User talk:Amelia.Gerlicher

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


Not sure about this GM immigrant [13 March 2015]

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

Dear Amelia, Thankyou for acknowledging my contribution but I am interested to know by which 2 people are we related. I still live in the area to all the distant relatives. Yours Peter Saunders family tree 17:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

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'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 (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 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: though the ones I am looking at are the ones for Rattlesden parish. Daniel Maxwell

Joseph Maxwell Morrow [22 June 2013]


I know for sure 100% that I am a granddaughter of Joseph Maxwell Morrow. My question is, who were his parents and where did they come from? His son Silas Lee Green Morrow is the line I come from? Does anyone know who his parents were and where they came from? Are they Irish? German? Do we even know?

Thanks, Abby--Abwar12 17:32, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

Hi Abby,
Check out the DNA notes on Joseph's page - that's what testing told us. I'm the project admin, so it's not my line. I suggest, though, watching that page and leaving a note on the talk page there with your questions. I think the others watching the page are more closely related. Also check out the list of close matches -- Irish is more likely than German. Good luck. --Amelia 19:58, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

Hannah, daughter of Andrew and Rebecca (Woody) Morrow [17 July 2013]

Hi Amelia, just thought I'd let you know that I stumbled across one of your Morrow's. Hannah Morrow, daughter of Andrew and Rebecca (Woody) Morrow, married into the Tosh family that I was working from Botetourt County, Virginia. I also added her two sisters, completing Andrew and Rebecca's family.

Best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 17:22, 16 July 2013 (EDT)

Source Pages [20 July 2013]

Thanks for the input, Amelia. I have made corrections, but am having trouble merging the two source pages -- title should be: Source:New Orleans, Algiers, Mt. Olivet Birth Records, 1857- 1937. I'm still pretty new at this system and can't seem to find the handle on how to change sources. Working on it... help appreciated!--Frank 16:14, 20 July 2013 (EDT)--Frank 16:17, 20 July 2013 (EDT)

I redirected the both to Source:Algiers, Orleans, Louisiana, United States. Mt. Olivet Episcopal Church Records, 1857-1988. The "Genealogy Trails" link you offered gave the original source as the film number that corresponds to the church records source. We don't create source pages for online transcriptions; use the page for the original Source. To redirect (merge) with an existing source, put #redirect [[Name of new page]] in the body of the source you're redirecting. The title you used isn't right because we have standardized formats to make the titles predictable and findable. Let me know if you have any other questions.--Amelia 17:21, 20 July 2013 (EDT)

deletes [24 July 2013]

thanks for pointing that out to me: so sorry, I simply didnt realise, got carried away ... will they automatically delete as I can't figure out how to do it?--Juliadb 02:23, 24 July 2013 (EDT)

Hi Amelia, again - sorry about this, am not very up on how to do the deleting - you sent me about 9 emails so hopefully they're all going to be deleted? or do I need to go through them all ? I did it all by hand (is there another way?). I'll be more careful in future (I think this is the only time I've put living people on though... ) regards, Julia DB--Juliadb 02:31, 24 July 2013 (EDT)

Infotable [4 August 2013]

Amelia, I'm new to WeRelate, and am having a problem editing the info table on this guy; when I click on Edit for the section (not for the other sections), I get an essentially blank page; and of course I don't want to wipe anything out that's already on there, etc. What I wanted to point out was that John Sevier's grave/monument, built by the State of Tennessee in an honored place, is carefully carved with a different birthdate: Sept. 23, 1744 (not 1745). Since such prominent, honored, official monument must have been carved with great care, thus the presumption is that 1744 is the correct birthdate — or at least, this alternate should be mentioned on the WeRelate page. For a photograph of this tombstone, see the page at Find-a‑Grave. BillThayer 11:03, 4 August 2013 (EDT)

Cemetery photo source pages [20 July 2013]

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.

