User talk:Amelia.Gerlicher

Old stuff at: User talk:Amelia.Gerlicher/Archive

Thank You for fixing my page, I't was my goof. Thanks again. Jim Jolly--James A. 15:56, 29 July 2011 (EDT)

Cemetery photo source pages

Thanks for your input, Amelia. I didn't know how to source pictures my husband took of the tombstone at the cemetery. Maybe it would be simpler to just delete the source? Thanks again I've got a lot to learn yet. --Mary Jean Jaynes--Jaynes931 10:18, 22 November 2012 (EST)

Hi Mary Jean. If you want to upload the pictures, you should can put all of the information on the page with the image - that would probably be easiest. Then for sourcing your information, you can either link to the image directly, or put in a source as "citation only" and write "Picture taken by ____" or some such, linking to the image from the source (the latter just gives a more visible explanation of what the picture is, since the pic only shows up as a thumbnail and is usually hard to see). Then delete the source page if you can - I'm never sure if non-admins an. If not, put {{Speedy Delete|Created in error}} on the page and an admin can delete it.

Newspapers - The New York Times [8 January 2012]

Hi Amelia, I am trying to figure out newspapers. I want to add The Spokesman Review (Spokane, Washington, United States) but in looking at The New York Times pages I have gotten confused. There are 2 for one thing. Source:New York Times (New York, New York) and Source:New York Times (The New York Times) Which one should I follow? Help:Source Page Title Examples does not really cover this. Thanks, Catherine --cthrnvl 11:53, 8 January 2012 (EST)

Formatting [3 February 2012]

Sorry if I'm not formatting right. Are there automated ways to handle this, like Wikipedia's Citation Bot? Or an easier way to enter data with citations? --jdb123 23:16, 3 February 2012 (EST)

It's mostly by hand or straight gedcom upload at this point. I notice you're just pasting in a URL. Please read the help pages on sources - the title of the source goes in the source title box, either pick "Source" and use "Find/add" to pick an existing source (i.e. Find A Grave, Worldconnect) or pick "citation only" and just type the title in if it's something obscure. There are shortcuts for Souce:Wikipedia and Source:Find A Grave discussed on those source pages.--Amelia 23:24, 3 February 2012 (EST)

1906 Kankakee History source. [22 February 2012]

Hi Amelia,

Thank you very much for fixing the source I added. I am very much the newbie here and I want to get this right. More help, please.

In addition to

Source:Kenaga, William F. Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois and History of Kankakee County , (let's call this source A)

which is the source with which we both worked on last night, there is

Source:Bateman, Newton. Historical Encyclopedia of Illinois - Kankakee (Source B)

I looked at the Family History Library catalog entries each are linked to.

Source A is referring to the 1973 reprint by Unigraphic, sponsored by the Kankakee Valley Genealogical Society. Only volume 2 was reprinted because volume 1 is on Illinois and is not specific to Kankakee county. KVGS created an index and it is included at the end of the book.

Source B is referring to the original 1906 printing.

The only real difference in the content between source A and source B is source A has the reprint info on the reverse of the title page and source A has the new index.

I created the new source because I was using an original printed in 1906 book with the gold leaf page edges, red ink used on the title page, pages bookmarked by my grandmother, who died 20 years ago, and no index in the back.

Now that I have read more of the source instructions I see I should not have created the new source page. I should have added the info about both volumes being available free digitally at the Family History Archives website to source B and used that as my source.

My Question:

I see that at the very least I need to move the links to the Family History Archives from source A to source B (the free web version is a reproduction of the 1906 printing). In reading the source page directions, it said that if the two items are significantly different to create a new page. When doing research, having the 1973 book with the index is a big advantage, but at the bottom of it all, the actual source is the original book, so should the source A and source B pages be merged with an explanation of the differences between the printings in the text at the bottom? The only pages linking to these sources currently were made by me last night, so it should not be a big problem making everything perfect.--LeeHollenbeck 00:36, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Also, since it looks like I'm the first person here from this county, I'll be doing a lot of tweaking of the sources. I want to thoroughly understand the standards so I can do my part to improve the source pages.

