User talk:Knarrows/Archive 2007

A related Place Name Problem

Oh this one is yucky. So I started going through my place names looking for those problem children. I have "Schwenningen" as the place for a LOT of people. And it's accurate (although I suppose it really should say "Schwenningen, Wuerttemberg, Germany"). But here's the problem. WeRelate isn't going to recognize it because the CURRENT name of the town is Villingen-Schwenningen. But the town didn't get named that until 1972. Before that, you were either from Villingen (in Baden, to make things worse), or Schwenningen (in Wuerttemberg). Germany abounds with such merged places! Feil and Bingert are another case in point. They were two separate towns, and are now merged into Feilbingert. From a genealogical perspective, I've been instructed to use the name of the town AS IT WAS CALLED AT THE TIME OF THE RECORD. So if I was born over there today, I'd be from Villingen-Schwenningen (Baden-Wuerttemberg), but if I was born there before 1972, it would have been Schwenningen (Baden-Wuerttemberg) and if it was before the merger of Baden and Wuerttemberg, it would have been Schwenningen (Wuerttemberg)!!! What's a girl to do about THAT, Ronni?? ;-) Jillaine 15:42, 8 July 2007 (MDT) (please feel free to move this to an appropriate location if your talk page isn't the right spot; it's just that I've started such a nice rapport with you! ;-)

This particular problem will crop up all the time and I've seen two ways users are dealing with this. (1) Put the place name however it is that WeRelate can link with it, then put a pipe character "|" after the text, followed by whatever is appropriate. For example: "Villingen-Schenningen, Wuerttemberg, Germany | Schwenning, Wuerttemberg, Germany." Another example: "West Virginia, United States | Virginia (now West Virginia), United States."

The stuff before the pipe will link the page, but after the pipe is what will be SEEN on the page. And btw, the placename database for European countries needs some work, and many times the name of the country will not want to link. Again, just use the pipe character to display how you want it to appear.

(2) The second way I've seen folks dealing with this is to put comments in the DESC field after they've linked a placename. "Clay, Clay, West Virginia" and then in DESC: "state of Virginia before 1864" --Ronni 21:55, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

And here's another problem that should be brought to Dallan's attention. It looks like WeRelate has pulled a list of towns from the LDS familysearch.org database. Sheesh. That's not current at all. So you've got a mix of some things current and some not. For example, Bingert, Bayern. Nope. That's now Feilbingert, Rheinland-Pfalz. It used to be part of Bayern, but isn't anymore. uh oh. Jillaine 16:41, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Yeah, the European stuff is a mess. I asked about European place names at the Watercooler a month or so ago and its a future project for now I believe. --Ronni 21:55, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

DESC tags in GEDCOM uploads needing changing

Ronni, I see that you're perusing a recently uploaded family tree of mine and changing a certain field to DESC instead. Is there something I should do with my GEDCOM before uploading it to avoid you have to make these changes? Jillaine 12:21, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Hi Jillaine... well, I can't give you a technical answer -- that would be Dallan's area :) -- but in your genealogy program anything in the place name field other than a city, county, state, country type format may cause the place not to be linked to the appropriate location page when it's uploaded. For example, in my own genealogy program, I include the name of the cemetery in my place name field. When my GEDCOM was uploaded, the places weren't linked because WeRelate didn't recognize the cemetery name (a few cemetery pages do now exist -- though there was a lengthy discussion about that not too long ago :)). Street addresses will cause the same problem. When adding info to your pages, do a preview before actually saving the page and you'll see all the non-linked fields show up as RED. Sometimes, it may be a legitimate place that just needs a page created. Other times it's "stuff" that's in the place name field when it probably would work better in the DESC field.

Understood. Dang it. I know I've got lots of "errors" in this regard. This is another thing that should go on a help page called "Before you upload your GEDCOM". Okay, so now I have a lot of bad Place names. (It's because FTM doesn't have a DESC field in its user interface for description of place names.) How can I find all these baddies and edit them myself? These are all on automatically-generated people pages, resulting from the upload. And once I change them, will the system recognize them as valid place names? Anyway, since I caused this mess, I should contribute to cleaning it up. Please advise. Jillaine 14:44, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Hmmm.. how to find 'em. I think you'll have to go through each page one by one. There isn't a "search and replace" function at WeRelate, so off the top of my head all I can think of would be to examine each page you uploaded. You can do that by using the FTE to examine your tree or list them using the link on your User Page. And yep, once you take out whatever it is that's causing the page not to link, it'll link automatically, IF the page it's supposed to link to exists. --Ronni 14:54, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Okay, then, Ronni, how are YOU finding my pages with bad place descriptions? (This is how this whole thread started, y'know-- me seeing you editing my pages.) How do you know which pages need edits? Is the system generating some broken-place-name link list for you? If so, can you send me the piece of the list that is mine and I'll start cleaning up after myself? Jillaine 15:35, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Also, I think it's a good idea to upload a smaller "test" GEDCOM to see how WeRelate handles it. If things look good, it's just a matter of deleting the old tree and uploading a new one if you chose.

Ooops! Too late! heh heh.

LMAO! --Ronni 14:54, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Thanks Jillaine for contributing to WeRelate. You've asked some great questions and offered some interesting ideas and I look forward to your participation here. :) --Ronni 14:34, 8 July 2007 (MDT)

Trout

H0riz0n 03:04, 29 May 2007 (MDT): Thanks for making those edits... back when I did them seemed like people were doing different ways.

Hey, no problem! :) I was just tidying up a bit. :) --Ronni 03:15, 29 May 2007 (MDT)

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.

Video Tour

We strongly recommend that you spend a few minutes taking our video tour. It provides a brief overview of how to use the features of WeRelate. A little time spent here may save you time later. There are also in-depth text tutorials available from the help button.

Create Webpages

The next thing to do is launch Family Tree Explorer, then select File in the Family Tree Explorer menu and give your family tree a name. You can either upload your GEDCOM or create person and family pages one at a time. To upload your GEDCOM, select File in the Family Tree Explorer menu and then click on Import and choose the GEDCOM file to import. The system will create an editable web page for each person and family in your GEDCOM. To create a page manually, select Add in the Family Tree Explorer menu and click on Add new person; enter the given (first name) and surname (last name), select Add, then fill in the blanks and save.

The Family Tree Explorer is a Flash application and will need to use some space in your computer to cache the files. That's computer talk for "If you store some ancestor page information on your computer, you will be able to view more pages faster. Otherwise, the system has to fetch each page every time you edit or look at it. This would make navigating your tree very slow.

Connect with other genealogists

You should always sign in when you are editing or adding pages. Use the signature button (second button from the in the menu bar above the edit box) to sign your comments on discussion pages. That way others with similar interests can find you. If you click on the blue user name on any page, you will go to that person's home page. You can leave a message on his/her Discussion page. The Discussion page button is in the light green second level menu bar above.

Shared research pages

Shared research pages act like specialized message boards. Be careful to use only one name spelling and one location in each field, do not abbreviate. Including postal codes and multiple spellings, names or locations in these fields will cause your pages to be improperly indexed. It will make it harder for your cousins to find your pages and work with you. For more information see Shared research pages.

Great things you can do at WeRelate

Please see the Great things you can do at WeRelate article.

Thanks for participating in your virtual community.--Dquass 18:40, 8 April 2007 (MDT)

Knar_PatrickHenryTucker.ged Imported Successfully

The pages from your GEDCOM, "Knar_PatrickHenryTucker.ged" 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.

-WeRelate agent 15:03, 13 April 2007 (MDT)

Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged is being held for review

The pages from "Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged" have not yet been generated because they appear to match pages from a GEDCOM you have previously imported to WeRelate. Please be patient while we take a look at your GEDCOM. If it turns out that the people in Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged don't really overlap people you have imported previously, your pages will be generated right after the review, which should happen tomorrow (or Monday if tomorrow falls on a weekend).

If you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged, you have two options:

1. Open the tree containing the information from the previous GEDCOM using Family Tree Explorer and delete the tree, then create a new tree and re-import this GEDCOM, or
2. If the two GEDCOMs don't overlap that much, leave a message for Npowell. We'll go ahead with the import, after which you'll want to merge the overlapping people by hand.

-WeRelate agent 04:07, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged is being held for review

The pages from "Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged" have not yet been generated because they appear to match pages from a GEDCOM you have previously imported to WeRelate. Please be patient while we take a look at your GEDCOM. If it turns out that the people in Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged don't really overlap people you have imported previously, your pages will be generated right after the review, which should happen tomorrow (or Monday if tomorrow falls on a weekend).

If you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged, you have two options:

1. Open the tree containing the information from the previous GEDCOM using Family Tree Explorer and delete the tree, then create a new tree and re-import this GEDCOM, or
2. If the two GEDCOMs don't overlap that much, leave a message for Npowell. We'll go ahead with the import, after which you'll want to merge the overlapping people by hand.

-WeRelate agent 04:37, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Knar_WilliamAugustusMayes.ged Imported Successfully

The pages from your GEDCOM, "Knar_WilliamAugustusMayes.ged" 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.

-WeRelate agent 05:08, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged Imported Successfully

The pages from your GEDCOM, "Knar_UlyssesGrantMorton.ged" 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.

-WeRelate agent 15:52, 14 April 2007 (MDT)

Ronni- Thanks a million for helping me, a newbe!

