Welcome [5 May 2010]
Welcome to WeRelate, your virtual genealogical community. We're glad you have joined us. At WeRelate you can easily create ancestor web pages, connect with cousins and other genealogists, and find new information. To get started:
If you need any help, I will be glad to answer your questions. Just click on my signature link below and then click on the “Leave a message” link under my name in the upper left corner of my profile page. Thanks for participating and see you around! Debbie Freeman --DFree 23:47, 16 February 2010 (EST)
B.Holmes seems to go to current e-mail rather than permanent e-mail. Which e-mail do you get yours from?--B.holmes 07:57, 19 February 2010 (EST)
I am a volunteer admin. I am a little confused about what sort of help you need. Are you the same user as B.Holmes? What can I do to help you? --sq 10:56, 19 February 2010 (EST)
Sure thing. I just have not figured out how to add sources yet. BK-124 and etc was my way of knowing what source to add once I knew how to add it. Happy to contribute in the joint manner you suggest. B.holmes--B.holmes 20:49, 24 April 2010 (EDT)
Jrich, Thanks for your insight. I see your points.--B.holmes 16:22, 4 May 2010 (EDT)
Great. Good advice again. May I ask another question. My hope to a WeRelate page was to have a readable narrative page that fills out more about the person or family than most genealogy programs. That is why o the family page I wanted to say a little about the husband and something about the wife then their marriage and their children. I agree that this means having multiple pages to update. Perhaps a way to accomplish what I was after could be to have the separate pages mirror on the family page? I noted that the John Bowne page is just a mirror of the Wikipedia page. Can this be done with WeRelate pages? ie. Can I have a family page that 1) mirrors the husband's page, the 2) the wife's page, the 3) the first childs family page? etc.?--B.holmes 23:22, 4 May 2010 (EDT)
citing sources [24 April 2010]
It sure would be nice if you named your sources rather than simply asserting everything about the Feakes, or saying "other sources". I removed the sentence from Person:Hannah Feake (1) that said: "BK-124 states, “she had red hair as a child and was delivered by Telaka, a Siwanoy Indian Squaw.”" on two grounds: mostly that no other reader than you will know what BK-124 is, and secondarily because I wonder whether this is a fact versus a romanticization? Of course, we would have a better idea of the answer to item 2 if we knew what BK-124 was. This website is about collaboration, and because you are working with other people who don't necessarily know you, it is necessary to cite your sources. Thanks. --Jrich 22:41, 13 April 2010 (EDT)
Excessive commentary [14 May 2010]
I have been watching your changes to Family:John Bowne and Hannah Feake (1) and have to ask why you are putting all this information here? Let me give an example of why I don't think it is all that useful. There is basically a paragraph on each child which duplicates the information that should go on each child's own Person page. Now, if any of these facts change on the child's Person page, due to new research, will some future user have to remember to change it in both places? Why not keep the information about, say, Person:Mary Bowne (3), on her page, so if new information comes to light it only needs to be changed in one place? Why is it not sufficient to have the child listed in the family summary in the left margin? If some are missing, you can/should create them so you can store all this information.
Also, you have the issue that some of the sources cited are only there because they talk about the children, not about the marriage. Shouldn't these go on the child's own Person page? For example, the Field Genealogy is a reasonable source for Benjamin Field and Hannah Bowne, but does not pretend to have done any thorough study of her parents and does not provide any insight into when and where the parents were married.
Speaking of The Field Genealogy, a work I have often used, as pointed out in an earlier message, much of the information you posted in the source citation is merely duplicating information that is, and properly belongs, on Source:Pierce, Frederick Clifton. Field Genealogy page, yet it does not provide something so useful as the page number. Do I as a reader really care if you happened to read The Field Genealogy at the Georgia Historical Society (especially since the copy available on books.google.com is more convenient to my California home)? I care more to know exactly what subset of all the information on this page you relied on this source for. In particular, it would be helpful to know it quotes Flushing Friends records (a primary source) and that the original record actually says Hannah "died 30th day, 10th m, 1707" because, sure enough, a quick search finds a website that lists her death date as the erroneous 30 Oct 1707 based on misinterpreting this Quaker date string. --Jrich 13:11, 3 May 2010 (EDT)
Jrich, Not sure which way to reply. I see your points and appreciate your insight.--B.holmes 16:23, 4 May 2010 (EDT)
Thank you. I saw your reply. If you look on your main user page, you should see me listed as a watcher, so I will be notified if you update your user page or the associated Talk page. So when you replied on the Talk page, I was notified. Some people like to reply on the originator's Talk page, but that splits the post and reply on two different pages, which makes it hard for others who may be watching, so I think it is best to just reply in the same place as the post. Just for reference, another way to reply, is to go to the user page of the user you want to contact, and in the More menu there is an option to send them email (if they allow it-some don't). This email route is useful to carry on a more private conversation with just that user, and not anybody that happens to browse the Talk page. --Jrich 18:17, 4 May 2010 (EDT)
Continued duplication of data, and other points [20 May 2010]
Duplication of data:
I have tried to use the transclusion feature to add info to a page so that it is narrative and not just useful to a strict genealogist. The info with citations are to be on the persons page. There may be some that I have failed to get to yet. Please excuse.
You may speak for all WeRelate people when you say to leave the narrative blank if the only info is that in the left hand column. I suggest that there are others, myself being one, who would find the page more enjoyable if it were a readable narrative. The transclusion feature enables the related info from parents and children's pages to be pulled in for context without their own citations. I have tried to add links back to the individuals where sources are cited.--B.holmes 22:25, 8 May 2010 (EDT)
My belief is that you will not like it so much after you get used to the WeRelate format, and find few pages that are laid out the same way. I think it distracts from any added stories or detail that does belong there. Plus it increases the maintenance effort to anybody that subsequently changes the page, by requiring them to make changes twice. I can tell you that if I were to find good sources that contradict your data, as some of the items that I listed above hint that I could, I would not bother to make changes twice. Instead, I would merely delete the duplicate data. It is a waste of time to read through all your added text, with its surplus of headers, only to find it adds nothing to the page that wasn't known before.