Hi, and welcome! I'm so glad you're following up on this, it's so much harder to make these distinctions without having access to anything more than the catalog records (sorry if I messed anything up - the v.2 that you created was a red flag since volumes are supposed to get the same page). In answer to your question, yes, there should be one page that describes the printings and notes that the index is only in one of them. If you have any other questions, let me know!--Amelia 11:56, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Hi Amelia, thank you for the help. I have amended the 1906 History of Kankakee County source pages and links and the links to those pages, and I have submitted the page I created and also the other source page to speedy delete. I think I did this correctly.--LeeHollenbeck 15:21, 5 February 2012 (EST)

Amelia,

I've been reading the help pages and looking at pages which have been used as examples, trying to get a feeling for how and where folks tend to post their genealogy data. Reading the help pages, the most logical place to put a transcript of one of the biographies from this 1906 History of Kankakee County seems to me to be in the Transcript namespace, as I have done here. I also made a transcript page for the source. I transcluded the transcription to George Falter's person page since I don't have another bio written up for him.

I would have thought there would be some considerable number of these types of bios transcribed at this site since although they are very secondary sourcewise, they are usually very colorful and would be an excellent item for wikification. I looked around for other similar books treated so and I could find very few. Since I am such a newby here, this made me uneasy.

Was there a better way to treat this? Reading the help pages, it seemed like this was more correct than reserving it solely for the person page or doing something in the MySource namespace.--LeeHollenbeck 22:16, 21 February 2012 (EST)

Hi Lee,

You've got a good idea, it's just that transcripts are relatively new and haven't been widely adopted yet. Personally I only have these types of things as single entries, so I just paste them on person pages, but you can certainly do it the way you are. Read the next entry below this - it has links to Jrm's efforts on Savage, which are the most developed in this space I think and he might be a better resource than I am. Good luck.--Amelia 01:48, 22 February 2012 (EST)

Thank you Amelia, I very much appreciate you taking the time to help me get started. I have been looking at many pages and will study Jim's as a good example. Because of the nature of this site, it has been sometimes difficult to figure out which pages are examples of best practices and which are not, except for when they are pointed out as examples or authored by members active in administration. That the transcript namespace is new, and has not yet been taken advantage of makes the lack of its use for these type of pages much more understandable. I like the idea of these transcripts. To wikify these already colorful obituaries, histories, and biographies makes them even more lively.

Help with a navigation template [25 February 2012]

I was wondering if I could prevail upon you for some help. I seem to recall you did some very attractive navigation templates at one point. I'm in desperate need of that sort of expertise.

I'm doing a transcript of Savage based on an existing text version from about 1994. I'm planning to have separate wiki pages for each page of Savage, so I want to have a bar at the top that clearly labels the page, as well as providing next and prev page access. I've created only the first six pages as an example. Presently, they're to be found at:

• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p1
• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p2
• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p3
• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p4
• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p5
• Transcript:Savage, James. Genealogical Dictionary of the First Settlers of New England/v1p6

I'm trying to bury all the formatting in templates, so that some flexibility in appearance is preserved. The templates I have so far are:

• Template:savagetranscriptheader - Navigation/page header for a page associated with only one section (takes as parameters, the name of the section, volume and page of the previous page, volume and page of the current page, and the volume and page of the next page).
• Template:savagetranscriptheaderrange - Navigation/page header for a page spanning spanning multiple sections. Built up using the template above, adds a second section parameter so a page can indicate from and to section labels.
• Template:savagetranscriptsection - Indent section start indicator (takes as parameter the section).
• Template:savagetranscripteoln - End of line (forces line breaks - no parameters)
• Template:savagetranscriptpage - Create labelled link to a volume and page of the transcript
• Template:savagepg - Simple template that produces a link to a transcript page labelled vVOL,pPAGE. This doesn't appear anywhere yet - it's intended to be used in source citations.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!--jrm03063 19:41, 13 February 2012 (EST)

Hi there. I'm not opposed to helping, but I'm just crazy busy this week and offline all next weekend, so it might be a bit. I would say right off though that <br> seems far easier than savagetranscripteoln - I can't think of any reason why you need all those extra characters. I also need to wrap my head around what you're doing and why (which I know you've explained before, I just need to read it again) ... I started a similar project putting transcripts on article pages, but didn't get very far before I lost interest ;-) --Amelia 01:53, 14 February 2012 (EST)