I found your discussion of your own ancestry fascinating and look forward to learning more about your line as soon as I get my bearings here!- --OliviaRevits 16:34, 29 April 2007 (MDT)

Hi Olivia! It was my pleasure.<g> I've got a lot of work to do yet on putting my own info online here. So much of what I do know about my family tree has been done by others and I'm hopeful they'll find me here and add their snippets to my snippets. LOL. If you need any help with anything, just let me know and I'll try to steer you in the right direction! Thanks for dropping me a line! --Ronni 02:56, 30 April 2007 (MDT)

thanks and a suggestion

It's great to have that Lizemore Cemetery listing, especially when I think of all the times lists like that have saved my life (so to speak) researching a particular person! I did add "Morton Cemetery" as an alternate name, because I'm told there's a plan to make places findable under alternate names as well as main names. I was wondering if you would want to include the Allen Morton Cemetery in the "see also" box -- I think that's a legitimate use of the box and it would allow you to make the distinction from the other side as well, if somebody at Allen Morton Cemetery were to get confused.--Hh219 20:27, 2 May 2007 (MDT)

Hey :) ...thanks for the suggestions! Including "see also" is a very good idea, because after reading the death certificates, I'm finding that many times "Morton Cemetery" is referring to Allen Morton Cemetery in Bentree and not the Morton cemetery in Lizemores. I'm actually hoping to get some pictures of the Lizemores cemetery in a couple of weeks when I head up that way. I'll hopefully stop in Bentree as well and find out what county it really is in. LOL

Well, I was just went to add Allen Morton cemetery as "see also", but I'm still confused on what county it's in -- Clay vs Nicholas. I've seen it listed different ways. Conflicting info on the net, though the death certs I'm looking say its in Clay county. --Ronni 00:23, 3 May 2007 (MDT)

You're welcome. Actually from where I sit, it would be fine to enter Allen Morton as one or the other and mention the possibility that it's the other, then change it later when you find out (assuming it doesn't straddle the county lines, LOL).

And because there are always new people, the confusion potential will never end, so why not mention in the "research tips" section the fact that there's conflicting info floating around? If you can settle the conflict on the ground and let us know, all the better; if you can't, all the more the rest of us need to know there's an issue. ...And photos are a super idea. Some wonderful person in Vermont put up pictures for several cemeteries there, including one of my gg grandfather's sister-in-law, who I never hoped to find, a very explicit stone that identified her both by husband and parentage, what a great thing to do. --Hh219 12:25, 3 May 2007 (MDT)

You know, you are absolutely right! Always hesitant in the past to put info on the net because I was afraid of errors being transmitted over and over again, I need to change the way I think since coming to WeRelate. WeRelate is about collaborating and possibly correcting the misinformation and bad data and we can't correct it if it's not offered up for inspection to begin with. I feel like I've had a breakthrough! <g> Thanks again! --Ronni 03:25, 5 May 2007 (MDT)

Tip for place names

Hi Ronni! My name's Christian and I'm a part-time employee of the Foundation for Online Genealogy. Thanks for your many contributions to the WeRelate community. I just noticed a little thing on one of your person pages and I wanted to explain why I changed it. I saw you'd listed a birthplace as Granby,,Connecticut, USA. As there is only one Granby in our place index in Connecticut, I went ahead and changed it to Granby, Hartford, Connecticut, United States, linking it up to the associated place page. If you have any questions about place page titles, check out Help:Place pages--Titles for place pages. Thanks and keep up the good work!

Christian--Wrhelp 05:00, 23 May 2007 (MDT)

Arden Keith Colby's ancestors

Here's the thing. That was a website I put on Rootsweb years ago, and forgot all about!  :( I have tried to get it removed, but been unsuccessful. The worst thing is, the email address is no good any longer! Maybe, if it isn't too much trouble or takes too much room or something, at least having somewhere that it is not valid any longer might help someone not be frustrated by another email that doesn't work! I was not intending to add it to WeRelate, but was just poking at things to see how things worked! Whatever you think is best, go ahead and do - ok by me!

I think WeRelate's crawler added it to the source database (or something like that). It's not taking up any room, so that's not an issue, and I'm sure others researching the same lines as you would appreciate the work you've done. Is there another database or website that you would like to link to instead? It's entirely up to you. We can leave it as is or remove it. The info you added will at least let someone know how to contact you otherwise. It's your call. And it's absolutely no trouble at all to do whichever you decide. :) --Ronni 11:18, 7 June 2007 (MDT)

It would be great if a bit could be added to direct people to www.volkertservices.com where all the information is kept current! Thanks - lots!!

Sure, no problem. I'll be happy to do a little rewrite on the page, but please come by and add, subtract or do whatever else needs to be done to it. Source pages can be freely edited by anyone. If you need any help, just give me a shout. :) --Ronni 14:12, 7 June 2007 (MDT)

Hester Griswold

Yes, go ahead and connect my Hester Griswold with your Griswold family pages. I have info on the Griswolds, too. I'll check to see if I can give you anything useful.

Cheers, gunnj

Thanks! The Griswold's are an allied (and new) family for me so I don't have very much info on them. Anything you can contribute is appreciated. :) --Ronni 00:05, 2 July 2007 (MDT)

Hester Griswold

No problem. Most of my information comes from the Holcombe line. I have a pdf manuscript of the Holcombes I found online.

Lee

Wonder if it's the same one I'm using? LOL. Source:Holcombe, James H. Descendants of the Founders of Ancient Windsor Through Five Generations. If so, it's nicely documented. --Ronni 00:15, 2 July 2007 (MDT)

Yes, it's the same one

What happens when I upload a GEDCOM to update a GEDCOM?

I am not sure how WeRelate works on this. I am used to using WorldConnect at Rootsweb and when I do a lot of corrections to my database, here at home on my own machine... I can then upload a totally new GEDCOM that includes the past info and all the new info. Their website preserves any "post-ems" that have been made by other folks so updates are not lost when I do this. So with WeRelate ... if "John Doe" has made changes to .. one of the family member's pages in my GEDCOM... and then I upload a new "updated" version of my that same database, will the changes "John" made to the webpage be lost? I hope I am explaining this well enough for you to understand the question

Hi there Msscarlet. I don't believe WeRelate can handle updates like you're speaking of. A new GEDCOM will *not* overwrite an old one, but I'm going to refer your question to Dallan so he can give you a more proper answer. --Ronni 19:42, 11 July 2007 (MDT)

Hi, Currently before uploading the new GEDCOM file you have to delete the old one. When you delete it, any pages that others have modified and are watching don't get deleted. Then when you upload the new GEDCOM new pages will be created for those people. Obviously this is not an ideal solution. This Fall I'll be writing a match-merge program so that instead of having to delete the old GEDCOM, when you upload the new one it will update the pages in the old one, and your changes will be combined with changes that others have made to those pages.--Dallan 20:04, 11 July 2007 (MDT)

Hmmmm... Yes I see this is a problem then. Well... as long as I do NOT edit any family pages or upload any photos or documentation and nobody else does any editing to any of my family pages... it will be OK to just delete the initial GEDCOM and upload the updated one. Otherwise, I have to just let the old one sit "as is" until the fall when you get the software updated. I hope it all works out for you. I am sure it is very time consuming writing program's, what little I have done sure did, thus I leave that sort of thing up to good folks like you! <wink> Would you let me know once that program is up and running, so I will know when it is OK to upload new GEDCOM's ?? Meanwhile I will continue to create and upload GEDCOM's for my various family lines. I have over 55,000 folks in my database and I work on it everyday, to add more information on each person and/or more children and spouses to existing families. I am definitely addicted!!--Msscarlet1957 20:15, 11 July 2007 (MDT)

i need all the help i can get

I am a 30 yr old mom of 5 1 girl age 9 and 4 boys ages 6,4,2,and,1,my life is very crazy,I was recently diagnosed with some pretty ugly diseases and my doc said that geneoligy,he felt would be a good stress releiver,i think not i already feel overwhelmed,i am wanting to reasearch my daddys side of my family,all i know is that his grand father and grandmother came here frome holland on a boat many years ago,and his grandfathers name was jacobos jenezon,i had someone e-mail me years ago from holland by the last name of leandert saying they thought they where related,but i dont even know where to start.if you can help it would be great thanks.c.j.

Your Offer to Help [31 July 2007]

I have completed a GEDCOM file for my HARVEY line. I created a name and family page {at least I think I did} for

a Joseph Harvey and wife Mary Unknown and their children and nothing else. Now that I created the GEDCOM I'm wondering if I should enter it on Joseph's page, or create one for the John S Harvey, the person who I used as the basic person with all his ANCESTORS {Joseph and Mary being the earliest ancestors I've so far located}? Any help appreciated. Ivanhoe--Ivanhoe 15:31, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

Hi there. I looked at the Family page for Joseph Harvey and Mary and made a few corrections for you. The Joseph Harvey you are working with on this family is Joseph Harvey (4). The "4" beside his name is his PERSON INDEX NUMBER (which is automatically generated). WeRelate uses that number to differentiate between all the Joseph Harvey's in the database. To create his PERSON page, simply click on his name (the red color means that no PERSON page exists for the him yet) and you'll be prompted to create/edit his individual page. Notice that when you do this, his PERSON INDEX NUMBER doesn't change, keeping him within the current family. Once you start entering vitals, you'll be able to see how all the pertinent data appears on both his FAMILY page and his PERSON page. I think this is the issue you were having. Hope this helps. If it hasn't, keep asking and I'll keep trying to help. :) --Ronni 23:46, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

Search for new contributions on werate search engine [31 July 2007]

How long does it take for new contributions to become search-able on the wereate search engine?

For example, I added my family's gedcom file and when I tried to search for a specific ancestor's name, nothing came up for them on werelate search results. I am assuming this is because there is a waiting period for new persons or places to become search-able but I wanted to make sure.

The name I searched for was "Roy Stuckmeyer" and my search was specific to the werate site. It is an uncommon name and it should be easy to find. I just wanted to see if he could be found after uploading the gedcom this morning. So far, there are no results for him or others from my contributions.

Thank you for this great site! Already I can see many advantages to having a genealogy wiki.

- Pam --Pjdrap 15:45, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

I'm just eavesdropping here; new contributions should be searchable the following day. The website is re-indexed overnight.--Dallan 18:25, 30 July 2007 (MDT)

Thank you so much. I thought it would be something like that but wanted to be sure. - Pam --Pjdrap 05:23, 31 July 2007 (MDT)

Souce Titles [15 August 2007]

Hello, I have a question about source titles. I am trying to created a new source with the following title:

Knapp, John I. and Bonner, Richard Illenden. Illustrated History and Biographical Record of Lenawee County, Mich.

