User talk:Ceyockey

Topics


Welcome [15 December 2008]

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. Review the tutorials to learn how to make wiki pages for your ancestors.
  3. Read the etiquette page to learn expected behavior in a wiki.

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!--Jstump 10:49, 25 September 2008 (EDT)


The tutorial I watched was the "Creating a Family", 4.45 minutes long. Actually, I watched all the video tutorials, and am so hopeful I'll figure out how to do this pretty soon...although it is more complicated than I realized...but I'll keep working at this. Thank you for setting it up so well.--Luv2birdAZ 00:21, 26 September 2008 (EDT)


Copyright and Genealogy Gems

Genealogy Gems. You recently mentioned that I violated copyright laws by adding these articles to WeRelate. I am a librarian at the ACPL and received permission from the Genealogy Center's manager to add these articles to WeRelate. I left the date and volume of these issues with the article so that others would know that these items were ACPL's, who is in partnership with WeRelate.--Tctheusch 10:30, 15 December 2008 (EST)


admin log [5 October 2008]

Hi, I noticed you had a question about the admin log. We originally used the log only for administrators. But, we now use it for all volunteer time. We are a tax deductible 501c3 non-profit organization. As such, we need to show public support to keep our non-profit status. So, if you are volunteering on the source project or another project, or patroling edits, please record your time.

Thanks for participating,--sq 21:18, 5 October 2008 (EDT)


Category Cemeteries [19 November 2008]

Hi Ceyockey,

I noticed additions to cemetery categories, but the cemetery categories are not consistent. We have Category:Cemeteries and only one subcategory under this category; something to do with Australia.

Then we have the categories recently added which are subcategories of the :Cemeteries of the United States. This one should be a subcategory of Category:Cemeteries. I have only used Category:Cemeteries because I was not aware that the others had been created.

What method should one use to inform users of newly added categories?

I have also confused myself as usual. Are the cemetery categories only for use with sources? What about places?--Beth 13:15, 19 November 2008 (EST)


Administrative Housekeeping [22 November 2008]

Noticed your work on some administrative housekeeping in the Southwest Virginia Project, including the addition of the Category:Southwest Virginia Project to some pages. In response I've added a category to the project header, so that anytime the header appears, the category is automatically added to the page. That will save you some effort in adding the category tag to each and every page in this project. (G) Q 21:30, 22 November 2008 (EST)


Blue color on administrator log [7 December 2008]

Hi Ceyockey,

The blue color on the administrator log makes the text almost impossible for my eyes to read.--Beth 21:14, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Its funny, but I think the color is rendering quite differently depending upon the browser used. The color parameters bgcolor="#BFBFBF" and bgcolor="lightgray" both show up as light gray in Firefox 3.0.4 on WinXP. However, using IE7 on WinXP, the BFBFBF shows up light gray, but 'lightgray' shows up as dark blue. You are seeing dark blue for all sections except the Dec 2008 one? --ceyockey 14:23, 6 December 2008 (EST)
Yes, I am seeing dark blue except the Dec 2008 one and I am using IE7 and WinXP Pro. It seems that I recall some type of color settings on Firefox but don't know if there are any for IE7 or if that has any effect.--Beth 08:31, 7 December 2008 (EST)

Categorization [4 January 2010]

Hi Ceyockey,

I see you've been doing some categorizing today. Could you describe your overall effort? I'd like to understand the thinking behind what you're doing so that I can better support you. Thanks!

-- Jillaine 00:08, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Thanks for adding the surname in place category to several of my Jackson pages! It seems that sometimes the categories are automatically added and sometimes not. I'm glad to see them there and will try to remember to add them if I ever create similar pages again. --Janiejac 01:11, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Pencader Cemetery Page [16 January 2010]

I noticed an article you created that may be better utilized as a placename: Interments in Pencader Cemetery, Glasgow, New Castle, Delaware, United States. Since you are its only contributor I didn't want to change it without your permission or involvement. If you opt to change it to a placename then I'd like to add appropriate cemetery category Category:Cemeteries of New Castle, Delaware, United States to add it to the Cemetery portal. BTW, good work with the page. Is the cemetery owned and operated by the Pencader Presbyterian Church next to it?--BobC 13:23, 12 January 2010 (EST)



Welcome [15 December 2008]

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. Review the tutorials to learn how to make wiki pages for your ancestors.
  3. Read the etiquette page to learn expected behavior in a wiki.