Thanks for ringing back - of course I'm at your disposal timing-wise. I know that savagetemplateeoln is a long way of just saying <br>, but I wasn't sure whether we would always want a break there - or whether there might be a better way to accomplish an end of line that perhaps didn't imply a new paragraph. I don't really know wiki formatting all that well, and I have no idea what might be possible if/when we move to newer versions of the underlying mediawiki software. Still, if you think that it's a noisy way to do something that has practically zero chance of ever being anything but a <br>, then it's easy for me to change that (at least at this stage!). --jrm03063 10:21, 14 February 2012 (EST)

This is a reply to below, here for reasons that might become clear. I put the below back to original - since it didn't work for everybody, though it seemed to work for my browser. Here is without nested tables. I think Jennifer asked the right question about nested tables.

--Jrich 09:45, 25 February 2012 (EST)

How about something like this? Color whatever you'd like.

That's lovely! I suppose we can experiment w/colors... --jrm03063 00:05, 25 February 2012 (EST)

The nested tables are causing problems with the page layout. JRich tried to remove the second |}, but that didn't help. There is a template here that could be tweaked for this that does not use nested tables. --Jennifer (JBS66) 07:20, 25 February 2012 (EST)

Fixed? (for me it is)--Amelia 13:06, 25 February 2012 (EST)

Yes, it's working correctly for me now. --Jennifer (JBS66) 13:45, 25 February 2012 (EST)

Connecting source to event [24 February 2012]

I appreciate your email but I still don't understand it. I am very confused. You had written me re: marriage record for Frank Pearl Sherbondy and Anna Sophie Gerke. Jeanette Sherbondy--Jeanette Sherbondy 11:27, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Hi Jeanette. It would be easier to help if you could be specific about where you're confused. I left the note because I saw that you had created a source page that appeared to apply to this couple, but that you had not linked the source page to the couple. The message tells you how to do that. It also explains that I renamed the source page because source pages should apply to more than just one page of a marriage book - they apply to the collection of marriage records held at the courthouse. If you have other questions, please let me know.--Amelia 12:18, 24 February 2012 (EST)

Savage Templates [5 March 2012]

Thanks again for your nice work on the Savage transcript templates. I especially like your rework of the section template!

The page header template does exhibit a little bit of a symmetry problem when the surname range takes up more than one line, for example Volume 3, Page 165. The next and prev buttons become vertically offset.

--jrm03063 11:15, 5 March 2012 (EST)

Question about bold face in the Savage transcript [11 March 2012]

I saw that you've taken to setting off sections in Savage, associated with particular people, by putting the given name in bold face. I like it - it's quite striking - but was wondering whether or not it was something that was done in the original publication that couldn't be retained in Dr. Kraft's transcript. Then again - it's probably so useful it doesn't matter.

The original publication did not use boldface; the emphasis on the given name was done through the capitalization only. However, I concur that using bold on the transcript pages being created is most useful in differentiating between the individual sketches.--jaques1724 18:36, 11 March 2012 (EDT)

Anyway - I want to write an accurate justification for doing this into the list of practices for the transcript. I was also thinking of controlling it with a template - since that gives us future flexibility on the formatting and a useful piece of logical information besides.

Thoughts? --jrm03063 18:19, 11 March 2012 (EDT)

I just did it because I thought it was easier to read. I've never seen, to my knowledge, a version of Savage that was "original" to his formatting, so I have no idea. I already had those sections done with bold, so it was far easier to leave it (reinserting the page breaks was annoying enough ;-)) I think a template will make the names harder to read when editing, which is at least as important, and will be harder to deal with, as people will have to remember the template name every time they edit, which isn't otherwise required now.--Amelia 18:58, 11 March 2012 (EDT)

I was thinking it might be useful if we had software-recognizable tags in the text - along with the ability to reconsider what the formatting operation might be. Right now, I think the thing most helping the source text to be recognizable is the original - fairly small - Savage page size, along with lines in the source that are consistent with lines in the displayed form. If the template seems an odious burden, I guess I can take on the responsibility of going through and doing that. Heck - it's less than 3000 pages! --jrm03063 20:28, 11 March 2012 (EDT)