This title is cut off before the end of "Biographical". Any ideas as to how I can get the full source title?

Thanks Jason--Jason 12:16, 7 August 2007 (MDT)

Hi Jason. Long titles are a problem. One suggestion would be to only use the one main author in the title, but then include the other author in a source citation on the main page. You might also try using only Richard Bonner's middle initial instead of full name, but I still think you'll be over the character count in that case. Hope this helps. --Ronni 23:47, 7 August 2007 (MDT)

Long titles (over 150 characters) are indeed a problem, but this one's not that long (only 113 characters), can you be more specific about where it is getting cut off?--Dallan 00:15, 8 August 2007 (MDT)

Dallan, I had the same problem the other day with a title that I thought wasn't that long either and had to leave off quite a bit to make it fit. What I wanted to put was this: Bates, Albert C. Records of Rev. Roger Viets: Rector of St. Andrew's, Simsbury, Conn. What I had to settle on was: Bates, Albert C. Records of Rev. Roger Viets. If I remember correctly, I could only get part of the word "Simsbury" on there before I ran out of room.

This is where my title is getting cut off:

"Knapp, John I. and Bonner, Richard Illenden. Illustrated History and Biographica"--Jason 15:56, 9 August 2007 (EDT)

Ok, now I get it. Dumb bug: I had restricted the number of characters that could be entered into the "Goto/Add Page" title field to 80. I just now increased it to 150. Hopefully that solves the problem. (Sorry for not responding sooner; I've been out of town.)--Dallan 18:05, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

[14 August 2007]

--BlackfordJB 09:36, 14 August 2007 (EDT)

thanks for the help [20 August 2007]

Hi, Ronnie. Thanks for correcting this things. I certainly couldn't figure out how to make that photo display. And the whole "cemetery thing" was another stumper. Thanks for your help and for volunteering your time here. Happy hunting!--genienut 07:44, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

Macintosh troubles [24 August 2007]

I have logged in and uploaded a gedcom.

However, when I tried to move around the tree I'd uploaded, I couldn't do anything but turn the tree to the left or the right. The nice little tabs that appeared on the tutorial and tour did not appear.

I tried Safari and FireFox. Firefox was a little better, but all I could do was turn the tree.

Suggestions?

Flutter8y--Flutter8y 19:02, 23 August 2007 (EDT)

Hi Flutter8y. I'm afraid we might have to wait for Dallan to respond to this one. In the mean time, you can try posting your troubles at the Watercooler to see if anyone has suggestions. I know there are several members using a Mac so perhaps they have had a similar problem in the past. Dallan will respond to you as soon as he can though and hopefully we can get you up and running before too long. --Ronni 20:33, 23 August 2007 (EDT)

Thank you!

This looks like a really cool idea -- I'm anxious to give it a whirl.--Flutter8y 20:48, 23 August 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for the message [27 August 2007]

I appreciate your offer and I will sure call on you if and when I learn enough to begin to put my information on line.

MuleTownGardner--MuleTownGardner 14:43, 27 August 2007 (EDT)

Thank you for the welcome! [14 September 2007]

Thank you for the welcome to this site. I look forward to being able to really utilize the features -- at the moment I am intimidated by the complexity -- but at the same time I realize that there is real potential for success once I learn more about using everything. There has been quite a lot of new sites appearing but when I saw the interview on Roots TV with Eastman/Dallan I was really anxious to get involved. Thanks again, I'm sure I'll be seeking your assistance.--Rootsmeister 14:10, 7 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi Roostmeister! Sorry for not acknowledging your message until now. Hope you are enjoying the site. If you have any questions, just let me know. :) --Ronni 04:06, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Uploading a GEDCOM [11 September 2007]

Evidentlly, my gedcom files is too large at 10MB. If I am to add my gedcom, I shall need some help. The instructions indicate that a request to darren at werelate.org will resolve this issue, yet any email to that address is rejected.

Can you organize this for me and advise?

On another topic, this WeRelate.org must be relatively new, eh? Info is scant, and Wiki is still mostly stubs.--JFBailey 13:08, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

I see that you got a hold of Dallan and he is addressing the GEDCOM limit? As to your other comment, WeRelate is about 1.5 years old I think, maybe a little older. It might still be considered to be in its "beta" stage even. I've only been a member myself since April of this year though. Once the community grows in size and users get their trees uploaded and taken care of, we'll start to see the stubs disappear. It'll take time, but I'm excited about the project. --Ronni 09:40, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

Wiki: url in text? [11 September 2007]

How do I add a url in the text of a message or Wiki edit (since it contains slashes)???--JFBailey 13:45, 10 September 2007 (EDT)

For external links just type the URL or surround the URL with single brackets:

No brackets:
http://www.rootsweb.com - will look like this http://www.rootsweb.com

With brackets:
[http://www.rootsweb.com] - will look like this [1]
[http://www.rootsweb.com Visit Rootsweb] - will look like this Visit Rootsweb

Hope this helps.--Ronni 09:58, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

Response to Welcome [13 September 2007]

Thank you, so much, for the welcome. I am really excited to become aware of the We Relate Wiki project. I have used wiki in my teaching, a bit, for student projects. I think this is the project I've been "waiting" for regarding my extensive Genealogy work. I'm on WorldConnect and Rootsweb page, but this appears to be the best forum... for collaboration and permanent publishing. I've begun with a small piece, to see how it works.

Thanks, again, for your interest. P.S. I heard about We Relate from the mention in the weekly Roots Web newsletter via email.

Bill  ;-)--Dr. Bill 16:15, 13 September 2007 (EDT)

Response to Welcome - 2 [16 September 2007]

I uploaded a small GEDCOM about 10 p.m. last evening... it is now 3:15 p.m. the following afternoon, and it is still in the queue... My have gotten a huge influx.... need more server capacity, huh?

Just to let you know.

Bill  ;-)--Dr. Bill 16:21, 13 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi there Dr. Bill :). Yep, WeRelate got hit by a big influx of users, which is very exciting for our growing community. As a result though, uploaded GEDCOMs are backing up in queue. Dallan and gang are aware of the problem and are adding additional servers to help out. Hopefully, the GEDCOM wait won't be too long for you now. Thanks for stopping by. :) --Ronni 04:01, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Ronni,

My family files that I am anxious to work with on wikis at WeRelate are in three files on my computer, a small one and two larger ones (a primary and a secondary, I'll call them): small, primary and secondary. I first loaded the small one, to do some work, see how it goes. That has worked fine, once we got over the loading problems (the overload!) I have created a number of person pages and family pages related to this small GEDCOM. Now, I am in the process of uploading the primary file (awaiting) to a new family tree name, that I would like to become the consolidated file of all three.

Now, to my question: 1) I assume I will want to remove the small one, and resubmit that small GEDCON file, with duplicates (very few) removed into the consolidated family tree... correct? If I remove that tree, will the wiki pages (person pages and family pages) I created based on those persons remain, or will they "go away" with out that specific family tree being on line??

Thanks!--Dr. Bill 20:24, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi again Bill. Deleting the small GEDCOM file from WR will result in the person and family pages you worked also being deleted, unless someone else is "watching" them as well, in which case, they would not be deleted from WR. --Ronni 23:46, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

Thanks! I'd sort of figured that out, during the evening, browsing the Watercooler and other discussions. Thanks for confirming. Now I know what I must do.

A neat system... I'll enjoy watching it grow. Enjoyed the Dick Eastman Roots Television interview with Dallan this evening, as well!! --Dr. Bill 23:50, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

Information downloaded--this makes no sense!! [14 September 2007]

This whole thing is about as clear as mud- and I am an experienced computer user. Please delete anything I've uploaded. I don't want people messing around with my data. I will attempt to understand this but I'm not going to take as much time as this seems to demand. Again please delete anything I've uploaded before someone fools with it. I'd do it myself but I don't seem to see a way. Thanks George Chapman--Geochapman 17:26, 13 September 2007 (EDT)

Sorry you were experiencing problems George. I see you figured out how to delete your tree though. Anything else I can help you with? --Ronni 04:35, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Thanks [14 September 2007]

Hi Ronni, Thanks for your welcome and kind offer of help. Still trying to learn my way around, and if I get lost I will certainly seek your assistance. Kind regards, Sharon.--Shaz1 18:02, 13 September 2007 (EDT)

Thank you Shaz! Need any help, just holler. :) --Ronni 04:03, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Name Field: Unknown as a surname [14 September 2007]

Hi Ronni -

I just found WeRelate through my Rootsweb Newsletter & so far it's going well. My question is for the name fields, is there a particular reason why WeRelate uses "Unknown" as a surname? I prefer using [--?--] for either a given name or surname that I haven't discovered yet. There's no confusion as to what this person's name is or is not when someone else is looking. I have actually seen entire trees where the documented surname is Unk or Unknown because the newbie researchers were not aware that it was a [blank] space. I know that this particular issue is a hot one for many researchers, for example my mom leaves the name field empty altogether if she doesn't know it, I prefer to have the fields filled with either the true name or the symbol [--?--]. It makes replacing them quicker as it's easier to scan down a list of names when you're looking for the symbols rather than placing out more words.

Hi Stephanie. Thanks for your email. I don't know why UNKNOWN was chosen as a surname place holder. I wasn't around in the beginning, so can't tell you if there was a discussion on it or not. Bet there was though. :) As to your preference of using [--?--], well, it's not the standard used here, but is it going to upset the natural order of things? I don't know. :) (You're finding out just how helpful I am aren't you? LOL). I always encourage people to bring these kinds of things up in the Watercooler. It leads to some great discussions and, in some cases, leads to some major improvements. So give the Watercooler a whirl and let's see what others have to say about it. --Ronni 14:51, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

[--?--], Pamela Unknown, Pamela [--?--], Sarah Unknown, Sarah [--?--], Susan Unknown, Susan [--?--], Sybilla Unknown, Sybilla [--?--], Thomas Unknown, Thomas

or

Woods, William Woods, William Woods, Wilson Woods, Wilson Wright, [--?--] Wright, Unknown Wright, [--?--] Wright, Unknown Wright, Ann Wright, Ann Wright, Amelia Wright, Amelia

Thank you for your time,

Happy Hunting!