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!--Jstump 10:49, 25 September 2008 (EDT)


The tutorial I watched was the "Creating a Family", 4.45 minutes long. Actually, I watched all the video tutorials, and am so hopeful I'll figure out how to do this pretty soon...although it is more complicated than I realized...but I'll keep working at this. Thank you for setting it up so well.--Luv2birdAZ 00:21, 26 September 2008 (EDT)


Copyright and Genealogy Gems

Genealogy Gems. You recently mentioned that I violated copyright laws by adding these articles to WeRelate. I am a librarian at the ACPL and received permission from the Genealogy Center's manager to add these articles to WeRelate. I left the date and volume of these issues with the article so that others would know that these items were ACPL's, who is in partnership with WeRelate.--Tctheusch 10:30, 15 December 2008 (EST)


admin log [5 October 2008]

Hi, I noticed you had a question about the admin log. We originally used the log only for administrators. But, we now use it for all volunteer time. We are a tax deductible 501c3 non-profit organization. As such, we need to show public support to keep our non-profit status. So, if you are volunteering on the source project or another project, or patroling edits, please record your time.

Thanks for participating,--sq 21:18, 5 October 2008 (EDT)


Category Cemeteries [19 November 2008]

Hi Ceyockey,

I noticed additions to cemetery categories, but the cemetery categories are not consistent. We have Category:Cemeteries and only one subcategory under this category; something to do with Australia.

Then we have the categories recently added which are subcategories of the :Cemeteries of the United States. This one should be a subcategory of Category:Cemeteries. I have only used Category:Cemeteries because I was not aware that the others had been created.

What method should one use to inform users of newly added categories?

I have also confused myself as usual. Are the cemetery categories only for use with sources? What about places?--Beth 13:15, 19 November 2008 (EST)


Administrative Housekeeping [22 November 2008]

Noticed your work on some administrative housekeeping in the Southwest Virginia Project, including the addition of the Category:Southwest Virginia Project to some pages. In response I've added a category to the project header, so that anytime the header appears, the category is automatically added to the page. That will save you some effort in adding the category tag to each and every page in this project. (G) Q 21:30, 22 November 2008 (EST)


Blue color on administrator log [29 November 2010]

Hi Ceyockey,

The blue color on the administrator log makes the text almost impossible for my eyes to read.--Beth 21:14, 4 December 2008 (EST)

Its funny, but I think the color is rendering quite differently depending upon the browser used. The color parameters bgcolor="#BFBFBF" and bgcolor="lightgray" both show up as light gray in Firefox 3.0.4 on WinXP. However, using IE7 on WinXP, the BFBFBF shows up light gray, but 'lightgray' shows up as dark blue. You are seeing dark blue for all sections except the Dec 2008 one? --ceyockey 14:23, 6 December 2008 (EST)
Yes, I am seeing dark blue except the Dec 2008 one and I am using IE7 and WinXP Pro. It seems that I recall some type of color settings on Firefox but don't know if there are any for IE7 or if that has any effect.--Beth 08:31, 7 December 2008 (EST)
FYI, while this is very old history: While you can get better precision (exactly the right color), hexcodes are not standard in html, if you use the HTML standard "names" for colors (e.g., "lightgrey", "palesteelblue" etc) , rather than the hexidecimal codes, you won't run into this problem. All browsers accept the HTML standards. Q 07:03, 29 November 2010 (EST)

Categorization [4 January 2010]

Hi Ceyockey,

I see you've been doing some categorizing today. Could you describe your overall effort? I'd like to understand the thinking behind what you're doing so that I can better support you. Thanks!

