# Associations, who is telling the truth?

**URL:** <https://gramps.discourse.group/t/associations-who-is-telling-the-truth/9662>\
**Category:** Help\
**Created:** [June 26, 2026, 10:10am UTC](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/associations-who-is-telling-the-truth/9662 "2026-06-26T10:10:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 24

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![romjerome](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/gramps.discourse.group/romjerome/32/1489_2.png) [@romjerome](https://gramps.discourse.group/u/romjerome)\
**Post date:** [June 28, 2026, 12:25pm UTC](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/associations-who-is-telling-the-truth/9662/24 "2026-06-28T12:25:19Z")

</div>

> [@AI guidelines for common enhancements to a Gramps feature](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/ai-guidelines-for-common-enhancements-to-a-gramps-feature/9665/4):
>
> Rather than computing all relationships between all people and all of their associations, it probably would be better to only do the selected person.

I guess that `CheckAssociations` addon was generated because there wasn’t a quick method to select people with associations data? That’s also why I was surprised you got it with few lines of code…

[https://gramps.discourse.group/t/new-gram-py-script-for-6-0/7192/11?u=romjerome](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/new-gram-py-script-for-6-0/7192/10)

Feel free to deprecate `CheckAssociations` addon. It still does the job: provide a way to check Associations into our database, but without advanced features, like a way for fixing some mistakes on seizure.

---

_[View the full topic](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/associations-who-is-telling-the-truth/9662)._