Stephanie Wright

- Bucks Co., PA--HawkEcho 10:47, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Wow, I just looked at the post & it looks much different that I wrote it - if you check it out under "edit" it looks better! LOL

Don't you hate when that happens? hehe.. It did look might pretty in edit mode though. :) --Ronni 14:51, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Pending Possible Overlap [18 September 2007]

Hello,

I have a few trees being held because of possible overlap. My complete tree has over 10,000 people in it and is too large to upload, so I have broken it down and am only uploading my main family lines, which do overlap at the point that a person marries into one of my other lines. Do you have any suggestions?--CynthiaR 19:29, 14 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi Cynthia. If you know exactly where it's overlapping and it isn't too many people, you could upload one GEDCOM, delete the overlapping pages from WeRelate and then upload the other GEDCOMs, repeating that process. You will still have to do some "mending" or reconnecting of the trees however because one tree isn't going to know exactly where to connect to the other tree.

If you aren't sure exactly where the overlapping is taking place, you can leave a message for Npowell and let him know what has happened and he'll probably allow the GEDCOM to go through. Realize though that in that case, you'll have duplicate pages in your tree and after the upload, they'll have to be merged or deleted when you come across them. Hope this helps. --Ronni 02:10, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

Just wanted to let you know that we processed the rest of CynthiaR's GEDCOM's.--Dallan 14:27, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

RE: Welcome [15 September 2007]

Thanks for the welcome, Ronni!--PFletch 07:21, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

Heya [18 September 2007]

hey ronni

cheers for the welcome, well I am about a tenth of the way through my tree.
But, I came across a problem, it seems that the family names can't have apostrophes in them. for example "Edward Smith and Mary O&apos;Neil". I've seen that happen before on myspace, but it doesnt happen anymore. anyway thought i would just give you the heads up.

Awesome site btw, got a few books to add yet though. Still not too many people in aus but I am doing my best too spread the word. Ciao.--Igibi 07:47, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi Igibi. Glad you are enjoying the site and thanks for the info on the apostrophes. I just checked it out and I see what you mean. They don't show up correctly in the sidebars on the family and person pages. Dallan may know about this already, but I'll pass the info along. Good luck on your tree! :) --Ronni 09:03, 16 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi, Could you give an example page where it shows up this way? I'm looking at Family:Edward Smith and Mary O'Neil (1) and it looks ok, but it could be messed up in other places. (It's most likely a simple fix once I know where it's happening.) Thanks!--Dallan 14:19, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

Ok, I see the problem in Person:Cornelius Smith (3), where his parents' family has an &apos; (but his spouse family does not). This is odd, because when I edit the page I see the &apos; in the parent family title you entered, but when I add another parent family with an apostrophe in it, it comes out correctly. Can you tell me how you entered the parent family name? Did you cut-and-paste it from someplace else, or did you use the little pop-up box where you enter the husband's and wife's names separately? Also, what browser and OS are you using? By the way, I'll make a change to the software so that if it sees this &apos; pattern in names in the future, it will turn them into apostrophes, but any existing &apos's will have to be changed by hand. I can tell you how to do that if you want.--Dallan 14:42, 18 September 2007 (EDT)

Thanks [18 September 2007]

Hey Ronni, I just wanted to tell you how much we appreciate all your help. You are a incredible!!--sq 00:00, 19 September 2007 (EDT)

NEW TO WE RELATE [19 September 2007]

Hello Knarrows

Thanks for your email and thanks for your offer of help if I reuire it.

Regards

Pat--Patriciaberry38 16:54, 19 September 2007 (EDT)

Louvicy Rowe Stacy [30 September 2007]

I received an email which stated that you made a minor edit to my page for Louvicy Rowe Stacy. Your edit was that you changed the spelling of a place name - Stacy [VA] to Stacey. I am fairly certain that my spelling is correct. It's no big deal, I just wondered why you had a different spelling!

Is this person [Louvicy Rowe Stacy] in one of your trees? I checked them, but couldn't find her. Let me know!

Linda Jones/--Cymrusa 23:15, 29 September 2007 (EDT)

Louvicy Rowe Stacy [30 September 2007]

Regarding my previous message, I guess the spelling change for the place name STACY was an inadvertent error. I had two minor-edit other emails for the parents and spouse of Louvicy Rowe Stacy. All three edits appear to have been changes to my use of postal abbreviations for state names - VA changed to Virginia -as well as the addition of the country name - United States. I assume these changes are being done to standardize geographic names. You can disregard my previous message!

Linda Jones/--Cymrusa 23:27, 29 September 2007 (EDT)

Hi Linda. The change I made to the place name was to show how you can use the pipe ("|") that allows for the place to be linked to city or county page. In this case, because the city could have been one of two places, I connected to the county page and then after the pipe, wrote near Grandy or Stacey, etc etc. I did misspell Stacy and I apologize for that. Again though, my purpose in making the change was to demonstrate how the pipe symbol can be used in such instances. My typo that came with it was a freebie. :)

Yes, we do like to standardize place names, but I believe Dallan is working on something that will help with that process in the future, so it's nothing we obsess over too much. :) --Ronni 03:29, 30 September 2007 (EDT)

MyRelate/Network - How Does It Work? [30 September 2007]

I can't find any info on how this feature works!

When I go to MyRelate page, it says I have 18 people in my Network. When I click on the "view network" link, I get a table showing my Network: "User" and "Watched Pages in Common."

However, none of the links [the user names, "talk," "contrib," and the number of common pages] in this table take me to the common pages! How do I find these common pages?

Please tell me where to find the instructions for this feature!

Linda Jones/--Cymrusa 23:50, 29 September 2007 (EDT)

Linda, when you click on the number under "Watched Pages in Common" it should bring up a list of pages that you and the other user are watching. It may turn out that the people in your network are watching pages other than pages in your tree. For example, I have quite a few people in my network that the only thing we have in common is that we are watching the Watercooler and Dallan's user page. Other than that, they don't connect with me in any other way. --Ronni 03:54, 30 September 2007 (EDT)

Re: MyRelate/Network - How Does It Work? [1 October 2007]

Thanks, Ronni!

I kinda figured that out later - that when I clicked on the number, the page that I was taken to WAS the page in common! I just assumed the common page would be someone in my database. I'll try not to panic the next time!

Linda Jones/--Cymrusa 21:17, 30 September 2007 (EDT)

the leter that I was sent [17 October 2007]

Hello my name is Lori and you have gone into my family tree and changed some information on me. My Parents are Both from Michigan and My Dad is Robert Gordon Williams SR and My mother is LouAnn McPherson - Williams. Please do not change this again.--Lori 1959 11:54, 17 October 2007 (EDT)

Hi Lori. I'm a volunteer administrator for the site. Part of the work I do here is monitor changes to PERSON and FAMILY pages, and often times, I will make corrections to pages where I can. For example, if a given name and surname have been reversed or a place name has been misspelled, I will make corrections to the page. In your case however, I'm sorry, but I do not recall making any specific changes to the names you mentioned above. If you could provide me with links, I could perhaps explain the changes I made and why. I do recall, however, writing a message on the TALK page of family group that showed a marriage date, but no spouses were listed. I merely noted the oversight of the missing spouses. --Ronni 12:13, 17 October 2007 (EDT)

Help [18 October 2007]

I just finished putting in some names for my genealogy, but when I click on Search, it does not bring them up. I started out with Charles Downey (2). What am I doing wrong?

--Suzid 16:25, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

Any pages you create won't show up immediately when doing a search. Actually, I believe the search engine updates around midnight (give or take), so you should be able to search your names after the update. In the meantime, you can see all your work by clicking on MY RELATE on the blue tab near the top of every page, and then once there, down at the bottom, click on "contributions." I just looked at your pages real quick and they look very nice. So you're doing everything just right. :) If you need any more help, just holler. --Ronni 16:33, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

Oops, "Contributions" isn't near the bottom of that page. It's smack dab in the middle. :) --Ronni 16:36, 18 October 2007 (EDT)

Welcome [29 October 2007]

Thank you for your message.

Arnold Bailson--Abailson 09:25, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

Editing places [8 November 2007]

Hi, I posted this on the place talk for Merthyr Tydfil, Wales, but realized it probably has a broader application than that... could you help me?

How do we edit the "place information" column on the left? As I understand it, Dowlais and Georgetown are both parts of Merthyr, not an aka for it. I don't see an edit link over there, though. Also, I can't get more of the wikipedia entry to show on this page, even though there is substantially more information on there now. We could just paste the text in, but then we wouldn't get updates. Anyone have any thoughts?--Joevans3 18:32, 7 November 2007 (EST)

Hi. Just click edit at the top right hand side of the page and that will let you edit the column you are wanting. There will be a area for "alternate names" where you can take out the names that are in error. To make Georgetown and Dowlais be "located in" Merthy Tydfil, go to their respective pages, click on edit and change their "located in" field. If those towns or places don't exist, then feel free to create a new place page for them.

