Duplicate Dogs in Database - Page 1

It was, if the same dog was erroneously entered twice or even more times with spelling errors and such, you could edit and correct the erroneous dogs name and other errors, records would combine and all offspring would be listed off of the correct dog. Now this is not working and dogs such as Whisky vom Bierstadter Hof, when you look him up, then click on siblings, you see he is listed 4 different times under incorrect names and such, his litter mate brother, Wind vom Bierstadter Hof, is also listed twice. I do not know why this editing ability, for fixing pedigrees in the database is not working anymore. I have fixed countless errors in pedigrees and pertinent information on different dogs, over and over. Now it is not working. What's up?

I noticed that myself when I entered two (2) of my dogs this week. There was a duplicated ancestor who had a slight difference in titles between the two (2) entries. Since it was just one (1) dog from several generations ago I did not make a fuss because at least his registration number and lineage was correct. Perhaps if when we notice such an error we can contact one (1) of the moderators and tell them which dog is incorrect so they can remove it. As I understand the operation of this database it is impossible for any of us normal users to truly delete a dog (let's say the dog who is duplicated but with slight mistakes) and that is not a bad thing. But, any of us can make changes to the information about a dog and really make a mess, or accidentally enter a dog who is already in the database. I am sure the latter is what caused these duplications to occur. But, I realize that if we depend on the moderators to make these changes then I am very sure that they will insist on hard proof in the form of a faxed or scanned document. And then one of the four (4) moderators must find the time to make the corrections. That is the tough part as they are all busy with other things. But, that is the only way to preserve the integrity of this database as the current information is only as good as we make it. Moderators; what do you think? Bob-O