-- Jillaine 00:08, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Thanks for adding the surname in place category to several of my Jackson pages! It seems that sometimes the categories are automatically added and sometimes not. I'm glad to see them there and will try to remember to add them if I ever create similar pages again. --Janiejac 01:11, 4 January 2010 (EST)

Pencader Cemetery Page [16 January 2010]

I noticed an article you created that may be better utilized as a placename: Interments in Pencader Cemetery, Glasgow, New Castle, Delaware, United States. Since you are its only contributor I didn't want to change it without your permission or involvement. If you opt to change it to a placename then I'd like to add appropriate cemetery category Category:Cemeteries of New Castle, Delaware, United States to add it to the Cemetery portal. BTW, good work with the page. Is the cemetery owned and operated by the Pencader Presbyterian Church next to it?--BobC 13:23, 12 January 2010 (EST)

Hello, Bob, and thank you for looking at the page in question. There is already a placename page at Place:Pencader Cemetery, Glasgow, New Castle, Delaware, United States. The "Interments" page was meant to be a descriptive article on the residents of the cemetery. Would you suggest a different placement / categorization of the "Interments" article? --ceyockey 19:32, 16 January 2010 (EST)
Hi, thanks for the response. I should have looked at the "what links here" tab or the place designation link and I would have noticed the links to the placename page. I have no problem with it and it shows a new approach to interments, with the placename page identifying the cemetery itself and location specifics and an article page to hold interment details. I like it. I added the Category:Presbyterian cemeteries to the placename page. --BobC 21:01, 16 January 2010 (EST)

Please note my response to your other note on the same subject on my User Talk Page in case you don't get notified of the response. --BobC 21:52, 16 January 2010 (EST)


to process [29 November 2010]

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/86982062--ceyockey 23:56, 28 November 2010 (EST)


Richard Trapnell(s) [2 July 2011]

Hi Ceyockey,

I believe you are correct Richard Trapnell (4) is the middle of three 'living Trapnell' people associated with Richard Trapnell (2). My records show him b. 23 Apr 1950, New York, NY, which appears to match Richard Trapnell (4). Regarding Richard Trapnell (2) being the son of Richard Trapnell (3), this is not the case. RIchard Trapnell (3) was uncle of Richard Trapnell (2) , and he (3) had no children. see Category:Trapnell_surname.--Hugh 16:20, 2 July 2011 (EDT)


Categories [15 July 2011]

Hello Ceyockey, I've noticed that you are doing a lot of work with categories. I just wanted to alert you to a conversation here about Dallan's future plans for automated categories. He is planning to replace the automatically-generated categories at the bottom of pages (such as Smith in Maine) with a faceted search instead. I thought that since you spend a bit of time categorizing, it may be a topic of interest to you. --Jennifer (JBS66) 07:13, 15 July 2011 (EDT)


Get Satisfaction [19 July 2011]

Hi, WeRelate decided not to use Get Satisfaction. I don't recall the reasoning or what we talked about doing instead. Maybe someone else can clarify. --Beth 21:02, 18 July 2011 (EDT)

The reason WeRelate decided not to use Get Satisfaction was primarily due to the lack of notifications (such as we have when a user is watching a page). WR opted instead to create the WeRelate:Suggestions page to track new ideas and archive implemented ones. Discussions on the Watercooler such as "No longer considering GetSatisfaction" and "Sortable tables, tools for working with subpages, and more" explains this in more detail. --Jennifer (JBS66) 06:19, 19 July 2011 (EDT)

Thomas J Yockey military info [21 August 2011]

Added image of military discharge paper. Let me know your thoughts.--SusanYockey 19:12, 20 August 2011 (EDT)


Thanks. Did you get this through in information request to the government or was it among papers you have in hand. I've added information bits from this to Dad's record and added to the caption that the thumbprint is not present, which indicates it's not a facsimile of the archived document but another edition. --ceyockey 11:44, 21 August 2011 (EDT)

Another thing to consider . . . the designation "TEC" might be anachronistic, rather rendered as "Tec" or just "T" during the time period. I'm going on really thin information in suggesting this. --ceyockey 11:58, 21 August 2011 (EDT)


You're welcome! I got this via a request I made to the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, MO. I had wanted to use his military records for my genealogy class, but didn't because all that was available was this one sheet of paper. I felt that there wasn't enough there for me to write a report on, so I found another relative to use for that assignment. The letter I got from the Personnel Records Center said that military records from that time period and from the lower half of the alphabet were destroyed in a fire.

