A lot of responses here saying "bruh findagrave" and missing the point of the project, which is to be able to quickly and easily locate a gravesite, especially in a large cemetery.

Findagrave profiles typically have plot numbers, which are somewhat tedious to translate to a location -- it can still take 10 minutes or more to find a location knowing the plot number; and sometimes the plot number was typed in wrong, or various different numbering schemes exist for the same cemetery. If you want to plan a tour of 10 graves that can take hours.

Furthermore, many have no plot information, and many more don't even correspond to burials (you can create a profile for anyone in any cemetery, and people do).

A minuscule few have GPS coordinates, which is a huge improvement and more akin to what this new project is doing; although there is no access to this data other than displaying coordinates on a per-profile basis, and pins on an aerial photo. The TOS also prevent scraping the GPS coordinates to make improved interfaces such as touted in this article.

A second major aspect is that there is little to no thoroughness or quality control on Findagrave. Mistakes will usually only be spotted when someone looking up their own relatives finds a mistake, and then has to go through the procedure of dealing with amateur profile managers who often have attitude problems and/or are unresponsive.

Thirdly, findagrave is a commercial project owned by ancestry.com and the crowdsourcing volunteers could see their work lost at any time; never mind the fact that their free contributions are already being monetized by Ancestry with no return to the contributors.