ViewsWatchers |
[add comment] [edit] Surnames [11 February 2011]Sometimes, the list of surnames in WeRelate sources are missing prefixes (such as Van, De, Van Der, etc). A quick check of the FHLC entry will confirm the correct surname spelling, and these can be added to the WR source. --Jennifer (JBS66) 08:21, 11 February 2011 (EST)
[add comment] [edit] Text from FHLC [19 February 2011]Do you know if text from the Notes section of the FHLC can be copied to WR (such as the paragraph from here that begins "Descendants of Johannes Verhaaren")? Often this contains useful information and names that would be a nice addition to WR. --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:33, 11 February 2011 (EST)
"Includes:
This seems like a pretty minimal rewrite for copyright purposes, but I don't know how else to capture the details of the content, which I think are really useful for the page. I assume you could do something similar with the genealogy notes in the FHLC, but it would be good to know we are doing something that is acceptable use... --Brenda (kennebec1) 12:53, 11 February 2011 (EST)
Sorry this took a few days. I went up the chain to make sure about the copying from FHCL notes. They said it was fine to copy direct from FHCL to WeRelate.--Sandralpond 09:37, 17 February 2011 (EST) Just to make sure there is no misunderstanding the permission to copy Family History Center notes is only to copy to the WeRelate site.Sandralpond
We can copy from WFCL because Dallan has a agreement with them to use FHCL and did download from there 5 years ago with their permission plus we give them credit with notes and Hyperlinks on each page. The notes we're talking about are on a seperate page on the link page in the FHCL. I have also found one source that had been indexed to the Family Search site.--Sandralpond 12:48, 18 February 2011 (EST)
Sorry I may have over stated the policy. AS I look over the review of sources, everyone I look at already has the notes added and aother worker from Family Search has found the same. So the majority are already here. What may have happened to a few larger notes is that they were not taken in in the original download and no one see this as a problem for them to be copied now.Sandralpond 09:59, 19 February 2011 (EST) Thank-you for checking into this Sandra! I'll continue to discuss this with people at FamilySearch. (I didn't extract any notes originally, so they must have been added later.)--Dallan 12:59, 19 February 2011 (EST) [add comment] [edit] Categories [14 February 2011]Regarding categories, I agree completely that categories need geographic groupings to be useful. My thought is that it would be helpful if Dallan could tweak the way categories are now automatically generated to take the type and subject fields into consideration. Examples of more descriptive source categories:
It would also be helpful if source categories were not put directly into a Place category (this again is automatically-generated). For example, instead of putting sources into Category:Maine, United States, put them into Category:Sources in Maine, United States instead. --Jennifer (JBS66) 16:49, 12 February 2011 (EST)
I think this conversation illustrates why I think the system needs to be responsible for creating the category pages and putting them into the correct super-categories. I don't think we can expect most users to learn this. Yes, I think this conversation should be moved; let's continue it on WeRelate:Current Source Projects.--Dallan 20:57, 14 February 2011 (EST) [add comment] [edit] Tie together Places and Sources [14 February 2011]I know this topic doesn't really belong here... but I wasn't sure where to put it... I've been thinking that it would be nice to better tie together our Place and our Source pages. I came up with an idea (see Place:Friesland, Netherlands). There is a box at the bottom of the page that says "Search for Friesland, Netherlands Sources". The links match our Subject drop-down box, and currently lead a user to a Search for that subject/place. This may not be necessary for every place page (as there may be limited resources at the town level) - but the country, state, and country level may be helpful. --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:35, 13 February 2011 (EST)
--Brenda (kennebec1) 11:28, 14 February 2011 (EST)
Let's move this to WeRelate:Current Source Projects as well.--Dallan 20:57, 14 February 2011 (EST) [add comment] [edit] List of surnames on source pages [14 February 2011]Example: Source:Ferwerderadeel, Friesland, Netherlands. Schutterij, 1858-1867. Can we display the Surnames covered more compactly, such as side-by-side? Can they also be sorted alphabetically automatically? --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:41, 13 February 2011 (EST)
[add comment] [edit] Review of subsidiary articles [19 February 2011]Would those of you who are following this page consider taking a look at some of the more specific pages I've added? only a few have any real content to date, but it is in these subject and type discussions that I've noted some areas where I haven't known what the "correct" solution was to a variety of source dilemmas. I'd appreciate any feedback... (I've tried to be careful to distinquish between my suggestions and what I know of the official wiki guidelines). Thanks. --Brenda (kennebec1) 13:30, 19 February 2011 (EST) [add comment] [edit] Template for Merging source pages [20 February 2011]Have found a duplicate source page in my Review of Source Pages-West Virginia: Source:Egan, Michael. Flying, Gray-Haired Yank, or, the Adventures of a Volunteer- I did review one and went to the next to find there are two exactly alike. I tried to use the Merge Template and found out it is not useful. How do I solve this problem? Can we delete a page? If we can merge source pages I find no page to tell me how. Thanks if you can help me.Sandralpond 19:53, 19 February 2011 (EST) The Merge template that you used does not merge two pages together. I think it was one user's experiment and is not a template that is in use. So... if you find duplicate sources, they can be merged by:
There is some help text about this here. --Jennifer (JBS66) 06:10, 20 February 2011 (EST) Hi, Sandra - this is a section to the "Guide" that I haven't written up yet, but it is basically straightforward, particularly if neither source has been used in a citation (i.e. it isn't linked to a person or family page). Thus, I'd add to Jennifer's comments only that you might take a look at each of the original source pages "What links here". If one source has been used for citations, it can be helpful to retain that source (and redirect the other one). This prevents possible double redirects (a redirect to a redirect). If it is better to retain the source that has not been used, and there are not a great number of citations, you could open up the person and family pages that are affected and replace the now-obsolete source page name with the one you are retaining. This is above and beyond the basics, tho, so its just fine to follow Jennifer's basic guidelines, which I'll also move over to the Source Page Review Guide and/or to a related page on duplicate sources. --Brenda (kennebec1) 10:31, 20 February 2011 (EST) [add comment] [edit] Template for multiple editions language [20 February 2011]There is now a template for the multiple editions language Template:MultipleEditions. --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:56, 20 February 2011 (EST)
[add comment] [edit] FHL film numbers [14 March 2011]I have seen over the years a few different conversations that suggest removing the FHL film numbers section from source pages. I have been removing this section on the sources I edit. Today I came across this page that shows in 2006 Dallan purposefully added the film numbers to the source pages. I would rather not have a long list of film numbers since this information can be obtained by clicking on the repository link. What is the consensus on keeping or discarding them? --Jennifer (JBS66) 13:59, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
[add comment] [edit] Author's surname in source titles [16 March 2011]This was discussed on the Support page, but I wanted to also leave a note here. When a source's author has a surname such as van der Veen - some sources are being titled as Source:Veen, Jan Van der... This may not affect many of the U.S. source pages - but these should be renamed to Source:Van der Veen, Jan... as part of the review. --Jennifer (JBS66) 06:53, 15 March 2011 (EDT)
|