As a long time user of the IGI I knew that there has always been issues with reliability particularly with user submitted entries. The user submitted entries were entries submitted by LDS members from their own research, some of which were flights of fancy and others had a name, an “abt” date and an “abt” place. It has always been a matter of sifting the good from the bad.
The new FamilySearch addressed this problem and used only data from the actual records which had been transcribed twice and then checked for any anomalies so was pretty good.
So the addition of the IGI is interesting, as far as I can see it is to be kept separate and is being split between user submitted entries and extracted entries which will be most helpful.
You really need to read the blog posting yourselves so you can be clear what it is you will be looking at, it’s source and how to access the index. So ……