As to adding wikipedia content, let me direct you to this page that may help: WeRelate:Links_to_Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it's a bit of a process, though not complicated. If you have any trouble or need more help with any of this, please let me know. I'm happy to help. :) --Ronni 02:44, 8 November 2007 (EST)

help, please ... [12 November 2007]

I just found this great site today and my first search was for McWILLIAM - MILROY in Scotland/New York and I had a find. I spent quite a long time composing a message but I can't find the message - where is it? I expected there to be a link to it on the page for Wilemina McWilliam but there isn't. I'm missing something here - will you help me out please? I guess I'm used to the lists at Rootsweb where responses and queries are obvious. Thanks for volunteering!--MizThistle 17:18, 11 November 2007 (EST)

Hello. I found where you left the message you are referring to. I believe it's here: Family talk:Peter Milroy and Elizabeth McWilliam (1). All pages on WeRelate consist of two parts: a main page and a talk page. If you are on the Family page, click on Talk and you'll see any conversations associated with that page. If you are on the Talk page, click on Family to see the main page. Another way to quickly see a page you've edited, but forgot where it was or how to get back to it, is click on MY RELATE at the top of every page and then in the CONTRIBUTIONS box, click on "See Contributions" to see what pages you've edited. Hope this helps. --Ronni 23:40, 11 November 2007 (EST)

Hi, I am an admin for WeRelate and I saw your message on Knarrows page. You might want to look at Connecting with others and also watch the WeRelate_tour video and the Wiki_basics_tutorial_video. If you still need help please don't hesitate to leave me a message. Thanks for participating.--sq 21:33, 12 November 2007 (EST)

Living Dead [17 November 2007]

I recently uploaded a GEDCOM, whitlock33, and when I list it 30 of the people are shown as living but they are not. I checked my GEDCOM and they are not listed as living there. Is it simply that birth and or death dates are unknown? Clearly from the age of their siblings, parents or spouses, they can not possibly be still alive. I tried renaming them, but they remain listed as living. Also I notice that the chidren of a family become reordered, Why?--Scot 19:20, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Hi Scot. Yeah, WeRelate needs the birth or death date of an individual to determine if they are living or not. It does not get that info from the parents as far as I know. In some genealogy software programs a death "flag" can be set, in which case, WeRelate will pick up on that as well and will not set the individual to LIVING if that's the case. I just checked some of the LIVINGs you were talking about and they seem to be renamed already, though there are a couple mistakes where they were renamed to the wrong person. I'll fix that for you. As to the order of the children, if they don't have any birth dates, I'm not sure what order WeRelate put's them in. I don't know if it's alphabetical or not. In any case, once the birth dates get added, WeRelate will put them in birth order. Hope I've helped a lit. --Ronni 03:24, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Thanks Ronnie, but I still don't completely understand. How did you determine which Doak was which child? All I could see was gender. When I now look at the family page I see Nancy but Isabelle and Lucinda are still shown as just Doak, but if I mouse over them the names pop up. What was different when Nancy was moved? I am also having a similar problem with merging. I uploaded two GEDCOMs and tried to link the three trees. I deleted the extra individuals and families and tried to connect at that point, but some how I kept linking to the individuals that had been deleted. Along the way I realized my grandmother's name was misspelled so I corrected it. The change was made to the page name, but to the individual's name. By that time I was totally confused.--Scot 17:39, 16 November 2007 (EST)

I think I've got it figured out, I renamed the page but did not edit the name. Merging is a nightmare so the match merge utility will be welcome.--Scot 18:07, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Sounds like you got it Scot. Editing and renaming the page -- two separate steps. :) And I second the merging nightmare! LOL The merge program will hopefully make things a lot easier for us. --Ronni 04:46, 17 November 2007 (EST)

What I havn't figured out is how were able separate the three living Doaks especially since WeRelate scrambled the birth order, I tried to sort a John Barlow and Ann family yesterday and I'm sure it is mixed up. ----

These are LIVING Doaks who really aren't living, correct? In the scheme of things, what real name you use to replace the LIVING won't matter because there's no data in it. And even if there was data in it, it's not "hard coded", i.e., you can flip names/data around all you want. Just look at your family, see what child (or children) are missing and pick one of the LIVINGs to change. From here on out, that LIVING will now be the new person whose name you entered. (I hope I'm understanding your question correctly, so if my response makes no sense, that's my excuse. <g>)

Yep, your Family:John Barlow and Ann Unknown (1) is just a little messed up. No biggie. Looks like you have two Deborahs where one of them might be an Elizabeth. I left a message on the talk pages for these I believe. Again, just pick one you want to be Elizabeth and change the data to match her, remembering to change the title of the page as well.

And finally, if you want WeRelate to show the birth order, but you don't have any birth info entered on the people, try using "abt 1870" or "bef 1870" or whatever the case may be to get them in the order you wish. Until you have birth data entered on them though, WeRelate won't know how to arrange them according to their birth. (Just what order it puts them in though, I can't tell. Dallan would have to shed some light on that for us.) --Ronni 10:39, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Or perhaps rather than guess, puy in the death field bef 2007 and it become obvious what it means. In many cases the only source is the father's will where he lists his children, probably in order, or first the boys in order and then the girls hopefully with their married names. I know that PAF links families from the youngest child up so it would be nice if WeRelate showed them in the order they appear in PAF.

OK, I think I've got those Barlow's straightened out. I went back to my Tree list to work on the next batch and all those Barlows are still shown as "Living Barlow and their husbands are "living living" even tho I've changed them. Is the list still coming from my uploads and doesn't pick up edits? Every time I think I'm catching on I run into something else. Bill Minnick just told me you can enter deceased in the death field in PAF and that will prevent the living tag. Still going back into paf to add anything to hundreds of entries would be extremely time consuming. The uploading the GEDCOM would create them all over again. I'm trying to figure out if you can load a GEDCOM into word and do a find and replace to do it.

town / county naming conventions [17 November 2007]

Ronni, I understand why Springfield, Mass. is in red and I understand that there is a file for Springfield but here is my problem: Today Springfield is part of Hampden county, the time the events I added it was part of Hampshire County, Hampden was not formed until 1812. I have the same problem with Suffield, were I live, it was formed as part of Hampshire Co., Mass it is now part of Hartford Co., Conn. Suffield moved to Conn., in 1749.

So what would you recommend for the best way to document this? I have seen it done both ways, and at least for Suffield it confuses many people. I get question all the time about how come my ancestor was born in Suffield, Mass. and died in Suffield, CT, they think it two different towns.

Art Sikes

PS: I have been researching my ancestors the Sikes’ & Austin’s and early Suffield Families for over 35 years and publish or help publish 5 book on what I have found so far.--ArtSikes 08:55, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Hi Art. Yeah, the naming convention you mentioned is something that crops up from time to time and I'm not sure the WeRelate community has come to a general consensus on the best way to deal with it. What I suggest is to use a pipe ("|") to show what it was then vs. what it is now. For instance, in your case, type Springfield, Hampden, Massachusetts and let it link to the page and then at the end of the text use the pipe to name it whatever you would like: Springfield, Hampden, Massachusetts, United States | Springfield, Hampshire, Massachusetts. This will create a link to the place page, but you will have given it the proper name at the time of the event by using the pipe. Then, hopefully, the place page for Springfield (or perhaps the county page) will show that Hampden was formed from Hampshire. If the place page for Springfield doesn't give this type of historical information, feel free to add to it. --Ronni 09:08, 17 November 2007 (EST)

Hi Art, I have a similar case in Virginia, My Ancestor was born in Brunswick County, married in Lunenburg County and died in Halifax County, yet he never moved.

Muti copies of people and/or families? [24 November 2007]

Ronni, I have another problem/question and that is what is going to prevent multi copies of people and/or families on WeRelate? I already see that there are multi copies of my early Sikes ancestor, is there a way to combine these with permission from both the people that put them up. You can go to some of the other web sites that have collected file from people and there are 50-100 copies of Richard Sikes my Sikes earliest ancestor. For that reason I refuse to put up a database with over 5,000 Sikes/Sykes names, they would just get lost with the other bad or poor data that is already there. The Austin’s have multi databases with over 40,000 Austin names and they are asking the same questions.

Art Sikes Genealogist, Sikes/Sykes Families Association President, Austin Families Association of America--ArtSikes 09:13, 17 November 2007 (EST)

As it is now, nothing prevents multiple copies of families being uploaded to WR. Dallan is working on a merge utility that will cut down on some of the multiple families appearing, but there is no hard and fast rule that says I have to merge "my tree" with "your tree" should we have the same ancestors. That defeats the purpose of what we are doing here, I realize. Do you have to ask permission to merge with someone else? Hmmm.. I have my own opinion on that and ... you know what... I'm going to take this conversation to the Watercooler because I would like to hear other's views and opinions on this, if that's ok?

As to merging with a tree now, unless it's a very simple little merge, I would wait until Dallan has the merge function/program installed. Merging can be quite a daunting experience if you've never done it before. --Ronni 09:22, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I'm not sure what you mean by the purpose of what we are doing here, I thought the pupose was to replace the 100 conflicting copies of the Richard Sikes family with one copy based upon the best available documentation. Then when you search on a name of your ancestor you don't have to review and compare to find the best data. Isn't that what collaboration is supposed to eliminate? ----

That's exactly the purpose of WeRelate. You understand it as I do, but not everyone that uploads to WR understands it that way, Scot. I know this from personal experience. My comment -- "that defeats the purpose of what we are doing here" -- was referring to those people that are resistant to letting others "tamper" with "their tree," even though corrections are being made. Again, I know this from personal experience. It will take time for people to fully understand what WeRelate and, in general, what genealogy wikis are all about. But, if you see multiple copies of the same data on WR and want to merge all that data into one family, then please feel free to do that. My caution to you was simply to wait until the merge utility that Dallan is writing is finished which will make the process much easier. I would venture to say that many people are NOT merging their data right now because they are waiting on this new merge function, not because they are resistant to merging their trees with others. I'm sorry if I gave that impression. --Ronni 14:24, 17 November 2007 (EST)

I'm glad to hear you agree with me. The "Tampering question" and copy right issues are why we are having a struggle convincing members of our AFAOA board. I hope when the match-merge utility can deal with gedcom uploads entirely. Years ago I completely corrupted my data base by doing multiple exports and imports of GEDCOMS. I was managing a descendancy for AFAOA of my Immigrant Austin ancestor as well as my own Ancestry. I wanted to keep them separate, but did not want to have to edit every thing twice. I had 3 files the ancestry, the descendancy and a master contaning both. before I realized what I was doing all 3 copies contained multiple copies of every individual and every family, a match merge nightmare. I had to dump it and start over, but lost a lot of editing in the process. Will the PERSON and FAMILY ID NOS. prevent this?

