User talk:Brannon

Topics


Welcome

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:

  1. Take the WeRelate tour to see what you can do.
  2. Watch the Wiki basics tutorial video to learn how to make ancestor web pages.
  3. Explore the Tutorials, if needed.

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! --Ronni 14:42, 13 September 2007 (EDT)


Outdated pages [1 October 2007]

Hi Brannon,

We were monitoring recent changes today and noticed that you had created four pages:

that you later replaced with:

You might want to delete the earlier pages.

Also, do you think you could tell me where the point of confusion was, that caused to you re-create these pages? This happens to people every once in awhile and I'd like to fix the UI so that it happens less often. thanks!--Dallan 19:57, 30 September 2007 (EDT)


The problem was that the pages didn't show up in the search results when I tried to go back to the page. I found later that I could get to it by clicking on the history of changes I had made, but at first it was not immediately obvious. I thought maybe the changes didn't get saved.--Brannon 13:17, 1 October 2007 (EDT)


That makes sense -- sorry about that. The pages get indexed overnight, so they don't show up in the search results until the next day.--Dallan 14:34, 2 October 2007 (EDT)


Page Titles [8 October 2007]

Hello,

I'm Mary, one of the volunteer administrators for WeRelate. I have renamed several of your pages that included middle names or initials, since it is a convention/rule of WeRelate not to include this information in the page title. It is, of course, included in the detailed information about the person on that page. The same rule applies to Family page titles--only first and last names are included.

Thank you very much for joining WeRelate and sharing your material!

Mary--Kittydoc 15:33, 2 October 2007 (EDT)


Please explain the purpose of the convention of not including the middle name in the title. It seems to me that users would prefer having more information in a title rather than less because of the challenge of finding the correct person while doing family history. Most people had very common names and it can be difficult to find someone in a search without a way to narrow it down. For example, the family page of John Carter and Hannah Knight Libby Carter shows that they have two sons name John Carter. So with the father and the two sons, it can even get difficult trying to differentiate names within a family.--Brannon 23:18, 2 October 2007 (EDT)


It's a convention more than a hard-and-fast rule, but having just a single given name in the title lets the system know which part of the title is a given name and which is a surname. (Everything after the first word is the surname, which works for e.g., Dick Van Dyke or Spanish names that include multiple surnames.) The system uses this assumption in the following areas:

  • When you edit a person page for the first time, the system automatically fills in the given and surname from the title. (People that put middle names in the title often forget to move the middle name from the surname field into the given name field before saving the page.)
  • In the index view of the Family Tree Explorer, if you select Person pages or Family pages, the titles are sorted by surname.
  • when we redo indexing next week, when indexing a Family page that refers to a husband/wife page that hasn't been created yet, the system will index the first word of the title as the husband/wife's given name and the rest of the title as their surname.

None of these are a disaster if the system "guesses wrong", which is why it's a convention and not a rule. And finally, you are free (and encouraged) to enter additional given (middle) names in the given name edit field of the person page. They should show up when the person's name is displayed on the left-hand side of the page, in maps and pedigrees, etc.--Dallan 08:55, 4 October 2007 (EDT)


Thank you for your response. I can see that it works that way. However, when asked to enter information for a new person or family page it has a separate box for "surname" and "given name". Why isn't the information stored the way it is entered? If I enter "Michelle L." as a given name and "Smith" as a surname, I would expect that the information would be stored as such. However, it seems to mix it up and Store the surname as "L. Smith", like you said it would. As a result, I can only enter first and last names. The problem with this is if I have to enter a list of children when I have their name only and no birth date. It would be easier to just enter the list under "children" on the family page, but in the current system, after I do that I have to go to each individual child (and sometimes there are quite a few) and re-enter all the names. This seems like a redundant task to me. If there was a way to change how the program works so that the names are recorded correctly the first time entered it would be much more convenient for the users.--Brannon 20:10, 4 October 2007 (EDT)


The problem is that the popup box just constructs a page title. At that point the notion of what you entered in which field (given or surname) is lost. So when you create the page later the system looks at the page title and assumes that the L. is part of the surname. I know what you mean about it being annoying though. One possible solution is to save the names entered in the given and surname fields in two separate fields on the page, and then when the page is saved, create a page immediately containing the full name. This seems reasonable to me; what do you think?--Dallan 00:27, 7 October 2007 (EDT)


I think it sounds like a great idea to keep it in two fields. I think it will help to clarify things.--Brannon 14:27, 8 October 2007 (EDT)


Brodford vs. Bradford [18 October 2007]

Hi,

I find a place in York/Yorkshire called Bradford, but not Brodford. Just wanted you to be aware, in case it's a typo.

