Outright hoaxes

If a curator did NOT upload a particular image, they cannot delete it. Only the manager of the picture can.

There are popular profiles, like Pocahontas with 15 of the same exact picture. I wish there was just ONE of the photo, but I don't have the right to delete the duplicates. So, they stay.

I'm not sure if a curator uploaded a "hoax" or a fake picture but if it was someone else who uploaded it and the Curator is "managing" the profile, they can't remove it. They can only change the display picture, but cannot delete someone else's work.

I'm not sure what picture you are speaking of, though?

Photography was invented in 1822. The first portrait photograph was taken in 1838. All portrait photographs attributed to subjects who died before 1838 are patent hoaxes.

http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...
http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...=
http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...=
http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003221372247?album_type=photo...

http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...
That image does NOT belong to Maria. That photo Belongs to Private User

http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...
This image belongs to Private User

http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003222107870?album_type=photo...
This image belongs to Private

http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000003221372247?album_type=photo...
This image belongs to Private User

There is NO way for Maria or any of the curators to remove these photos. You can contact the owners of the photos if you think they are in error.

Adam, you are George All's 6th great grandson, but Jerrod Sizemore is ALSO his 6th great grandson. Carolyn Shinault is his 5th g-granddaughter as well as Deborah is his 5th g-granddaughter. They are equally related to him as you as descendants, and maybe it's better to reach out to them than to make it a public discussion as most people have a hard time keeping up with all the threads in the public forum.

Found the CORRECT person to one of the photos:
John M. Sizemore

In fact it's a cropped photo and erroneously labeled. I've input the full photo and "tagged" the correct people whom I also added to the Sizemore tree.

Thinking something is in error and pointing out an historical impossibility are two different things. Not to raise public alarm when these profiles are public is to continue to expose all the rest of the descendants as rubes marked for all manner of genealogical snake-oil purveyance--as I believe you have some understanding--and that would be irresponsible of me. Would contacting all 5000+ descendants individually be the only way of both satisfying your requirements for discretion and my sense of duty?

I don't think that was suggested as the option.

In a Geni profile, there is a media gallery, with one of the images set as the profile image.

What I am suggesting is that the profile main image be made as accurate as possible. That is a doable Project, but like all Projects, needs a methodology and a time line.

For other images in the gallery which are incorrect, the manager should be contacted. If they are not responsive then a comment on the photo can serve as the correction.

Adam, I was trying to be helpful, but you seem very condescending. I did NOT say reach out to 5,000 people. I suggested you reach out to the people you REALLY have a problem with (the people who uploaded those photos), because they uploaded pictures and labeled it incorrectly as photography did not come out when the gentleman in the picture was alive. I OVERstand what you are saying, but you are MISunderstanding what I am saying. If I cannot help you, or you just don't "get" what I am saying, you need to contact help@geni.com.

You clearly did not say I should reach out to the rest of the Sizemore descendants entire. That was my own conclusion based on the apparent apathy I am sensing with regards to protecting all of them from possible fraud. Above and beyond these in-and-of-themselves basically harmless yet glaring mistakes, a chance remains someone will take advantage because the profile is now in the public eye. I'm not saying that you have a legal obligation to protect. I'm asking, don't you feel a moral one?

I had assumed that you had gotten my message clearly because you curate the Elvis Presley profile and have so far shown forebearance in validating spurious claims there. I consider contacting help my final recourse within Geni--surely you recognize I alone cannot compel anyone to remove a picture on your servers. If you assure me you've done everything you can do, then that's what I'll do.

Adam, if it helps I might clarify that the advice from all here is that in the first instance the person to contact about an erroneous image is the image owner. If that fails, then contact Geni support. Those are the ONLY courses of action to get an incorrect image corrected, since no-one else can do the job. End of story in that regard.

Listing the profile here may help to get some attention to find out who the profile really belongs to - and well done Mimi for some great detective work. Mimi deserves thanks for that from all of us. Erica also deserves thanks for trying to help out. But beyond that, there's not a lot that we can do besides what I wrote in the preceding paragraph.

Adam, you claim to sense "apathy". What I sense is completely the opposite. What I sense is several curators spending a lot of time and energy trying desperately to help but being unable to deliver what you and they want - which is images associated with the correct people. I don't think anyone disagrees that is what we are trying to achieve. We just have to be realistic about what we can achieve, and be knowledgeable about the best way to achieve it. Expecting curators to take actions that they cannot take is not really going to achieve anything.

I hope we have all learnt from this project discussion.

adam i changed the photo to a map. you could have done it yourself took 2 seconds...