Oh man, corrupting a database is genealogy nightmare, huh? The PERSON and FAMILY index numbers are used primarily on WeRelate to keep persons with the same names separate. How that's going to work in a GEDCOM download, I don't know. Hadn't really thought about that until you asked, but as long as the unique identifiers associated with each person and family are kept intact, I can't imagine it being a problem. Now, there might be a situation where you download a tree that has a John Smith (1) and a John Smith (2) in it that turn out to be the same person, but you won't end up downloading two John Smith (1)'s since WR keeps that from happening on site. --Ronni 04:55, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Ronnie, Feel free to take this issue to the Watercooler. I would like to hear what some others have to say. Art--ArtSikes 14:45, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Ronni,I have figured out a procedure to follow before uploading Ancestral tree GEDCOMS to WeRelate that will not only minimize editing of overlapping individuals, but also eliminate the Living Dead problem. I keep all my files for my related lines in a single PAF file called master. (I use PAF because I assume it should be the most compatible program with the unmodified GEDCOM standard) So far I have only uploaded Ancestries, but soon I hope to be uploading descendancies. I’ll work on a procedure for them to minimize required editing as well.

To prepare a GEDCOM for an ancestry tree upload from PAF. Find the earliest generation with living individuals, then determine the latest generation without living individuals. More than likely the first will contain the children of the second. If this is the case select the closest parent of a member of the older generation to your family of primary interest.Using that person as the root then using advanced search, do a partial export to GEDCOM of all of his or her ancestors, ancestors’ siblings, siblings’ spouses, spouses’ parents, siblings’ children, or whomever you wish to include. Include all information on living people. Select 2 generations of descendants and as many of anccestors as you wish.

Next create a new PAF file and import the GEDCOM into it. Then edit the file by deleting all individuals not known to you to be deceased. This assures that names of early individuals too old to be still living will not be lost.Finally, delete all persons previously uploaded that link trees together. Export the entire remaining file back to the GEDCOM, overwriting the previous GEDCOM that you created and upload it.All that you have to do now is restore the links for the individuals in previous uploads to their respective families contained in the latest uploads. Finally delete the GEDCOM and PAF file from your PC. Some discretion must be used inselecting the root individual to assure you include whom you want and to exclude the most overlap. What do you think? Do you see any problems?--Scot 14:05, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Sounds like you've got it Scot. When I uploaded my GEDCOMs (which didn't involve the problem of overlapping like in your case), I cut off the data at my 2G-grandparents, so LIVING individuals weren't going to be a problem. Beforehand though I set everyone in my database that didn't have a death date to NON-LIVING if they were over 110 years of age. As a result, I don't believe I had any LIVING DEADS. I have not attempted to do another GEDCOM that has the potential to overlap my previous ones, because of the "thinking" it would involve on my part (lol). Your procedure though sounds like you have it figured out Scot, so good luck and hope you've solved your LIVING DEAD problem. BTW, every time we talk about this, I think about the movie. <g> --Ronni 04:10, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Ronnie, I have a problem I can't understand. I created a GEDCOM of 22 persons with the procedure previously described, deleting my grandmother previously uploaded. I uploaded it, but before linking her back in I realized her first name was misspelled. I redirected her page to (Mabel Gray (6))edited it and added it to the family. When I display my tree she appears with the note "Not in tree". Am I missing something here?--Scot 14:43, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Hi Scot. You're using the Family Tree Explorer (FTE), correct? All you have to do when you see a "Not in Tree" message is click the Green Plus at the top on the left hand side of the FTE and add it to your tree. The little box for Mabel is also "grey" as well, indicating that page hasn't been added to the tree. You can also add this page without using the FTE if you want, by clicking on the TREE+ link at the top right hand side of Mabel's page. I'm guessing the redirect "untreed" her. <g> Hope this helps. --Ronni 16:34, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Thanks [18 November 2007]

Just wanted to say thanks for the welcome. I have been working on our genealogy for 7 years, and there is still so very far to go. My husband thought maybe his family had dropped to earth about 150 years ago, but I have proved him wrong so far. His family doesn't seem to enjoy being found though, so there are alot of brick walls. Always something to keep me busy looking and not becoming bored. Thanks again and hope to visit you again. Diane--Dcg1950 18:46, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Redirect in lieu of merge [25 November 2007]

Thankyou for correcting my bungled attempts at redirect by removing the syntax such as <gender>F</gender> and replaced it with poundsign redirect Person:Mary Best (14). Is that something I can do (as is done in Wikipedia)? If yes, how should I do it? If no, should I send you a request each time I want it done. Or should I continue to do it as I was doing it and you will correct it?

Hi there. Yes, you can do the redirects yourself if you like. To do a redirect, all the content has to be taken out of the TEXT (or biographical) field and replaced with #redirect [[Person:Name Name (#]] on the top line of the TEXT box. Once saved, all the other info on the person being redirected is taken out (which is why you should copy all the info over that you want to save to the other Person page). Here's a link that discusses merging just a little and then gives instructions on the redirect: Help:Merging_pages

One way of avoiding redirects is to take the record that has the most content such as Nancy Perkins (1) and her children, rename it as Nancy Perkins (2) which did not yet exist, and change the other pointers to point to Nancy Perkins (2) instead of Nancy Perkins (1) or (3). But this did not work for John Binkey (7) which should be (5) and his wife Catherine Best (4) which should be (5). What should I do in a situation like this? Greensburger 23:39, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Renaming is kinda like doing a "redirect" in disguise and, as you found out, renaming only works when the page doesn't already exist. I guess that's what happened for John Binkey. Perhaps the page you were trying to rename it to already existed? If you are doing the merges that way, and it makes things less complicated and all the links are hooking back up, then go for it. When I first came across your pages, with the links to the "new" person put into the NAME field of the "old" person, I thought you were putting in "place holders" and was going to go back and redirect them all, which I thought was a pretty good idea, so I was just giving you a helping hand. :) It did make it easy to see where you were going with it and if mistakes were made, it was easy to undo. Anything you can do to make the manual merges less complicated and keep you on track is a good thing. :) --Ronni 04:38, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Sorry to come in on this conversation a little late. I'm not sure if this issue has been resolved already or not. When you rename a person/family page, links to that page from related person/family pages are supposed to automatically update to point to the new title. When you edit the page and put in a poundsign redirect to manually merge the page, links to that page in related person/family pages are removed. They should probably be updated to point to the redirect target, but at this point they're not. So if you wanted to merge person A into person B, you should be able to edit page A and add a poundsign redirect to page B, then edit the families that A was a member of and point them to page B. Not a lot of people are doing this however, so it's quite possible that there's a bug. Please let me know if it's not working as expected.--Dallan 02:31, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Feedback on final place review [21 November 2007]

Hi Ronni, I wanted to make sure that you saw the proposal I left for a final place review on WeRelate talk:Place review. I'd love to get your comments on it. Thanks!--Dallan 11:36, 21 November 2007 (EST)

garbled "OKeefe" page [25 November 2007]

Thanks for the fix, I was thinking I should contact someone because I had some bizarre behavior with this name. The presence of a __'__ character in a name, from which a family was being rolled up, seemed to cause problems (what a surprise). I didn't track the behavior well enough to be able to submit anything like a competent bug report, but maybe you guys have encountered this...--Jrm03063 11:41, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Hello. We have encountered it before, back in September. I had to go back and look at the message logs to see what the cause and/or fix was, but I don't think it occurred enough for Dallan to zero in on why it happened. This is only the second time I've seen it. --Ronni 04:55, 22 November 2007 (EST)

We have. Can you give me a particular page that it caused problems on? I'd love to see it.--Dallan 02:31, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Reply to your welcome message [22 November 2007]

Thanks! I appreciate hearing from you.

You have built some great pages!

Janice--Mssuzzpie 12:14, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Two bugs [4 December 2007]

I created two duplicate families to uncover the causes of broken links I encountered last week. These are real people in my ancestry, so don't delete them. The husband Robert Best (4) had a full name "Robert Cruson Best". His wife was "Anna Barbara Bierer". The first family of Robert Best (4) and Anna Bierer (1) originally had a Family record titled "Robert Best and Anna Bierer (1)". I also created a duplicate family for Robert Best (5) and Anna Bierer (2) with duplicate Person records. The Cruson and Barbara middle names did appear correctly along with the correct birth and death data.

But when I edited the first Family record to change the Husband's name from "Robert Best (4)" to "Robert Cruson Best (4)", the link was broken and "Robert Cruson Best (4)" appeared in red with no birth and death data on the family page.

I know this is an invalid edit and that the middle name should not be in the Husband name box. But since it is the correct full name, the system should automatically normalize it to the record title "Robert Best (4)" along with a tutorial message to new users that middle names must be omitted in family records and one of the names must agree with the title.

The second related bug was uncovered in the duplicate family of Robert Best (5) and Anna Bierer (2) when I changed the Wife name from "Anna Bierer (2)" to "Anna Bierer (1)". This causes Anna Bierer (1) to have two husbands Robert Best (4) and Robert Best (5) which is expected. But the Person record "Anna Bierer (1)" shows one of the spouses as "Anna Bierer (2)" instead of "Anna Bierer (1)".

I think the solution to this is to inhibit any attenpt to change the person name and/or number in the "spouse of family" box and force it to agree with the record title. Any attempt to edit it should cause a message to appear that suggests use of Rename if the name must be changed.