Mm, well, all of that is pretty much beyond the scope of my work with the project, so if 3000 pages sounds doable to you, by all means... ;-) --Amelia 00:16, 12 March 2012 (EDT)

No merge template for Serena Gump [23 July 2012]

Hi Amelia, I would like to merge Person:Serena Gump (1) and Person:Serena Gump (2). Serena Ellen Gump died in 1945. I will add the documentation for death for Serena Ellen Gump and William Butler Lowe after merging the 2 pages. --Beth 08:28, 16 July 2012 (EDT)

Sorry for the delay in responding; in the future feel free to take lack of response as consent! I have no earthly idea why I put a no merge template on that page, and don't have any feelings in the slightest regarding what is done on the pages - presumably it was an artifact of long-ago merging issues. Merge away.--Amelia 22:12, 23 July 2012 (EDT)

Thanks Amelia; this has happened to me also. I have no idea why I entered the no merge template when questioned but it was a gigantic project. Thanks.--Beth 23:03, 23 July 2012 (EDT);

Useful Sources? [4 August 2012]

These sources don't appear to have much genealogy or history: Source:McNish (clanmcnish.com) and Source:Longmore blogmore. The former leads to an expired web page and the latter to a page of personal promotion.--HLJ411 16:06, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

Just took a look; no pages link to either of those source pages, so if you're cleaning up Source pages, I'd say they're both candidates for deletion. Jillaine 16:24, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

Agree with Jillaine.--Amelia 19:44, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

Hello Jillaine, Thought I would keep you in the loop. I also took a look at the second one, and deleted the webpage link listed as the repository (seemed to be a possible spam), added a note on my edit, and then sent a message to the only user who was watching that source. This WeRelate User/Watcher seegenealogygoriented orionted, but I could not tell about the webpage source he/she created. Please feel free to correct me, roll back, etc. Debbie Freeman --DFree 16:44, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

Minor, by default [16 August 2012]

I'm ashamed to say that I've only just discovered that there's a setting to establish whether edits should be minor by default. I've tried of late to be more careful about labeling them minor (which they almost always are), but that's still an extra click to remember. Got to thinking that it would be nice if the default could be changed - wandered around and found exactly that. I expect that entire disk drive manufacturing plants will now go off line, without all the change-spam that I've been emitting over the years... --jrm03063 10:50, 16 August 2012 (EDT)

I didn't know that either! Sorry to get grumpy, but as you probably well know, when somebody launches a systematic project and you're watching 10,000 pages, things get annoying pretty quickly :-) --Amelia 12:59, 16 August 2012 (EDT)

Next time there's a candidate for change-spam king - they can be told to examine "settings"->"editing"->"Mark all edits minor by default". --jrm03063 13:05, 16 August 2012 (EDT)

Butter source fix [26 August 2012]

Mrs Gerlicher,

Thanks for fixing that Butter source..Ive had a problem sometimes with the autoselection (when you start to type a source name) lately where it wont find what I type properly. I promise it isnt laziness on my part.--Daniel Maxwell 01:47, 26 August 2012 (EDT)

A general practice of yours... [5 September 2012]

I've noticed, on a number of pages where a WP copyright notice appears, instead of:

{{wikipedia-notice|William Carey (courtier)}}

You seem to prefer:

<show_sources_images_notes/>
{{wikipedia-notice|William Carey (courtier)}}

Am I correct in this? If so, there's nothing keeping us from making this standard behavior for the script that replaces the {{source-wikipedia|whatever}} template. Do you think this would work correctly on non-Person/Family pages? Do you think it would work correctly if there weren't any sources|images|notes to show?

I don't have a preference for one form versus the other - but I think one should be preferred. If you think we're better served by the second form - let's adopt it! We can ask Dallan to change his script to do that by default. I assume it would be trivial for him to do the in-place replacement of the source template with the specific wp page template, and then separately add the copyright notice at the end of the page. I'll try to remember to make that change when the opportunity presents. Maybe converting old forms could be an early task for those of us who will be beginning bot writers? --jrm03063 11:32, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

I like the latter because I think that "footer" shouldn't go in the middle of the page. Even if there is other content that's not WP, the style of the notice is inappropriate as a divider, at least to my eyes. Hence I add the show line wherever I'm otherwise editing. I assumed that it would break something to have it be automatically added, but that would be lovely.