Thanks/Person John Sevier (1) [4 August 2013]

Thanks for your helpfulness to a newbie! Yes, you guessed right: you wuz the first on that list of Watchers. I'd seen the Talk page but the last comment there was in 2010 was it? and my experience with Wickedpedia is that thinly-followed pages, the Talk pages are even more so…

Asfer Sevier's birthdate, as a historian I usually trust tombstones more than books (or at least books in which the statements are unsourced). The tomb was ordered by the government of the State of which he was essentially the founder, and the great hero, after they'd gone to the trouble of rescuing his remains from Alabama. In its very opening page for example, the Turner biography (1910) of Sevier makes completely at least one categorical mistake (Xavier is not now, and never was, in France) and one completely unsubstantiated statement (that Sevier has anything to do with the Xavier family). So the alternate date seems plausible to me, short of a source document stating 1745 of course…

Anyway, most kind of you to respond at length and so helpfully! Best, BillThayer 18:27, 4 August 2013 (EDT)

Rosanna_Hill_(1) [7 September 2013]

Ms. Gerlicher Please take a look at the comments I have added to the following page and let me know if your view on how the issue should be resolved: Thanks, Tbrady--Tbrady 16:22, 7 September 2013 (EDT)


It sounds like the sources are fairly unanimously on your side. As added background, the original uploader is someone who uploaded a sizeable gedcom here several years ago that is generally considered to be of medium unsourced quality-- and they he/she disappeared. So I think you should make the changes necessary to conform the pages to the best available theory. It sounds like that means deleting Rosanna Hill from the family page (leaving her intact), and then merging that page with the correct page with Juliana. Put the discussion of who the wife is on the family page, as well as maybe a someone modified version on the Rosanna Hill page (from the perspective of why she's not Stukely's wife). If you need help with any of this, let me know. Thanks for bringing good sources and analysis to the site!--Amelia 19:35, 7 September 2013 (EDT)

I'm so sorry I screwed up. [8 September 2013]

Oh Amelia I'm so sorry I messed up. I did visit the tutorial pages & I though I had the source thing figured out. I will do some more homework. The History of the Stiles Family in America is a transposed copy of a book. It is available online at Thank you for you patience & assistance. :)--JulesLonghurstStiles 02:36, 8 September 2013 (EDT)

The Stiles Family in America [9 September 2013]

My source book is by Mary Stiles Guild & Paul Stiles, Henry Reed Stiles. & you are correct it is just called "The Stiles Family in America". I will get the hang of this.--JulesLonghurstStiles 23:32, 8 September 2013 (EDT) This is the link for the book.

Help with a new template [16 September 2013]

Amelia, I realize this alot to ask, but I could use some help with a new template. Since we have a US Vice President template, I am interested in creating a Second Lady template. You seem to have created many of the templates on the site (Mayflower, Presidents, etc). If there is a guide for this, I might just do it myself but I could use some pointers since I have never done one before.--Daniel Maxwell 14:33, 15 September 2013 (EDT)

NM. Using your First Ladies template, I copied the formatting, replaced the seal with the VP version, and have now added all of the Second Ladies's names (not all have WR pages). See: Template:USSecondLadies
I hoped to get to this on my Sunday afternoon, but it didn't happen, but that's pretty much what I would have suggested. I added some content to the category and linked a couple more. I usually put the template after the source list, but I don't think we've settled on a rule one way or the other.--Amelia 11:59, 16 September 2013 (EDT)
Great, and thanks for the additions. I decided to do this when I was going through some of the notable livings like Al Gore and Tipper, then noticed Tipper wasn't part of a big list like this. Daniel Maxwell 13:19, 16 September 2013 (EDT)

Adding places and dates [3 December 2013]

Hello Amelia ! Please, be patient ! I am doing a very big work ... the census of Place:Rumigny, Somme, France for the year 1851. I have 644 persons to type ! Two methods ... typing all informations for each person, before working for the next record ... or (it's that I am doing, because I prefer ... it's working simply faster for me !) beginning with the names and family links to type the rest of the informations later ! I tried to explain (very bad) this to Jennifer, yesterday ! I want to go so fast as possible, because I have a very big conflict with fr-Rodovid-contributors who are playing dictators since 3 years and see very badly that I left Rodovid and I now participate in WeRelate. Excuse my poor english ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 16:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Since the message of Jennifer yesterday, I give at least the occupation and the year for one person per family ! Please see for example my recent record : Person:Auguste Demoreuil (1) ! - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
See also my first complete record : Person:Bénoni Quignon (1) ! Patience ... patience ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

All of my people under list are gone. [17 December 2013]

All of my people under list are gone. I don't know what I did or didn't do to have my list disappear.

  I hope you can help me.