The editing programs should be changed to prevent people from doing these invalid edits by mistake. Greensburger 02:07, 24 November 2007 (EST)

I've notified Dallan of your bug report. He'll get back to you as soon as he can. Thanks Greensburger! --Ronni 06:32, 24 November 2007 (EST)

I agree with the bug about normalizing names, although it's a little more complicated than you might think. If Robert were of Mexican descent, his last name might actually be "Cruson Best". (Although this is admittedly strained, there are a number of other two-word surnames like "Van Dyke".) A three-word person title is probably, but not always, incorrect. This is a very common source of error though, and adding some checks/warnings/tutorial messages is high on my todo list for next month.

Can you explain what you mean in the second example? I'm looking at Person:Anna Bierer (1) and I see that she links to two family pages: Family:Robert Best and Anna Bierer (1) and Family:Robert Best and Anna Bierer (2), as expected. Both family pages link back to Person:Anna Bierer (1); neither links to Person:Anna Bierer (2). I just thought of something -- is the problem because you're thinking that the (2) in "Robert Best and Anna Bierer (2)" means that the wife in that family is "Anna Bierer (2)"? It's not; it just means that that's the second family page for two people named "Robert Best and Anna Bierer". It has nothing to do with the index numbers of either spouse. But I can see where that would cause confusion.

To eliminate this confusion, instead of displaying the title of the family page we could display the full name of the spouse along with a link to the spouse's person page. Others have asked for a way to navigate directly from a person page to the spouse's person page, and this would address that issue as well. We'd still need some text that would link to the family page, but this could be addressed by a "view family" link next to the spouse name. (If we did this it wouldn't happen until next year though - we have to get match+merge finished first.) What do you think about this approach?

--Dallan 02:31, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, I was confused and thought the (2) in the Family title meant Anna Bierer (2). For every user like me who talks about it, there are probably dozens of others that are also confused. I suggest you put the letter "F" for Family in the displayed Family title, such as "(F2)", so that Family:Robert Best and Anna Bierer (2) will be displayed as "Family:Robert Best and Anna Bierer (F2)". If a user keys "(F2)" the F can be ignorred in the input, but will be displayed in the output. This will minimize confusion. Changing the title may be something you could add to the program in a few minutes.

You suggested displaying the full name of the spouse in the Family page title instead of the shortened first/last names used for indexing. I agree. And to avoid confusion, I suggest both the full and shortened names be displayed in the Family page heading. For example, "Family:Robert Cruson Best and Anna Barbara Bierer (indexed as Robert Best and Anna Bierer (F2) )". Changing the middle name would not require Rename and the middle name would instantly appear in the Family and Person page titles. Attempting to change the surname or first name would cause a message to be displayed saying Rename is necessary when changing the surname or first name. Or is it necessary? Greensburger 13:54, 25 November 2007 (EST)

I thought about the (F2) as well. It's an interesting idea, although to avoid confusion we'd have to rename all family pages (and probably the person pages as well -- to append (Pnn)). I think first we'll change how family titles are displayed on person pages -- others have asked for this as well -- and leave page renaming for later. Although you don't have to rename the page if you change the given or surname, it's a good idea to avoid confusion. Reminding people to rename the page (or maybe better yet, renaming it automatically), is also on the todo list.

There are three big high-priority items on the todo list right now: re-doing search to make it "fielded" so that searches for people named Madison don't return people with events in Madison, matching and merging of trees, and usability improvements like these. They'll all be done; it just takes time.

Thanks for the suggestions!--Dallan 19:23, 27 November 2007 (EST)

Place Page for cemeteries [26 November 2007]

I am not sure if I messed up or not. I wanted to create a place page for a cemetery, so that I could give directions and GPS coordinates for the cemetery. I did so for two cemeteries but then realized that I left off the county in the name of one of them. I cant' see how to change the name of the place .

A couple of questions: 1) Is a cemetery OK for a place page? 2) If it is should I just delete the current place and then recreate a new page? And can I add a picture of the cemetery? 3) If it is not then how or where do I include the information for each cemetery?

These are the two cemeteries in question. Each is currently linked to just two people so now is the time for me to fix things

1. 1

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Place:Buckingham_Cemetery%2C_Glastonbury%2C_Hartford%2C_Connecticut%2C_United_States This is linked to http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Elijah_Fox_%284%29 and http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Chester_Fox_%282%29

1. 2

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Place:Eastbury_Cemetery%2C_Glastonbury%2C_Connecticut This is linked to http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Amos_Fox_%281%29 and http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Mary_Stratton_%2811%29

Thanks for your help and hope I didn't mess things up too much.

David Armstrong--Quadraticman 23:35, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Hi David. :)

1. Yes, it's ok to create a cemetery page
2. Yes, you can add a pic of the cemetery. To fix the one you messed up on, just click on RENAME and that'll allow you to correct the title.

The pages look just fine David. You didn't mess up anything at all. Renaming pages (i.e., changing the titles) is something that is done all the time because of corrections. If you need anymore help, just holler. :) --Ronni 08:42, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Watching pages [26 November 2007]

Ronni,

I'm sorry, I still don't fully understand the Watch Page area...I mean, does anyone need to watch every tiny edit? I think I turned off the watch page by clicking on minor edit because I have been posting and editing as I go...boring stuff!

Thanks, Gale--GaleB 13:00, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Hi Gale,

Whenever you create or edit a page, especially a page that is part of your tree, you would want to "watch" that page, I would think. If are not watching a page that you are interested in, then when someone else comes along and edits it, you won't be notified of the change. Even if someone came along and added a message to the TALK portion of one of your pages, you wouldn't be notified of it. Also, if you are not watching your pages, then it could be deleted if it becomes a part of someone else's tree and then they decide to delete it later. So watching pages, especially pages that are part of your tree is something you'll want to change in your preferences.

Under preferences > editing, I would definitely check "Add pages I create to my watchlist." The other setting, "Add pages I edit to my watchlist" is a personal preference which you may or may not want checked. In your case, unless you do a lot of editing of pages outside your tree, then I would check it as well.

The next setting I would check is under preferences > watchlist. Check "Hide my edits from the watchlist." This way you won't be bothered with all those tiny little edits that you are making on your pages. Only pages that you are watching that are edited by someone else will show up on your watchlist if this is checked.

Hope this helps. --Ronni 14:14, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Category pages [26 November 2007]

Hello Ronnie, I have a question. When I look at a Category page it says there are X "Articles" in the category. Is werelate using the term "articles" to mean "items" on this page. Articles are special page types? Categories are tags that group pages. On the categories page it lists all the pages that have been tagged by their special page type?

Right. :) Think of "articles" as pages, whether it be a source page, a user page, a person page, etc. You are understanding categories correctly in that pages get "tagged" and are grouped accordingly.

Have I confused you ? I am not familiar with wiki's so am having a hard time navigating. There is no set path or hierarchy and it is difficult to now where I am and how to get to where I want to go.

thxs Peter --PeterP 19:52, 26 November 2007 (EST)

I do understand that a lot of folks have trouble navigating through WeRelate. I had that problem when I first started, but Dallan and company have redone the navigation since then so it's a lot easier than it used to be. :) What I did was make my own "menu" that helped me navigate through WeRelate. When I went somewhere on WeRelate, I made my own link to it, called it what I wanted so I could find it the next time without any problems. You could do the same. Check out my "home" menu: User:Knarrows/Home. When you get to my "home" menu, click on the site map and that will give a good start on creating a menu. --Ronni 20:44, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Thxs Ronnie, Your home page helps make sense of it. Much appreciated.

Thxs Peter --PeterP 21:08, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Deleted places comment [4 December 2007]

Hi Ronnie, I deleted the comments on Places because I was feeling that I was being too opinionated without having thought things through. I thought I should spend a little more time getting to understand things before making big statements.

That being said, I have a tendency to share my thoughts. Some times they should be thought through before being documented for all eternity.

In thinking about places, in order to understand why it would be necessary to include county, I learned a few things.

Places can be many different things, political jusrisdictions, geographical areas, institutions, etc. London is a municipality. It exists inside a counties boundaries (I think) but it isn't part of the county, politically. The county has no jurisdiction over the city of London.

When I try to explain the relationship between counties and municipalities it gets confusing. I need to do more research.

I work for Canada Post, the Canadian Postal Service. I am familiar with the heirarchy of an address necessary to find a place uniquely. County doesn't enter into it. There are municipal addresses and rural addresses but they do not include the county.

You can see in the attached link that all addresses in Canada can be uniquely found by, unit #, Street, MUNICIPALITY, PROVINCE, COUNTRY.

Postal Addressing guide

If you go to the Canada Post postal code lookup screen they have a drop down list of all the municipal names in Canada organized by Province. Canada is assumed.

Postal code look up - municipal list

Middlesex is a county and is not a municipality. Canada Post doesn't need it to find London.

From a genealogy perspective, are counties important. Counties have juridictions and roles. Just like municipalites. Counties and Townships are more about land management and roads and resource management. They may also be used as boundaries for census. When trying to find an entry in a census it helps to know teh census boundaries. Many times these relate to county and township boundaries. Not municiple addresses.

It is an interesting discussion OI am having with my self. I see no difinitive answer. I think what needs to happen is look at the purpose of the PLACE name space and then based on that purpose decide what needs to be used as the key.

Purpose of Place namespace is to provide a place for researchers identify research tips and sources tied to the Place.

Do you see any merit in this one sided discussion?

Thxs Peter --PeterP 18:33, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Well, first of all Peter, you made me laugh! I enjoyed listening in on your "one-sided discussion." :) Secondly, Dallan is the one that really needs to read this message (I'll bring it to his attention) because of the place name reindexing project that's going on. I'm not familiar with Canadian place names or their hierarchy and can't really comment on how they should be structured for genealogical purposes. I did want your voice to be heard on the subject though, which is why I questioned you. :) Thanks for sharing Peter! I mean that! :) --Ronni 19:43, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Counties are important to locate the birthplace of people who were born on a farm or other unincorporated area. For example my paternal grandfather was born in Hempfield Township, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, and not in a city or other municipality.