Would like to confer on a source related issue... [5 September 2012]

I'm sure you've noticed that my approach to attaching sources is....different. It might seem haphazard and even a little unhelpful, but there really is a method.

Part of what I'm thinking WRT sources is to explicitly establish correspondence with foreign pages and reference material. We have ways to do this for Wikipedia, but they aren't obvious and can be inadvertently thwarted. One approach is to create explicit templates that designate a unique relationship between pages. Another might be to designate a source as having unique associations for one or more types of WeRelate pages - so that a bot can detect sources for which the record name - or record name combined with the volume page field - uniquely identifies a corresponding remote page. Creating "duplicate references" for such a source, would be considered an error that would be detected by running a Bot that would flag the situation.

Anyway, would love to hear your thoughts. If nothing else, maybe this will help you understand why I add sources that (in many cases) don't really add anything new to a page.

--jrm03063 12:10, 4 September 2012 (EDT)

I think I am intrigued, but I also think I don't understand... yet...  ;-) --Amelia 02:13, 6 September 2012 (EDT)

Clarification: Removed sources without unique information [3 October 2012]

I see that you removed a couple of sources from a page that I was in the process of reviewing. I have not seen this action before so want to make sure I am not busy creating work for others. What is the "policy" that lead to this action?

I have included most of my sources, including GED file imports so that future researchers know where I got the data, and also know where to look for possible new data they have not reviewed.

FYI - after I do an upload, I review every page created in order to clean-up source names, move fields since my GED export mapping does not align with WeRelate fields, etc. If I should be removing sources based upon certain criteria, let me know so that I can reduce the admin workload.

Thanks Rick--RGMoffat 08:16, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

Hi Rick,

Thanks so much for asking. In general, gedcom sources are frowned upon and removed in almost all cases because they are no more useful to viewers than no source at all. There's no way for the viewer to access the source or to have any way to weigh its authority. While it's true that these collections may be your source, that's just not useful to the community where we're looking for a good, verifiable, reliable source. In addition, tertiary (and worse) sources that merely restate facts found in better and more primary sources that are already listed on the page are unnecessary and can be removed. In your case, I know you've been careful with your sourcing and have generally left the pages you've created alone, but I made this edit when I was otherwise tweaking the page in part to draw your attention to these best practices. This was a pretty clear case where your gedcom sources were adding nothing (here they were sourcing the name and a birthdate that was sourced better in four other places), so they should just be removed.

So going forward, since you mention you're constantly cleaning up, I'd remove gedcom sources unless there's some reason they are more reliable than other sources -- i.e., this was the granddaughter's gedcom. And in that case, there should be enough notes on the MySource page or the source detail to explain that. Anything else that is similarly inaccessible and in your possession -- like Grandma's family tree notes -- gets the same treatment. Personal family tree websites that are still up can be left as sources, but again, if they are only restating what's otherwise sourced better, they can just be removed as well.

Thanks so much for your efforts -- always better to over-source than under :-) If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. --Amelia 11:41, 3 October 2012 (EDT)

Question on categories [9 October 2012]

I seem to recall you did some work with categories for the different ships associated with the great migration. I also recall we added quite a number of people to the category for the witch trials. In working through the Savage transcript, I observe that his narrative often names arriving ships and he likewise often mentions the trials. I can make such references into an active link using the normal form with a leading ":" - but (when I look at the actual category page) - I'm a little disappointed to see that I don't find the originating page on the "what links here" list. It seems like it would be slick to put links into the Savage transcript for those sorts of things, but it's kind of a bummer to not be able to start at the category and work backwards to know things like "here are the pages of savage that have a witch trials reference" or "here are the pages of savage that reference such and such an arriving ship". I'm sure I can cobble together something that - as a secondary process - creates such reports - but I really want to make sure that I use everything that media-wiki has to offer in exposing this sort of information. Any thoughts? Thanks... --jrm03063 11:20, 9 October 2012 (EDT)

Delete source page [4 November 2012]

Hi Amelia,

I removed references to the source http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Source:Harriette_Jensen._Hoisington/Horsington_Family_Website

However I did not find a link under "more" to delete the source. Perhaps you can help with this?