Cheers, --Mary 20:32, 17 October 2007 (EDT)


Thanks. That it is recorded as Brodford in my family records, but I was wondering if they really meant Bradford as well. I may put it in parentheses or something.--Brannon 11:37, 18 October 2007 (EDT)


Larabee/Felt [15 November 2007]

I don't see any changes, what did you edit? Scot--Scot 17:56, 15 November 2007 (EST)


I don't think changes show up until the next day. I added info about ordinances for my church as well as information on the family of Elizabeth Felt. I basically linked the trees. I'm pretty sure I kept all information that was already there and just combined. I think they run changes on the server every night, but eventually they will do them every 10 minutes, from what I understand. So I can get to them from my edit page, but I'm not sure you can. You might be able to check the edit history, but even then it may not show up until tomorrow (11/15).--Brannon 18:01, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Thanks this is just my 2nd day here and the learning curve is steep.


REYNOLDS.ged Imported Successfully [26 November 2007]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may view them by launching the Family Tree Explorer and opening the family tree into which this GEDCOM was imported.

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org.

--WeRelate agent 19:32, 26 November 2007 (EST)

COOK.ged Imported Successfully [26 November 2007]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may view them by launching the Family Tree Explorer and opening the family tree into which this GEDCOM was imported.

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org.

--WeRelate agent 22:02, 26 November 2007 (EST)

JOHNSON.ged Imported Successfully [26 November 2007]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may view them by launching the Family Tree Explorer and opening the family tree into which this GEDCOM was imported.

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org.

--WeRelate agent 22:04, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Sarah Geer [3 December 2007]

I noticed that you edited her off as wife of Nathaniel Park. Did I put her there as a typo? Do you have any sources?

Larry

catchall@sisna.com--Waterart 18:44, 3 December 2007 (EST)


Sarah Geer [4 December 2007]

I noticed that you edited her off as wife of Nathaniel Park. Did I put her there as a typo? Do you have any sources?

Larry

catchall@sisna.com--Waterart 18:44, 3 December 2007 (EST)


I'm not sure what you mean because I still see two versions of Nathaniel Parke and Sarah Geer on this page: http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Nathaniel_Parke_%281%29

Unless you saw the first Nathaniel Parke listed on this page: http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Family:Thomas_Parke_and_Dorothy_Thompson_%281%29

There isn't much info on him, but maybe that is what you are referring to because I see your name on the watch list. Go to one of the above links and you should see all of the information you want there. There are two Nathaniel Parkes and the second one has all the information you are looking for, I think. I didn't delete the first one because I didn't want to cut you off the tree by doing so. You should be able to add the second Nathaniel Parke to your tree and hopefully that will reconnect all of the information you had. I hope this makes sense.

I was trying to merging three trees together and it can get really confusing. You will see user Katsus98040 on the watch list of some of those pages. That is the other user who had information on these people. I may have made an error in the merges and I am very sorry if I did. I try to avoid deleting information but I may have if it was there in another form. I hope I didn't screw anything up!--Brannon 11:14, 4 December 2007 (EST)


Rydalch history.paf does not appear to be a GEDCOM [1 January 2008]

We were not able to import your file, because it does not appear to be a GEDCOM file. Here are some related help topics:

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org.

--WeRelate agent 16:19, 1 January 2008 (EST)

rydalch.ged Imported Successfully [1 January 2008]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may view them by launching the Family Tree Explorer and opening the family tree into which this GEDCOM was imported.

For questions or problems, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org.

--WeRelate agent 21:17, 1 January 2008 (EST)

Pedi-Map [30 January 2008]

Wow! The new Pedi-Map is really impressive. Thanks. --Beth 18:08, 30 January 2008 (EST)


Stephen Larrabee and contemporaries [18 February 2008]

I certainly won't be offended if, in your judgement, you and I share a person and you go ahead and merge and drop unsupported facts in favor of supported ones. Better still, collect both sets of facts in the merged person and note the relative merits of each.

