26 pm

Locking pedigrees - especially foundation pedigrees - is a necessary evil when dealing with an open database. For every person like yourself who knows & understands older pedigrees, there are ten who don't, but try to tinker with them anyway. :roll: I won't even go into the deliberately malicious tinkering that goes on...

In my opinion, the problem here is that the 'contact research group' link that pops up when you try to alter a locked horse no longer works. :? I've asked about that before, but don't know when they'll get around to changing it.

Meanwhile, if you bump your head on the lock again, feel free to PM me or post, and I'll do my best to fix it.

User avatar
Pan Zareta
Breeder's Cup Winner
Posts: 2074
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:55 am
Location: west TX boonies

Postby Pan Zareta » Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:59 am

Sam wrote: The "Wagonner Mare" (which, apparently there were almost 20 of with different peds and no other name except "Wagonner Mare") is the bane of my existance.


"20" would be a conservative estimate of the actual number of Waggoner Mares, and a lot of them were probably registered TB's whose ff branches tend to trail off into oblivion (in the TB registry) betw ~1890-1930. Same for the Burnett mares & probably many others who are in QH peds. as "[owner's name] Mare". :roll: At the time & place it enhanced w/ some buyers the value of the mares & their offspring to conceal the fact that they were reg. TBs.

Sam
Chef de Race: Intermediate
Posts: 4194
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:51 pm

Postby Sam » Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:47 pm

Pan Zareta wrote:
Sam wrote: The "Wagonner Mare" (which, apparently there were almost 20 of with different peds and no other name except "Wagonner Mare") is the bane of my existance.


"20" would be a conservative estimate of the actual number of Waggoner Mares, and a lot of them were probably registered TB's whose ff branches tend to trail off into oblivion (in the TB registry) betw ~1890-1930. Same for the Burnett mares & probably many others who are in QH peds. as "[owner's name] Mare". :roll: At the time & place it enhanced w/ some buyers the value of the mares & their offspring to conceal the fact that they were reg. TBs.

See ... just goes to show that not even female horses got respect back then. Half the "Waggoner Mares" I've run across don't even HAVE a pedigree. "Well, how do you know it was this mare rather than that one?" "We just do"

oooooooooohkay then.