Teacher Roxie--TeacherRoxie 18:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. If you're talking about under the List menu, that sounds like a technical issue. That page can take a while to load, but otherwise I don't know what would cause people to disappear.--Amelia 19:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I have trouble getting People from the List menu to load - especially in the middle of a session when I'm moving in and out of the list. If that is the issue, suggest refreshing the page or re-loading the page until it works - up to 3-5 times in my case does the trick. Jennifer JBS66 suggested this approach to me and it worked! Good luck.--Frank 19:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Amelia, I went back to We Relate, pushed list, then people and all of my names came up. I don't know what the problem was before, but thanks. Maybe I just wasn't waiting long enough for the program to bring up the name. Thanks for your help, TeacherRoxie--TeacherRoxie 21:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Category Sort [8 January 2014]

Could you take a look at the category for the Salem Witch Trials? I've used the '^' character to push transcript and source pages past the end of the primary alphabetical sort. Is this the sort of thing you were thinking? Or do you have another idea?

Thanks! --jrm03063 15:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleaning up guide [10 March 2014]

Amelia, it seems that there is some disappointment that there are no agreed on standards for Cleaning pages. I wonder if maybe you'd like to collaborate on updating this page? You're an old hat around here, and I don't really want to be doing it myself since it would be just my idea of what is 'cleaned' up.--Daniel Maxwell 15:04, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Is there a page started?--Amelia 00:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
I thought there was, but I guess it hasn't gotten that far. There is a discussion on my talk page about some of the points Beth is going over. Might want to move it all to a new page. Daniel Maxwell 00:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Future Gedcom [24 March 2014]

Hi Amelia,

Thought I'd pre-inform you that sometime in the next 60-90 days I'll be uploading a Gedcom for the BLOOM family of Hunterdon Co, NJ and Clearfield Co., PA in collaboration w/several other Bloom descendants. As it stands, there are more than 10,000 individuals (none living) and likely to be closer to 30,000 soon, with duplicates that I've already contributed to WR. Will read the Guidelines for Gedcom, since everything I've entered has been one-by-one. If you have any helpful hints, please advise. Gedcom may have to be split. Thanks...--Neal Gardner 22:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Neal,
Oh wow. I don't know if 10,000 people is allowed in one gedcom, but if it is, I'd recommend against attempting it. Unless you have everything exceptionally clean, you'll need to go through and edit most of the pages when you do it. Just as an example, when I last uploaded a couple hundred people, I had to touch nearly every one of them to fix all the census sources since I do them differently than WR; fix assorted other sources that are either too personal to upload or could/should be replaced with something better; fix a number of places so they displayed correctly (the place linking just changes what underlies the pipe -- your misspellings, etc., remain); remove and/or research assorted wives so I didn't upload empty pages; fix my --?-- surname convention to "unknown"; and add categories for the civil war vets. It took me a couple months in between various other things. Some of this can be addressed ahead of time if you're willing to modify your own database accordingly, although that in itself is of course a lot of work. Good luck!--Amelia 05:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Amelia. I'll definitely preclean before I upload. I'll suggest to my major Bloom cousin to create single Gedcoms for each of the 11 children of the immigrant, Wilhelm BLUM/BLOOM, then present one by one. I'll prewarn you each time. With all the talk about "needing to grow", this is probably my best contribution, besides linking all my FindAGrave pages to WR. As a "worker bee", not a techy, I hope this helps. Thanks again. --Neal Gardner 06:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes for William Renwick Riddell [3 May 2014]

Good morning. I have been going through my large number of "MySource" records and have been converting many of them into "Citation Only." I see that you have reviewed some of the person pages I have modified, and want to make sure I understand what you have done, and why. I hate to make extra work for others if I can do it right the first time.

I must admit that after 30 years in the information technology field, the overused term "best practise" is a red flag to me. It often is used as a marketing tool to justify the way a particular organization likes to do things, without documentation or justification for the claim. I willingly follow the WeRelate practices as best I can, so please help me along here.

There is also a difference between syle and best practise. Styles can differ.

For William Renwick Riddell I see the following changes: 1) leading "0" on a day in a date was removed. In other records that you changed I see months were changed to mixed case rather than all upper case. Pretty clear.

2) In a number of cases for this person, "Notes" were moved into the "Text/Transcription location" field. Is this one of the best practices you mention? Where is it documented so that I can review it?

Personally I prefer using the Notes field so that there is a blank line between comments and data, but maybe I have been using them in reverse to the best practice.

For example, on a census record, I put my comments in the "Text..." field and then the census information in the "Notes." field.

I guess I can still get the same effect by adding a line break after my comments.

3) In Personal History did you insert the "show_sources_Images_Notes" instruction or did it come in with the Wikipedia instruction and I have just never noticed it before?