Besides the fact that I think what you are trying to accomplish with transclusion is unnecessary, and even slightly detrimental, I personally suspect that transclusion is a bad idea as well. Mostly, because if somebody else wants to transclude a different part of Hannah Feake's page, they are going to have to move the onlyinclude's around to suit themselves, but that will destroy what you wanted. And Help:Advanced Editing Commands implies that the transcluded pages should be templates, that are designed from the start to be transcluded, not Person and Family pages.
I would be more interested in seeing the quality of genealogical material improve before worrying so much about the cosmetic presentation of it. This is necessary to ensure a reliable consensus about the facts that will make this site useful to other researchers. This requires the citing of quality sources. "Genealogy without sources is mythology." --Jrich 23:54, 8 May 2010 (EDT)
I think I have a solution to this issue. The problem is that the basic information about people on person and family pages appears down the left-hand side of the screen, leaving the main body of the page blank. Blank pages are aesthetically unappealing. But duplicating the information on the left so that it also appears in the main body means that if something is changed, it needs to be changed in two places, which has disadvantages. A possibly-better solution would be for the software to list the basic information about people in infoboxes on the main body of the page instead of down the left-hand side. Coincidentally I've been working on exactly this, and should have it working by the end of this week.--Dallan 10:29, 13 May 2010 (EDT)
Thanks Dallen, I look forward to seeing your efforts. Need a Beta tester?--B.holmes 09:03, 14 May 2010 (EDT)
I'm making this announcement on the watercooler. If you have some feedback, I'd love to hear from you. Please add a comment to the "New look" topic on the watercooler.--Dallan 09:28, 20 May 2010 (EDT)
Dates and Gregorian Calendar [11 May 2010]
All the dates you added to Family:John Bowne and Hannah Bickerstaff (3) are wrong because they ignore the calendar shift of 1752. You should read and study wikipedia:Gregorian Calendar because this is something you must understand if you are going to do genealogy before 1752. Basically, when they switched from the Julian to Gregorian calendar in England and its possessions in 1752, the first month of the year was changed from March to January. So before this time, if you see a date that refers to the 9th month, it means November, not September, etc, etc. This is particularly crucial in Quaker records because of their fondness for using numeric months. --Jrich 11:17, 11 May 2010 (EDT)
Census titles [7 August 2010]
Hello B. Holmes, I noticed that you are creating new census pages. WR's naming convention for census pages is: County, State, United States. YYYY U.S. Census Population Schedule (where YYYY is the year of the census). The pages you created had US instead of U.S. I renamed the pages you created, and changed the links on your person pages. Let me know if you have any questions. Have a great day! --Jennifer (JBS66) 09:16, 7 August 2010 (EDT)
Thanks for your help again.--B.holmes 10:02, 7 August 2010 (EDT)
an oops! [27 December 2010]
I'm glad to see some of your posting! I just saw your page Family:Joseph Hedger and Sarah Stevenson (1) and believe there is an oops where the link to Woodbridge, Colonial New Jersey doesn't link to the right place. I have Jacksons at Woodbridge, so was checking it out. I believe I also have info (not posted yet) that will tie in with some of your posting, so I'll be keeping an eye on your New Jersey work! --Janiejac 23:26, 26 December 2010 (EST)
Thanks for the note. I think I have corrected that and some more I have found. Like Flushing LI in the Bahamas? I look forward to working with you on Woodbridge connections. Cheers, Buddy--B.holmes 10:04, 27 December 2010 (EST)
Find a Grave images [7 October 2011]
I noticed that you have added photos from Find A Grave. Photos from Find A Grave are not public domain. Unless there is clear indication on the image page that you either took the photograph or have permission from the copyright owner to use it on WeRelate (including agreeing to WeRelate's licensing), it will need to be deleted. Please see our policy here.
The best way to include those types of images is to link to the memorial page. For example, on the page for Brutus Bourie, you could enter this in the text area: Photo of Brutus' gravestone on [http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=16677167 FindAGrave.com]. The link would look like this:
Photo of Brutus' gravestone on FindAGrave.com
Images can be deleted by clicking on More>delete from the image page. Please let me know if you have any questions. --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:24, 6 October 2011 (EDT)
I do have permission from the FAG member who took the photo of the Bourie plot in Ft Wayne. I appreciate your help in how to link the photo but how do I state the permission that I have to WeRelate's satisfaction. Thanks again for your help--B.holmes 13:08, 6 October 2011 (EDT)
Jennifer, I have tried to correct all the contributions of mine which are now assigned to the above category. Do you check the talk page on that category? Am I correct on why it was formed? Thanks, Buddy--B.holmes 08:20, 7 October 2011 (EDT)
Spelling of my name [25 September 2012]
Thanks for your input on the Driver tree. Just a quick note on the spelling of my middle name it is no"C" but E for Everett.
I will look into adding trees to this site, looks promising.
Sincerely David E Paulsen DCPfamily@frontiernet.net--Dcpfamily 15:59, 25 September 2012 (EDT)
Hugh Marsh family [21 November 2015]
Hi, I see that you are watching the Hugh Marsh (b.1763) page. Are you descended from him? If so, I'd love to know your line and am happy to shre information. firstname.lastname@example.org Thanks!--Sheri 14:12, 21 November 2015 (UTC)