The main reason for counties in the USA is non-municipal, local government, especially a century ago when most people lived on farms. Each county has a courthouse and law offices, a sheriff's department to police the county outside of the cities, and a school system sometimes divided into townships. The township name can be put in the city space, but would be ambiguous if the name of the county were not present. Naming the county is also important because that is where the birth/marriage/death records and deeds/wills/tax records are kept. Greensburger 18:56, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Hello Greensburger, yes, counties are important, I agree. In some jurisdictions and in some past times they are very important. They were the administrative centers for communities. Records and information were managed in these administrative places. My issue is that Werelate is trying to create a standard index for places. The model says there are 4 levels. Each level down is a member of the level above.

Country: USA State:Pennsylvania County:Westmoreland County Municipality:Hempfield Township

Country:Canada Province:Ontario County:Carleton Municipality: Ottawa

The above example for Ottawa once existed. It doesn't any more. The county of Carleton was replaced by the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton. The city and county merged into one entity.

County: Canada Province: Ontario County:? Municipality: Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton

How about Jamestown Virginia in the early years?

Country: ? America - was it a country State: ? Virginia was a colony County: ? nothing here Municipality: Jamestown.

Country: British North America Province: ? none County: ? none Municipality: Hochelega (Native village where Montreal is now).

How would you index the following: it is the description off the land grant for Samuel Twissell, 1895

North East quarter of section ten, of Township 35, in Range 28 West of 4th Meridian, in the Provincial district of Alberta, in the North West Territories Dominion of Canada

Some of the information is geographic and some of it refers to "administrative" areas/places.

Lets say for the sake of argument, that the example above is actually downtown Red Deer Alberta today.

Country: Canada Province: Alberta County: Red Deer Municipality: Red Deer Red Deer County is a municipality in Canada

Red Deer County is divided into seven administrative areas called “Divisions”. Each Division has an elected Councillor who serves a three-year term. A Reeve and Deputy Reeve are elected from Council’s ranks on an annual basis. Governed by the Municipal Government Act, the Council enacts legislation on issues of economic activity, safety, health, recreation, community services, transportation and utilities among others.

Within the north central boundary of Red Deer County is the City of Red Deer with a population of over 71,000 people.

While Red Deer City is inside of teh geograpic boundary of Red Deer County, Red Deer county will not have any administrative role or records related to Red Deer city. Red Deer city is also a municipality independent of the county.

I think I have beaten this to death. It must be painful for some people to read this.

So what does it matter if Red Deer the city is linked by an index key as being part of Red Deer the county when it is true for geography but not true for administrative records?

If you are interested in genealogy you want to find the records not the geography. Perhaps this is too fine a point. If you get as close as the county you should be able to figure out where to look for the records.

Thxs Peter --PeterP 19:00, 30 November 2007 (EST)

As to Jamestown, it was originally settled in 1607 in the Virginia colony. In 1634 Virginia was divided into 8 original shires or counties: Charles City, Elizabeth City, Henrico, Warrosquyoake (renamed Isle of Wight in 1637), James City (Jamestown was in James City County)' Accawmack (renamed Northampton in 1642), Warwick River and Charles River (renamed York in 1642).--Scot 12:43, 1 December 2007 (EST)

The naming hierarchy for each country has been determined largely by the FHLC as it is the most comprehensive of the sources used to create the index. Informationf from the FHLC was combined with Getty, Wikipedia, and other sources. Some countries have five levels of jurisdictional hierarchy and a few have only two, most have three. It depends on the records available. Also please realize that because most genealogists are researching older records, we and the FHLC felt it was important to pick a point in time to record jurisdictional hierarchy. For some countries such as the US and Sweden the point in time is very current. Sweden has changed little in the past 100 years. For some such as the countries of the UK, that point in time is in the late 1800's. Although certain jurisdictions are no longer extant or no longer the repository of records, genealogy records are likely archived with the older jurisdiction's records and not with the more modern jurisdiction. We realize the records in Canada are not kept by the counties. However, according to Allen County Library, there are a lot of genealogical societies organized on the county level. So, if you can ID the county, you can probably locate records through the local county genealogical society. Hope this helps. :-)--sq 01:07, 2 December 2007 (EST)

Yes Thxs Solveig, and the other contributers as well. It was helpful for me to understand why tings are set up the way they are. I learned some new things while looking at the problem. Thxs again. Peter --PeterP 13:49, 2 December 2007 (EST)

The only thing I can add here is that I agree that place organization is very complicated. Whenever I think about how places should be represented I try to think about how places are going to be used. I think we could use places for at least the following:

1. Help improve matches -- if you believe your ancestor was born in Warrosquyoake, and I believe my ancestor was born in Isle of Wight, it helps in the matching to know that they're the same place. Similarly, if your GEDCOM says "Ottowa, Carleton, Ontario, Canada" and mine says "Ottowa-Carleton, Ontario, Canada", it's helpful to know that Ottowa-Carleton is the "child" of Carleton. Also, if you say your ancestor was born in "Ottowa, Ontario, Canada", and I say mine was born in "Carleton, Ontario, Canada", knowing that Ottowa used to be located in Carleton is useful.
2. Help people find sources -- next year we'll re-do the source index. It should be very helpful to be able to see quickly what sources are available for the towns our ancestors lived in as well as their containing jurisdictions. One of the challenges here is that places changed jurisdictions over time. Also, places can exist in multiple jurisdictions at once. The new place page format will replace the "previously-located-in" field with "also-located-in" so that you can list a place under multiple record-keeping jurisdictions at the same time. The people working on Scotland are using this to track ecclesiastical jurisdictions as also-located-in places.
3. Help people find other people, families, images, etc. that occurred nearby. In a few weeks we're going to redo categories so that each county or province (whether it's county or province will depend upon how deeply places in that country have been organized) will contain links to all of the people, families, images, sources, etc. that have events in that county or province.

Handling independent cities like Red Deer and Jamestown is an interesting problem, because although they are not administratively part of the surrounding county, they are located nearby, so for finding nearby people and families perhaps we should put them under the surrounding county. Jamestown is especially problematic because it straddles the border between two counties.

Another interesting problem is that although we can track using the "also-located-in" field multiple places that a town has been located in over time, the place page for the town can have only one title. So which located-in place should be used for the title? Because the only source for a lot of places is the Family History Library Catalog, we generally tend to use the place the town was located in according to the Family History Library Catalog, except that sometimes we categorize things deeper (e.g., put towns into districts that the FHLC omits). Perhaps this adds unnecessary complexity. I don't think it hurts (2) source-finding much, and might even help if you're looking for a county-based Canadian genealogical society, and it should help both (1) matching and (3) finding people with nearby events.

What we need are people who are know about and care about particular countries, who are willing to "adopt" a country and to make the place index for that country better. That would be a very valuable contribution!--Dallan 18:06, 4 December 2007 (EST)

Image control [1 December 2007]

Ronni, I have a couple of questions regarding images. I have uploaded several and then linked them into person or family pages. Sometimes they appear full size and sometimes as thumbnails. How can this be controlled? Also is there a way to text wrap around an image?--Scot 12:53, 1 December 2007 (EST)

Hi Scot. I added some examples to Person:John Whitlock (7) to show you how to insert pics onto your pages. The little pic under the word IMAGE is a thumbnail and it's the one you entered in the Image Field, giving it an Image ID. Those pics normally show at the end of the history or biography, but since there wasn't any text there, it shows up higher. However, I believe checking "primary" moves it to the top. The other images I added are to show you how to adjust their place and size on the page. To get it to wrap around the text, you kind of have to play with it a bit, moving the text around some to get it to show just right. Sometimes the ads on the right will get in the way as well. Let me know if this helps. --Ronni 13:27, 1 December 2007 (EST)

What Am I Doing Wrong??? [26 December 2007]

I've tried to enter one of my interesting lines--Samuel Millington Story--but apparently I've got A LOT TO LEARN. It appears that I've got him there three times. I don't have a clue how that happened. He does have three wives, the third being his widowed daughter-in-law, but I haven't even tried to address that yet. I had Samuel and his three children by his first wife entered, but now only Luther Copeland Story is listed. It appears that Luther and his three children are in there, but I'm not sure about the spouses. And his daughter Marian's family appeared to be there, that is, entered successfully, but how to I get back to the any of these entries for additions and editing?--Rdrhude 16:04, 20 December 2007 (EST)

He married his daughter-in-law? Wow... that *is* interesting. :)

First, have you had a chance to go through the tutorials such as the Getting started video? If not, take a look at that when you get a chance and it'll explain some of the basics. To get back to those pages you have been editing, go to you User Page (MyRelate tab) and click on "View Contributions." You can also access your pages under the Family Tree tab, but I believe I've found a bug, so let me get back to you on that. It could be why you're having trouble keeping track of your pages. Another useful tool, but will take some time getting used to is the Family Tree Explorer (FTE). It will open up your trees and list your pages as well. You can also access that under the Family Tree tab ("launch FTE"). Sorry you are having trouble, but I'll try to help as much as I can. --Ronni 16:44, 20 December 2007 (EST)

Hi, I wanted to let you know that we've had a bug for about a week that has caused the pages you've created to not be added to your tree. I fixed the bug today, and tomorrow I'll work on adding the pages that people have added this past week to their trees. The pages you've created are still there and should have been added to your "watchlist" (even though they weren't added to your tree).

There's now a new "choose" link available when you're editing Person and Family pages that will let you fill in the fields for "Child of family", "Spouse of family", "Husband", "Wife", etc. by selecting the page from your watchlist (assuming you've created the page previously).

Another thing you can do is go to the Family Tree page, type the first few letters of the title of a page in your watchlist that you'd like to visit into the box under the "Go to page" heading, and wait a few seconds. You should see a drop-down list of pages in your watchlist that begin with that title. Use the down-arrow key to select one of them and press "enter" to go to that page. --Dallan 01:08, 27 December 2007 (EST)