I'm interested in posting his death cert. that I got from your mother, but I need to black out her information.

David and I both looked at the discharge paper when it arrived and we couldn't figure out what the TEC meant. However, there were other things on it that we couldn't tell what they meant. What does TEC mean?

It's possible that the original form with his thumb print burned in the fire, but at some point before the fire they made a copy of it. Unless, the military gave your dad the original and made a copy for their records.

Dad mentioned that there was a major fire in the St. Louis records archive which destroyed a lot of material and this must have been among the victims.
After looking about a bit, I think that 'TEC 4' refers to Wikipedia:Technician Fourth Grade, and I'll add that to the record later. Also, 'CAC' might refer to 'Civil Affairs Corp', which makes more sense than the Australian air manufacturing unit :-) .
--ceyockey 14:45, 21 August 2011 (EDT)


Yeah, I noticed the Australian bit and thought that was weird. I'm still not sure what a Technician Fourth Grade and the 'Civil Affairs Corp' is, I guess I should research these things to find out.

Also, his education on the form doesn't seem to match. It said that in 1944 he had 4 years of college, so it makes it sound as if when he enlisted he would've been in grad school. Then it says that he enlisted in Nov. 1942 and he would've been 19, so I don't think he would've completed college by then, but I'm not sure. Do you know if your dad skipped a grade or something?


Yockey research in IL [7 September 2011]

Planning to do some Yockey research in IL. Is there anything you'd like me to look up for you?--SusanYockey 13:43, 3 September 2011 (EDT)


The possibilities are legion. I think top on my list would be a transcription of Crum Chapel Cemetery, where Dad (TJ Yockey) is buried. As far as I know, the only transcription resides at http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ilfayett/cemeteries/crum-avena/crumchapelcem.html (not yet in WeRelate, Place:Crum Chapel Cemetery, Fayette, Illinois, United States), which only lists 3 Crums and nothing more. That is not Yockey-related per se except it would provide some context to the St. Elmo-area, which holds the Davis-branch (Mom's side). I'm quite keen on cemetery transcriptions in general these days as there are so few of them and they are seldom complete. Second on my list would be to scrape up anything on Courtland M. Yockey and Jasper Lorenzo Yockey (not to be confused with Person:Jasper Yockey (1)). As far as I know, we've next to nothing other than oral history on these predecessors. --ceyockey 20:36, 3 September 2011 (EDT)

I went to the Il State Archives early this am and got the death certificates for both Zona and Jasper L. Yockey. I tried to find Richard Yockey's death certificate and it's listed in their database, but the listing of the microfilm rolls in their book at the archives doesn't always tally with how it is in reality. I think that visit will be the only one at least this week. David said we might be able to make a trip up here after my conference is over. I'm not sure that I'll be able to transcribe the Crum Chapel Cemetery. My goal of this trip was to visit Mound Cemetery in Hunt City, IL. I really wanted to see your Yockey grandparent, great grandparent, etc. graves. Hopefully, we'll have time to visit the courthouse in Newton to get more Yockey documents. Do you know what county Courtland and Nora got married in and do you have an idea as to the year of their marriage?


Cite template [4 September 2011]

You just marked the Cite template for deprecation. I think an explanation is needed and there is none on the page referenced by the deprecation.