Thanks,

George--ggp 10:55, 4 November 2012 (EST)

Hi George. Thanks for letting me know. I didn't realize that people can't delete their own Source Pages -- I'll take care of it. If you need to do so in the future, you can use {{Speedy Delete}} to flag the page for admins to delete.--Amelia 23:15, 4 November 2012 (EST)

Springfield, Hampden, Mass. - Duplicates [5 November 2012]

Hi Amelia, You are correct that we probably have a duplicate page. I understand what is happening. When I go to search I entered "Massachusetts, Town and Vital Records" and then put the location into the location box. If you search, it does not come up. However, if you title the search, "Vital Records of Springfield, Mass" and search for that there are six entries..not two. So I think their needs to be some admin to take a look at it.

I always thought you put the name in "Title" box and the "location" in the location box and it appears they are using location as part of the title, thus you don't find it when searching. What I have is an "Ancestry" database. It also appears that there is another title besides Ancestry for some other databases.

Please let me know what I need to do. Thanks so much and sorry for the trouble... --Txbluebell6 18:27, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Hi there. You're right that source searching is less than ideal. There have been multiple efforts to optimize it, and it still needs significant improvement. As a general rule, the more specific you get the fewer results you'll get. Place in particular is a very strict modifier.

But to get back to your source, please provide more details regarding which Ancestry database you're talking about. Is it this one? If so, you can cite whichever book you found the record in - that database is just a pointer to scanned published records.--Amelia 23:08, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Not sure about this GM immigrant [7 January 2013]

Amelia, since youve done more of these GM sketches than I have, and since you also seem to have the full membership at American Ancestors, I was wondering what you think of the immigrant John Perry - Person:John Perry (31). I started to clean him up, but Anderson refers to a source in the Register, fairly recent, which he says 'may' correspond to the family of the immigrant. I hesitate to do anything further with that until I see how certain the source (in the Register) is with that information. He already shows that the Ann Newman marriage is quite likely not the immigrant's, but once again I hesitate to change it further before seeing it.--Daniel Maxwell 21:29, 6 January 2013 (EST)

You're wondering what to do about the wife? The underlying source is pretty much what GM reflects - such a marriage exists, it fits, there's not evidence one way or the other. I don't know that we have a standard for this; it's similar to the parents question recently debated, but in this case there is actually a marriage record. I lean toward leaving the family there (to help with future merges), and I added a note to Ann's name to flag that it was only probable then leaving the note that Jaques added on the family page. We could replace her with Elizabeth, but I think it's six in one/half a dozen the other - that name is based only on the existence of a later Elizabeth Perry remarrying.--Amelia 23:38, 6 January 2013 (EST)

Well not just the wife, but the 'baptism' as well, which Ive left in place until I could be sure. I couldnt see the Register article so I didnt want to go on a deletion/renaming splurge just yet. Id probably add the Ann name as an alternate name and make it Elizabeth ______, since that was the only provable spouse he had in the colonies. This isnt my family, I am working on him solely for the GM page project. Daniel Maxwell

Same here, but there's no evidence of Elizabeth either -- Anderson just guesses that based on the fact that an Elizabeth Perry married later in the colonies and there's a daughter Elizabeth. But that's such a common name I'm not particularly moved by that evidence. The baptism is the same status as the marriage - it fits, but can't be sure. I'm generally of the bent that I leave what's there so that it catches new uploads better, but I don't feel strongly about it.--Amelia 23:53, 6 January 2013 (EST)

Ok, for now I'll leave it. Generally when something isnt proven I prefer to leave it out completely, but I am no expert on that family. Thank you btw for helping with the GM sketches page; its quite a chore!Daniel Maxwell

werelate contest [9 January 2013]

Hi Amelia, 1. I have written a note about how I chose the contest subjects on my profile page. 2. I hope that any mistakes contestants make can be a learning opportunity for everyone here although I am basically avoiding recently deceased people for the reasons you mentioned. If I use a recently deceased person I am trying to keep it to people with very long lives (90+) so the living siblings wouldn't be such a problem. 3. I have figured out a way that established WeRelate users can contribute contest subjects that works for me. I will write that up today. Thanks for your patience and your interest. Catherine --cthrnvl 13:16, 9 January 2013 (EST)

Thanks for assistance [8 February 2013]

Amelia, thanks for your assistance. At first I was a little confused as to how to add sources in the various categories, but I think I'm finally wrapping my head around it. I have lots of information on several family lines that I want to gradually add. That's why I chose just two persons at first, thinking that I can learn to add sources and citations correctly on those two.