Trust me, if the shoe is on the other foot, I'll merge your stuff .... :) !--Jrm03063 19:21, 17 February 2008 (EST)


Merging tips... [18 February 2008]

The tools really don't help a lot, but the results are worth it. As much of a computer jockey as I am, this is one case where planning it out on paper is a big help. "Cutting off" a tree can happen, but you can also look at old versions of the stub (history of the person or family page) and figure out what was lost. Unless you start deleting trees, its actually pretty hard to inadvertantly "lose" anything (lose track of it for a while maybe, lose it permanently, not so much). Be brave!--Jrm03063 09:05, 18 February 2008 (EST)


John Libby (4) [27 February 2008]

You've seen what I've seen. When I realized that you were active in there I decided to just add a couple of source entries and see what turned up.

I'm not sure whether the question is which children went with his first wife and which with his second (Mary). Unless there is a source that has any actual information on the unknown or Mary, perhaps the best thing is to create a single "family" page that references both wives. We can put in the body of the family page information on what the different views are about which children go with which wife and that these wives were serial.--Jrm03063 17:21, 26 February 2008 (EST)


I would go right ahead and indicate both the "Unknown" initial wife and the second (slightly known) "Mary" as an alternate wife. To my mind, the alternate spouse form allows for any number of ambiguous situations and I would expect Dallan to say that multiple uses were what he expected. I think the key point is that we don't just put the alternate spouse in without comment on what we are doing. My thinking is pick a simple form, explain the rationale in the body text or a note, and start adding as much source information as can be had. If a different form becomes justified as the information starts to accumulate, well, then you go to a different form.--Jrm03063 08:06, 27 February 2008 (EST)


Digital library [18 March 2008]

Hi Brannon,

The digital library is finally ready to try. Thank-you for offering to test it and give feedback! To see it, go to http://www.werelate.org/dlib . You log in by clicking on "My DSpace" in the lower left-hand corner. Enter your WeRelate user name and password. From "My DSpace" you can submit items: either to the "Sandbox" collection (a collection for testing - items submitted to the sandbox will eventually be deleted), or to your personal collection (items submitted to your personal collection won't be deleted). As can can see, there is still quite a bit to do:

  • The "skin" (look and feel) need to be customized. I haven't spent any time on this.
  • When you submit an item, you're asked to enter the title of a WeRelate Source page. There needs to be a "Search Sources / Add New Source" button that will pop open a window where you can search the Source wiki for your source and add it if it doesn't exist. (Also, see the WeRelate talk:Source Committee for proposed, soon-to-be-implemented changes to the Source wiki.)
  • It needs to be integrated with the wiki. Currently you have to log in separately to the digital library, searching the digital library is separate from searching the wiki, etc.

Any feedback is appreciated. The Search/Add Source button should be added sometime this week, and a new skin sometime next week. I'd like to hold off on integrating with the wiki for a couple of months though while you and others get more experience using it and we can decide what the best integration points should be.

If you have time and are interested in helping with the development, please let me know. The big project for the next couple of weeks is going to be customizing the JSP pages to make the HTML look nicer. Another group is supposed to be helping to develop a new skin, so we'd need to modify the JSP pages to make them work with the new skin.

P.S., when you submit an item, the coverage information (places, subject, ethnicity, occupation, and religion) will eventually default to what's on the Source wiki page so that you don't have to re-enter it unless you want to change or add to the defaults).

Thanks again!--Dallan 22:43, 18 March 2008 (EDT)


Alvin Barnum.jpg [3 April 2008]

Hi -

I sent an email to dallan, but I guess he is out of pocket. Can you please delete the above picture? I labeled it wrong. It should have been a picture of his son. Now I have 2 of the same picture with different names.

Thanks! Monique--Nicki 01:18, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Hi Brannon, just wanted to let you know that I took care of it.

Hello [15 June 2008]

Hi Brannon,

I noticed that you are watching some pages that I am also watching. I wanted to introduce myself. My name is Jeni Shirley [Maiden: Williams]. I'm from Salt Lake City, Utah. My maternal grandmother is Marilyn Myrup, and I'm currently writing her biography.

I would love to know what you are working on.

Sincerely, Jeni Shirley--Heygirler 18:23, 15 June 2008 (EDT)


Image license [25 August 2008]

In reference to your image. You entered there was no copyright. I assume that you took the picture. The copyright belongs to the picture taker even if it is a family snap shot. If it is your picture you may release it to public domain or use the dual GFDL-SSA license. I listed it as a low resolution copy of a historical photograph because, I always need to reduce the size of the image to load it on the website. I assume you did too. If you have any questions or comments please leave me a message.  :-)--sq 23:42, 25 August 2008 (EDT)