If you have been reading the Watercooler, you are aware that several times I have posted that the Cite template does things that don't seem to be doable as easy or any other way. (It works in notes and source citations whereas the ref tag does not. It is easier to do {{Cite|S1}} than to do [[#S1|S1]] and it is not clear to me that the second S1 in this last form will get renumbered if sources get deleted or rearranged.) I use the Cite template a lot, because as part of my analysis of a source, I often need to compare and constrast it to another source and want to a comment to a source citation something like "this disagrees with Wheeler{{Cite|S1}}", desiring a footnote to indicate ambiguously to exactly what I mean by "Wheeler" rather than letting the reader guess.

Further I have posted many times about the inadequacy of the ref tag. If something were to be deprecated it should be that, as it is nearly useless for creating usable, easy footnotes. Although I use the ref tag to create footnotes in the narrative section, {{Cite|S1}} is easier than <ref name="S1"/>. The ref tag is only good for doing the exact same thing as the Cite template, and any other use of the ref tag than a plain footnote referring to a source citation either requires manually doing the citation inside the ref tag, potentially resulting in incomplete or non-standard citations, or suffers from the inability to simply leverage the already cited source with a different page number or explanatory text specific to that footnote. In other words, to effectively use the ref tag, each reference to a source must be described by its own source citations, resulting in multiple citations of the same source. Brain-dead.

Please provide an explanation why the Cite template was marked to be deprecated, and what group decided this should be done? --Jrich 13:44, 4 September 2011 (EDT)


Sorry if you don't like the tone, but it crept in as a result of the apparent arbitrariness of nominating the Cite template for deprecation at the current time. All the more annoying because I find it to be the most functional of the citing tools on WeRelate, and use it a lot. I didn't see any discussion on the referred-to page that provided any justification, or any place for me to add my discussion to. (In the future it could be slightly more understandable to us mushrooms if a brief justification for the deprecation were placed on the deprecation page, possibly with the transition plan for removing existing uses of it, and the proposed alternatives going forward, along with an invitation for discussion, prior to actually flagging the template itself.)
You should realize that it is not clear to me whether you are pursuing a personal agenda or acting on behalf of Dallan or something else altogether in this matter. But there are no signs that there was a discussion on this issue, or that anybody else participated in the decision to pursue this action.
I am aware that the Cite template has been marked obsolete for a while, but we have had several discussions about these citing tools since then, in which I think there been some recognition that the ref tag is not useful ("that's actually not very helpful" per Amelia), and Dallan saying changes to make it more functional would take a while ("it's not a quick enhancement unfortunately"). So I assumed the Cite template actually would be left in place until these issues were resolved and some sort of coherent set of tools implemented. Who would expect it to be deprecated when all the alternatives are still broken/ugly for reasons I have repeated and illustrated many times?
Actually, it's more than that, namely that I don't understand why it is necessary to get rid of it in the first place, since it seems to have been modified to renumber correctly, something that kind of belies its being marked obsolete in the first place. It works, it is useful, it is used, so what harm is there in keeping it?
All and all, I don't understand why there is action on it at all, and most particularly, why so at this time. --Jrich 14:41, 4 September 2011 (EDT)

Template navigation [26 December 2011]

Ceyocky -

I think it's an awesome idea to categorize all the navigation templates - so useful - and thank you for taking that on! I hadn't thought about that use of noinclude. One tiny favor... can you mark minor edit? I've gotten about 50 emails :-) Thanks!--Amelia 11:02, 24 December 2011 (EST)


I'm not sure it was a problem, it could have been a poorly formatted Person page instead, but there is a possibility adding spaces to the Cite Template changed the way it worked. In any event, it may be worth keeping an eye out for this, especially in some of the formatting templates. Appending your categories in a whole line at the end adds a carriage return that is outside the noincludes, and depending on how precisely the formatting of the template was designed, it may make a difference? --Jrich 09:51, 26 December 2011 (EST)


Linked data, semantic web, etc. [5 November 2012]

Trying to make sure I understand your remarks on the recent vote. I think, in some respects, I am interested in some things that are very similar to what you're interested in. Your key point, being, I think (in my words):

Inclusion of WP text, on it's own, is not terribly important. What's important is that we know that some PERSON page WRi refers to the same individual as some WPj page (a biography on WP).