Did I miss any other changes? For example, did you change any "sources" to "Citations only?" I can't tell if I did that, or if someone else did.

Finally, let me say that I appreciate the effort you put into helping users on this Wiki. As it grows in popularity your job must be getting more and more time consuming.

Thanks Rick--RGMoffat 17:45, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Rick,
Thanks for your questions. Answers...
2) (note field v. text field) The reason I did this is that having the information from/about the source in an associated note is 1) much more susceptible to error by having the elements disassociated; and 2) much harder to understand/edit in editing mode, particularly for people other than the author. Aside from the blank line issue, I've never heard a corresponding reason in favor, and so I generally change it if I am otherwise editing a page. I have no idea if this best practice is documented somewhere, although I know I've discussed it at least a couple times; there have been multiple efforts at documenting best practices but ultimately only a couple people care enough to work on drafting, and that's not enough to be a "consensus" document.
3) (show images) I insert this because I dislike having the Wikipedia footer in the middle of the page. I don't know that it rises to the level of best practice, but I know a couple other admins do it as well.
I got to the page while reviewing recent source edits, and your source 5 (gravestone transcript) didn't meet the criteria for a Source Page, so since it only had one link, I did the edits on Riddell to change it to citation only and deleted the source.
Thanks for the complements, and appreciation back to you for being so conscientious. Let me know if you have any questions on the above.
--Amelia 01:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Merge person [15 May 2014]

I was going to contact Tclough to suggest merging Elizabeth Plummer (11) with my Person:Elizabeth Plumer (1) but noted Tclough has not been active since a message in March 2010. Can you do the merge or shall I attempt it. I will defer to the spelling as Plummer.--HLJ411 18:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Go for it.--Amelia 05:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Morrow, Rattlesnake Creek [18 June 2014]

Hi Amelia, if I have a question concerning the Rattlesnake Creek Morrows is this the way and method to communicate?--Huberlg 02:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Here, or use the More > Email this User link to the left.--Amelia 04:10, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello Amelia, My name is Linda G Huber and I am the daughter of Frances Jean Morrow of Birmingham AL. My grand father was David Jackson Morrow, great grandfather Joseph Cameron Morrow and my gg grandfather was David Jackson Morrow. David was the son of Jesse Washington Morrow and his father was Robert Morrow of Caswell NC. My question to you is, does anyone have parental information about Robert Morrow the Rev. War soldier and ancestor to this line. I have a DNA test with However there are no remaining male Morrows in my direct line. If we had known about the Morrow DNA project 5 years ago we would have had my Uncle Jack, who was my mother's twin, take the test. He had no sons and is now deceased, as is my mother.

I was one of the persons who believed my Morrow family line went back to Norfolk, Va but according to your DNA project the Rattle Snake Creek Morrows, of which Robert was a member, are not related to the Norfolk Morrows. Any idea where this line goes back to in this country or Europe?

Thank you for your time and consideration of my questions. Linda G Huber--Huberlg 14:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Volunteering [7 July 2014]

Hey Amelia - Dallan emailed and asked me to leave you a message here re: volunteering. I am on a break during July but am available to help again starting in August. Please just let me know what is needed and feel free to email me directly. Regards,--Cos1776 17:41, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

elizabeth Hodge [5 November 2014]

i do not think that yours and my elizabeth Hodge are the same person. My family were farmers in the Devon area. Or do you have accounts to prove otherwise--Ksmm 22:52, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean. I don't have an Elizabeth Hodge. If you're referring to the note I left on the Thomas Lee/Elizabeth Hodge page, I did that because I am an admin who reviews new family pages, and there are children on that page with two different last names. That typically means they have different parents, which means they should be on different family pages. If they do have the same parents, best practice would be to explain that on the family page. Thanks, --Amelia 01:02, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

"Presumed deceased" [28 December 2014]

Amelia, I was going through the speedy delete pages and I noticed a note left on the talk page for Person:Daniel Holland (12); that the man hasn't been seen since 1991, and a PI couldn't locate him and he presumed to be dead. I don't know how WR should handle these.--Daniel Maxwell 14:01, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Since it's the sister's entry, I figure we don't second guess her reasons for wanting him up there, and missing for 24 years seems like a decent presumption.--Amelia 16:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
I was going to suggest perhaps 'after 1991' in the death area. I too am in favor of keeping it. Daniel Maxwell 17:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Please, patience and better analysis of the contributions [1 January 2015]