I'm not far from the Allen County Public Library and in the near future will be visiting it's genealogy department a lot more.

Thanks for all your work at WeRelate. Hopefully I won't be making tons of mistakes in the future.--David Cornwell 18:07, 8 February 2013 (EST)

Clean up of Great Migration list [7 March 2013]

Mrs Gerlicher,

Do you think you can help me out with the remaining clean up of the Great Migration clean up list that Robert Shaw made on the talk page of that article? Since I only have access to Ancestry.com's version of GM, I cant check all of the entries except against the PDF on GM's website.

If you can help me, make a '<---- added ' or some other notation showing that each entry was checked and so we dont duplicate work. I'll go through it a bit of a time myself but I could use some help.--Daniel Maxwell 18:34, 17 February 2013 (EST)

Sure. But I don't understand what only having access to Ancestry's version affects this one way or the other?--Amelia 23:25, 17 February 2013 (EST)

Because it has the sketches from Volume 1 (GMB) and only some from GM 2. It seems to be missing a handful for Volume 1, as well. Otherwise I would have done more of them. User:DMaxwell

Mrs. Gerlicher, I am working on the year discrepancies on the GM page and all of them (so far) correspond to instances of dual dates. For example, the first record immigration William Baker appears on is dated 16 Feb 1632/33. He is in the PDF as 1632 but the list as 1633. Should our list correspond to the PDF, the actual (Gregorian) year, or should we make them dual dates in the list itself? Unsure what WR policy is on this.--Daniel Maxwell 01:15, 19 February 2013 (EST)

It should be 1632 -- if an immigrant was here by winter of 1632/3, he came in 1632.--Amelia 10:30, 19 February 2013 (EST)

I disagree, to eliminate confusion, dates from 1 Jan to 24 Mar in years before 1752 should be double dated. Look at [1] under dates.--Scot 18:38, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Scot, the date listed is not the date of first record, it's the date of immigration. There were no winter sailings, and therefore, a first record before March of one year indicates a sailing no later than late fall of the year before. William Baker is a partial sketch, but I've seen this logic explains a number of times elsewhere.--Amelia 22:57, 19 February 2013 (EST)

My comment refers to dates in general, not specific cases, looking at a single date there is no way to tell if the writer interpreted it correctly Savage for example. the alternative is to append O.S. or N.S.--Scot 10:51, 20 February 2013 (EST)

Well, as far as it relates to this case that was the entire point of my question. Do we conform to the GM list, a dual date or the (actual) year? My mind isnt set either way. user:DMaxwell

Quoting from the style guide referenced above "Double dating should be used in pre-Gregorian dates for dates between 1 Jan and 24 Mar, if known. For example, 11 Feb 1731/32 is the birthdate of George Washington."--Scot 12:28, 20 February 2013 (EST)

Scot, I agree with you on the style guide, but my point was that the style guide simply does not apply. The year being listed is the year of arrival. There were no arrivals in the 1630s during months that would be double dated. Using a double date would only be confusing here because, in the absence of a month, it could just as easily mean a range. -Amelia 12:46, 20 February 2013 (EST)

Can I help with this? I have access to americanancestors.org (NEHGS) which has all the GM work published so far.

Jillaine 17:21, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Just make sure to leave a mark when/where you've gone through it. (we've been adding '<-----'etc to know where we are on the list). user:DMaxwell

Go for it!--Amelia 22:57, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Happy to. Where's the list? Jillaine 09:51, 4 March 2013 (EST)

Talk:Great Migration Study Project Sketches

GMSP Checklist [10 March 2013]

Okay, I want to make sure I'm doing this right. I don't find a check list for what we're supposed to be doing, but looking at examples, I think the checklist might be:

1. Look at Great_Migration_Study_Project_Sketches for a line with a blank last column.
2. Search for that person on WeRelate
3. make sure said person has Category:Great Migration Study Project included
4. make dates referenced in the GM text (say, from AmericanAncestors.org) have an associated citation using the format in existing examples, and pasting the first section of text into the text field of the citation.
5. Edit Talk:Great_Migration_Study_Project_Sketches adding the appropriate notation in the final column such as "<--- added".

Am I missing anything? I experimented on YOUNGLOVE, Samuel (last in the list), following the above steps EXCEPT the last one because he's not on any of the lists on the Talk page. What do I do under those circumstances?

Wanting to be helpful, not making things worse.

Jillaine 13:50, 7 March 2013 (EST)

Hi Jillaine,

There's actually two different projects, and you can do either or both:

• Fixing the lists. This is the project DMaxwell was asking me for help with. It was discovered that the list that I originally linked to was out of date. Comparisons between the article (which used the old pdf) and the "new" pdf were posted on Talk:Great_Migration_Study_Project_Sketches. To help with this part, you go to one of the lists on the talk page, look up the actual entry referenced in the GM databases online, and, if necessary, change the corresponding entry in the Great_Migration_Study_Project_Sketches chart to match. (Or add the name, or delete it, although I think those sections are done.)
• Adding GM sketches. You do this using steps 1-4 in your question above - basically seeing if the person is on WR, fixing them up if necessary, and adding the link to the chart. Adding people from scratch if you need/want to.

And if you so desire, you can do the second while doing the first, which I do sometimes. I'll also make notes like "No record in New England" on the chart as I'm paging through. Every part helps.

Does that make sense? Thanks for your help! --Amelia 00:01, 8 March 2013 (EST)

P.S. Younglove looks good!

Ah... okay. I see now. Explains much. Can't take credit for Younglove-- someone had already added the GM sketch text. But I will take credit for adding a link to his profile from the GM Sketches project page. ;-b

I'm more interested in the first project than the second, in part what's going on on the Talk page confuses the heck out of me. But I'm wondering if most of the sketches have already been done?

Jillaine 09:08, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

I would say most are probably on the site in some form, but some have been improved from bare gedcom uploads and most haven't. The talk page lists are down to really minor differences in spelling and dates that don't impact the substance of the list, so far as I can tell, so it's fair to ignore :-)

--Amelia 09:50, 10 March 2013 (EDT)

Well, we should probably try to finish it up eventually. The idea was to make it match GM's own list (which as we saw was filled with its own errors). Jill, the problem originally was that in the course of uploading the list some time ago, a number of people were completely deleted. It was especially pronounced in the As and Bs. One user came by and changed the heading of the GM sketch page to "here are some of the immigrants listed in GM" and Amelia questioned the 'some'. I added the missing ones, Amelia checked the list for duplicates and ghost entries. Whats left are differences between the dates listed on the GM list and what we have in the article. In some cases, we had wrong dates listed. I havent started to go through the misspelled list yet, but those are even more minor. Its an article that requires alot of micromanagement. Daniel Maxwell

Medieval Stuff and Draft Conventions [19 February 2013]

I would appreciate it if you could review this document and the related discussion. I would appreciate your views. --jrm03063 09:19, 19 February 2013 (EST)

Question for using a website database as a source [1 May 2013]

Hi Mrs Gerlicher,

There is a website that lists baptisms/burials/marriages for several parishes in England that is available no where else I am going to have to use to cite for a certain family I am working on. Might there be an example of another source on WR that was done similarly I can use as a guide for how to enter the Parish extracts? Typically, I enter books or articles as sources, I hadn't done just as a website list.

thanks!--Daniel Maxwell 11:05, 1 May 2013 (EDT)

Where did they get them if they aren't available anywhere else? Can you point me to it?--Amelia 11:29, 1 May 2013 (EDT)

They are extracts from films that aren't available in a book, it seems that they probably rented the films to get the extracts. They are available here: http://www.fullerfamilyhistory.org.uk/FFH_DB_Intro.htm though the ones I am looking at are the ones for Rattlesden parish. Daniel Maxwell