From that associatiation, we can do a lot of interesting things:

  • Verify basic properties such as DOB/DOD, gender, etc.
  • In situations where DB pedia tells us parents or children - we can verify that the same relationships exist on WR, and if not, whether it's because they're missing or people are incorrectly assigned (on WP or WR).
  • We can recognize situations that SHOULD yield relationship properties on db-pedia, but which do not show those properties, and feed that information back to the WP community

On it's own - WR is actually in pretty good shape - since key genealogical information has a predictable structure. I've written programs that traverse around the tree.

There are other sources of information for which I think associations can and should be built. Not too surprisingly, these are the the reference/source items that I indicate on my user page as offering a unique description of a person, such that a correspondence can be established between the two repositories of content.

This gets me to my greatest concern of all. How do we represent these associations? Naively, they could be represented as sources. Of course, the genealogy purists are quick to point out that these things are not really sources in the strictest sense. We further have the problem of knowing how - or when - a source reference on a particular person page - implies an association. The same WP biography could easily support information on multiple WR pages - so which one is the real one?

The decision about when - or if - we see WP extracts is separate - but I really don't want to risk the association information in a discussion about cosmetics or temporary discrepancies between two copies of a database. --jrm03063 15:49, 25 October 2012 (EDT)

I hate to be a pest...I wanted to consider your suggestions relating to use of WP w/Surname pages, in a somewhat wider context. Regardless of if/when we use WP extracts or not, I think we're both interested in the general question of how to designate that some WR page should be understood as corresponding to some WP page. Knowing how we want to do that, might reflect on how we want to handle particular WP reference/inclusion scenarios.  ??? --jrm03063 11:55, 5 November 2012 (EST)

Message boards [15 April 2013]

Hey there,

Just a head's up I going to delete/redirect your message boards pages. Source:Rootsweb Message Boards exists if you need to cite a board, but we long ago deleted all of the surname-specific boards. There's no content that would go on a page for a specific board that wouldn't go on one main page, and maintaining them therefore is a burden with no benefit. Plus they break the rule of creating pages for personal correspondence and personal trees, which is basically what they are. (We keep large central pages for the boards, as well as for things like public member trees, WorldConnect, etc., in recognition of the fact that they are frequently cited, but we don't have tree-specific pages, either.) Let me know if you have any questions.--Amelia 11:54, 15 April 2013 (EDT) (admin/source patrol)


Categories vs Search Discussion [11 May 2013]

Although genealogy is my hobby and I spend a great deal of time at it, particularly in WeRelate, sometimes words used by administrators such as yourself are beyond my understanding.

"The first thing that comes to mind is faceting based on country; presently search results are not faceted and introducing even the most minimal faceting would be a great improvement."

What is faceting? I am sure that a visit to an online dictionary, if I knew of one, would not give an answer based on the needs of genealogists.

Regards --goldenoldie 02:17, 10 May 2013 (EDT)


Ohhh! You mean "breakdown"! Unlike Lidewij I can appreciate Jennifer's description of how to find an orange rug on a seller's website, or, perhaps, a book on Amazon or a computer monitor from an electronics distributor. But "faceting" is a term completely out in left field to someone who grew up speaking North American English, but had to adopt the United Kingdom variety when I migrated nearly 50 years ago (i.e., before the arrival of the personal computer).

Regards --goldenoldie 07:14, 11 May 2013 (EDT)


Mistaken identity?? [10 May 2013]

Hi, Ceyockey,

I got the message you left on my talk page, and my response is "Huh?". I think maybe you meant it for someone else, since it makes no sense to me and seems to be out of context. You might want to check and see if you meant it for someone else? --GayelKnott 22:12, 10 May 2013 (EDT)

My mistake -- wrong page, wrong message. Maybe even the wrong day???? Maybe I should just start over?--GayelKnott 22:17, 10 May 2013 (EDT)