Hello, Amelia ! Please, can you read again what I wrote here ? and

The records were changed, with a minimum of informations about place and date (census 1851), and all these records are not "orphan" ---> I put the links between the different persons. I know, this "work" is not finished, I am sorry. I have to complete with 1) all the details that we can read in the census, 2) the information of the census 1836, 3) and also the birth records. Have you seen, I am working and contributing for months to clean up a lot of records (from other contributors) since I read this page WeRelate:Old GEDCOMs ... for me, it's more important to clean up so quickly as possible all the old records (date format + caps surname + deleting "uid" and "refn", etc). And I don't forget that I have to help for a translation in french ... but all these programs and activies take ... TIME.

Happy new year ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 07:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand works in progress, but these pages were marked with cleanup requests over a year ago and haven't been touched since. They are 2-3 unconnected individuals with no information. If you are not going to add further information within a few days (and it doesn't need to be everything, just something), please don't add such people in the first place. Getting reasonable amounts of information on your own pages is much higher priority than doing minor administrative fixes on old records. But the point of speedy delete is to give you a chance to fix the records if you want to. If you can't, then there's no reason they shouldn't be deleted. They cannot add value in their current state, and only add confusion to the database.-Amelia 18:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Amelia ! Your interpretation is for me too "wild" ! "... cannot add value" ? + "only add confusion" ! + my "minor administrative fixes on old records" ! Very funny ! Did you really seen, how "heavy" and dissuasive all the records with "UID_" are for the genealogists and visitors of the site ? But I will add "something" in the next days on my records which "revolt" you ! Please ! Be not so "authoritarian" ! Be more comprehensive with contributors who are working for the "community" and not egoistically for their own "ancestors" ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 19:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
And who are these 2-3 unconnected individuals with no information ? Please say it "clearly" ! It "works" better and quickly when a message is given on the "talk page" of each contributor ! We cannot every day verify by "watch list" all the records where we put a little modification - Thanks - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 19:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
And see (for example) what I added on December 5th 2013 : and (and the same short information for the children of these 2 men). - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 20:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


This is not a personal vendetta or some wild accusation. Dozens if not hundreds of pages like this are marked for deletion every week. Your pages marked for speedy delete were marked for more information over a year ago -- a courtesy not given most users. There was no response, except one notation that one of the children was in the census at some point in his life. They are still unconnected people with no information from which another user could identify them, which means they violate the most basic tenets of work on this site and either need to be fixed or deleted. The reason the Speedy Delete process is a marking process and not just instant deletion is so that the page can be fixed if you are so inclined. You have fixed the problem. This should be the end of the story.

But it's also important to note that while we all find UID's annoying, and cleaning them up and other community work is appreciated, you can't upload empty data with no dates, places, or sources, and leave it there because you are busy working on other things, and expect everyone to just leave it alone because we know you are doing other things. I would only hope my own forgotten orphans would be similarly found and flagged. You have to attend to your own data first. If you would rather work on community projects, then don't upload empty pages in the first place. And while I agree that a personal note regarding all defective pages would be the ideal, that's not a scalable approach for admin review. The reason for the watch list, the summary field, and the attendant emails is to alert you to the changes on your pages.

editing changes [7 March 2015]

You made some changes to some of the pages I edited. I'm all for best policies and practices. I will do my best to emulate. Thanks for all the great work WeRelate does. I haven't seen an easy way to make a cash donation. Probably something else I missed...

Bill Loughner 16:00, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you [13 April 2015]

Hi Amelia,

Thank you for formatting my list: looks nice.--Helen-HWMT 10:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

coming back [5 September 2015]


I'm coming back. What do I need to know? Do you have my email address? jillainedc at yahoo

````--Jillaine 12:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the source on Elijah Land and Elizabeth, Amelia --MJ--Jaynes931 17:51, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [20 September 2015]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded SarahJay.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing. We will keep your GEDCOM in the queue for two weeks to give you time to review it.

Note: if your gedcom contains many errors or multiple families, we’d ask that you resolve and correct the errors, delete this gedcom and re-submit it without the errors before merging it with families already on WeRelate. If the gedcom is very large, we’d suggest breaking it up into separate files (or families) and importing them one at a time, which makes the review and correction process easier.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 17:31, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

SarahJay.ged Imported Successfully [20 September 2015]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to

--WeRelate agent 05:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC)