GEDCOM Export Ready [10 avril 2013]
The GEDCOM for tree Default is ready to download. Click here.
- Ce n'était qu'un test pour tenter de comprendre le fonctionnement de ce module.--Markus3 09:31, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
Bienvenue [10 April 2013]
Boujour Markus. Bienvenue a WeRelate! Je répondrai a votre question a ce page ici. AndrewRT 17:54, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
Petite bibliothèque généalogique [13 April 2013]
Bonjour Marc, I moved your Utilisateur:Markus3/Petite bibliothèque généalogique to User:Markus3/Petite bibliothèque généalogique because namespace titles are in English. I cannot redirect the old page for you so, could you please do the following:
- "Watch" User:Markus3/Petite bibliothèque généalogique
- "Delete" Utilisateur:Markus3/Petite bibliothèque généalogique (go to More>Delete)
Merci! --Jennifer (JBS66) 07:49, 13 April 2013 (EDT)
Échanges récents sur la WP francophone ? [1 May 2013]
Bonjour ! Serais-tu peut-être le contributeur avec lequel j'ai eu cette discussion ? Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 07:18, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
- Oui c'est bien moi ! Je suis en train de placer mon arbre généalogique, mais comme tu m'as dis, les personnes vivantes ne sont pas acceptées ? Amicalement --LouisRoussel 07:33, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
[2 mai 2013]
Merci Monsieur.--MarcelVallet 05:38, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
Hello [2 May 2013]
Its nice to see a cousin and I am very glad to see that this site has gone international. I have "met" several other French cousins. Sheri--Sheri 12:33, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
Merci beaucoup pour votre response. Ma francais est tres pauvre. Votre anglaise est en fait tres bien. J'ai un cousin eloigne a Paris. Les deux des nous avais anctres a Gambsheim. (Mon clavier NE MONTRE des accents)--Sheri 13:24, 2 May 2013 (EDT)
Correction de fiche [3 mai 2013]
Monsieur, merci pour l'aide. Je teste les différents produits présents sur le web avant de me lancer et ne suis pas convaincu par celui-ci. --MarcelVallet 03:57, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
watchlist [3 mei 2013]
Marcus, merci de nous aider avec les catégories.
Are you sure want? Have the categories that you made on your watchlist.
Sont que vous voulez-vous? Avoir les catégories que vous avez fait sur votre liste--Lidewij 11:50, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
- Right now, for new pages you are creating, like the categories, you are watching each of those pages. If you do not want to be watching those pages.
- Settings/Preferences. Edit. Pages that I create automatic tracking. ? --Lidewij 12:18, 3 May 2013 (EDT)
Translations [5 May 2013]
I met with Dallan today. It is possible to translate most of WeRelate's text! The first step is this: WeRelate:Label translations project. We need to list all of the WR text that should be translated along with their tranlations.
- What can be translated:
- All Page labels such as Birth, Burial, Home, Search, List, Add, MyRelate, Volunteer, Help, Settings, Watch, History, etc...
- Drop-down box labels such as Alt Birth, Cremation, Degree. Note: These are a 'special situation' and should be listed separately.
- Page headings in Orange such as Images, Notes, Personal History
- What cannot be translated: The titles of Namespaces (Person, Family, User, MySource, Transcript, etc)
Please tell me your thoughts and if you are interested in helping! --Jennifer (JBS66) 14:47, 5 May 2013 (EDT)
Merci francophone [9 May 2013]
For fixing my translations.
In english the month always starts with a capital letter. Today I have learnt that it is not in french.--JeffreyRLehrer 06:23, 9 May 2013 (EDT)
partie francophone [22 août 2013]
Bonjour, Monsieur Markus. Je suis, depuis l'origine vos efforts pour développer la partie francophone de ce site et il semble bien que le décolage soit difficile. Cette notion d'arbre universel n'a pas la cote chez nos compatriotes. Encore bravo pour vos essais.--MarcelVallet 08:11, 22 August 2013 (EDT)
Upper or Lower case [19 September 2013]
It may be true that werelate prefers lower case, however it doesn't really matter. When I originally uploaded my gedcom's they were in upper case so all of this family is in upper case and I would prefer to keep each family intact in that format. If you add ancestors or descendants in lower case, I have no problem with that and I'll try not to change those. Sue--Suepcard 13:17, 19 September 2013 (EDT)
Radegonde Lambert [26 September 2013]
The link that you added to Person:Radegonde Lambert (1) does not work. How can I see the Registres de Baptême de Martaizé? --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Nettoyae des fiches [15 novembre 2013]
Je n'ai aucune objection quant à la suppression des informations codées.
En ce qui concerne St Just, c'est St Just en Chevalet dans le département de la Loire--2m474 22:13, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Renaming pages [18 November 2013]
Bonjour Marc! Merci for your work on WeRelate's French pages! When you see pages titled Person:Antoine Feuillon Or Filion (1) or Person:Augustin Roy Dit Lauzier (18) you can "Rename/Renommer" them. For example: this page the primary name is Filion, you can click Rename (on the left) and rename the page Antoine Filion. You would also need to Rename the Family page to Antoine Filion and Marie Latouche.
When you Rename a page, you will see a box that says "To new title:" do not include the words Person:/Family: or the (#) at the end. So, an example:
Adding identifying information to pages [2 December 2013]
It would be helpful if you could add some basic information to the Person pages you are creating (such as approximate birth year). Otherwise, these pages could be mistaken for living people. Merci! --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Drost family in Dunkerque [26 December 2013]
I wonder if you can help me. I have found a Dutch man who married in Nord, France and baptized a child there too. I am having difficulty translating the information.
Person talk:Jan Drost (5)
If possible, can you help me with the names, dates, places, and parents from these documents? Merci beaucoup!!--Jennifer (JBS66) 18:30, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Removing Titles in Suffix Fields [6 January 2014]
Hello, I noticed that you removed the information that I put in the suffix field on James Henry of the Borden Tract, Augusta County, Virginia. This information is important to differentiate him from other James Henry's in the Augusta County area, which can be easily confused by other researchers. Please leave this information intact, so it is helpful to other researchers, and also to the researchers working on the Early Settlers of Augusta County Project, where there are in excess of 5,000 or so persons that are in the process of being documented.
Also, I noticed that you removed the "III" from the title suffix field of Joshua Cresson. Since his father and grandfather were also named Joshua Cresson, the "III" in the title suffix field is certainly appropriate, accurate and conforms to normal naming practices. Please do not remove similar information without consulting or advising the contributor.
Thanks for your cooperation and best regards,
Volunteer Administrator, WeRelate--Delijim 00:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Chastain Family [9 March 2014]
Hello Markus, sorry, I do not have any other information on the family of Pierre Chastain. The information I found on Familysearch. I added a photo of his gravestone, and a link to an Ancestry Member Tree with some additional information. According to this submission, he may have been married 2-3 times, but some of the dates look suspect. Hope that helps.
Jim:)--Delijim 15:59, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Random Changes [12 April 2014]
I note you are just randomly changing pages that I contributed. Can you explain the initiative that is driving these random changes or are you imposing your standards across other contributors records?
This complete lack of control in WeRelate to who can alter an individuals contributions is appalling.
Andrew 09:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hello, Andrew ! I distroyed nothing. Which pages have now a problem ? I want just clean up some records that have repetitions or completely useless information. What do you mean exactly with "random changes" ? I really want to impose nothing and "my" standards. WeRelate is a wiki ! Everyone can contribute, complete and fix the records. For 3 weeks, I simply :
- delete every line saying "record change" (with a date) --> completely useless --> 1) The date of the last modification appears at the bottom of each page. 2) Each page has a special page "History". --> These are the advantages and the typical comfort of a wiki site.
- fix/modify line saying "killed in action" on a place field.
- Please, can you better explain your "anger" or "disagreement" ! I have also to say that no "chief/administrator" had alerted me for these 3 weeks ! And you are the first contributor who ... "protests".
- Excuse please my very bad english ! Thank you ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 10:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Marc is not "randomly" changing pages. All pages contributed to WeRelate are open to any user making contributions to improve the pages. If you look closely, the pages that Marc edited looked something like this previously. They had red-linked text saying "killed in action". Red-linked places are errors, and in this case, killed in action is not a place and cannot be linked to one of WeRelate's place pages. This information belongs in the description field which is where Marc correctly moved the text to. --Jennifer (JBS66) 17:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I am really impressed with Markus changes!!!! I learned a lot from your changing names from all upper case to lower case. GIve me a break. Are you related to any of these people???--Joana1493 14:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Please do not rename 'livings' to 'unknowns' [14 April 2014]
Person:Unknown Robiè (2) should be investigated as to if the person is living. If no information can be found, then the person should be removed, not renamed, since it is still a de-facto living person page. The only exception is of course famous people. Any and all other livings must be either deleted or a death date added.--Daniel Maxwell 19:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
I note your comments regading the changes being made to my family tree on 'We Relate'. I find it high handed to make these changes without consultation, particularly as these go against what is regarded as normal presentation of family surnsmes.
My family names have always, and will always be, presented with surnames in capitals,as a consequence of the unwanted actions of others in 'We Relate' I have today deleted my tree from your site and will cancel my membership forthwith. Further more I will advise all my fellow genealogists to avoid your site.--Whiskymac 10:14, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Changes to Surnames [19 April 2014]
Markus, why have you changed the surnames on my family tree from Upper caes to Lower case? It is normal procedure to have family surnames in UPPER case to distinguish them from he other parts of the persons name, please change these back.--Whiskymac 19:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- The use of mixed case (not upper case) is discussed on WeRelate's help pages, including this one. Since this is a collaborative research environment, marking your own line with upper case is counter to this idea and against WeRelate conventions. --Jennifer (JBS66) 21:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I note your comments regading the changes being made to my family tree on 'We Relate'. I find it high handed to make these changes without consultation, particularly as these go against what is regarded as normal presentation of family surnsmes. My family names have always, and will always be, presented with surnames in capitals,as a consequence of the unwanted actions of others in 'We Relate' I have today deleted my tree from your site and will cancel my membership forthwith. Further more I will advise all my fellow genealogists to avoid your site--Whiskymac 10:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Whiskymac ! Please ... Do not misunderstand my edits ! 1) See for example what I wrote to Joana1493 here 2) I'll try to explain in a few hours that the site WeRelate remains perfectly understandable and makes no confusion between given names and surnames. Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 15:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Ditto - I too have removed my tree due to the overhanded enforcing of standards by a few with absolutely no consultation. Genealogy / Family History is by nature a consultative study except here on WeRelate - Andrew 12:49, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Markus3, please leave my names alone! Feel free to add people with your Mixedcase spelling, but don't presume to make wholesale changes on someone else's work. It is standard in French documents to use UPPER CASE for surnames, especially legal documents, and it is absolutely acceptable on WeRelate. If you want to be the CaseNazi, focus on your own work, not tirelessly correcting the case of other's work. If this continues, I will just remove the file, and post elsewhere.--Strebig 03:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Strebig ! Please excuse my very bad english !
- 1) You wrote : "If you want to be the CaseNazi" --> I think, this is really exaggerated, discourteous and even aggressive.
- 2) I do not want to impose anything on anyone ! I just wanted to improve (and spending my time foolishly ?) pages by following the recommended rules Help:Person pages tutorial, as Jennifer (JBS66) wrote above.
- 3) I am a "WeRelate newbe" (April 2013). I never read on WeRelate that there was a potential duality/alternative in the spelling of surnames. I understand that if there are still surnames in capitals, it's just that contributors markers are too few. I volunteered to improve the oldest contributions especially after discovering for example these pages : WeRelate:Old GEDCOMs and 
- 4) I personally prefered also put surnames in capital (for better readability and immediate distinction between surname and first name), but ... I just want to put the WeRelate records/data in accordance with the current "rules" that I have not helped to define. I have ONE wish ! --> My goal is to make the records more consistent to motivate potential french speaking contributors ... when WeRelate will become multilingual (what I expect since May 2008 ... In 2008, I chose stupidly Rodovid who was probably better as WeRelate but does not progress in programmatic improvement, friendliness and courtesy.)
- 5) Before starting for several weeks my series of modifications (changes uppercase to mixed/lowercase) on pages/records posted by other contributors, I seriously checked if there was "debate" or "clear opposition "... since I had not found anything, I JUST ... tried to clean according to the rules. Do you have references or pages that I could not find ? Please, show me what links !...
- 6) I personally found only these discussions : November 2007, January 2008, June 2010 and March 2011
- Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 09:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Because you linked to your comment on another page, I think you might be interested in the note just above yours:
"We would appreciate it if you would not change names of persons already on WeRelate unless it is absolutely necessary and the records back up such a change.
Thanks and best regards,
Jim (Administrative Staff on WeRelate)--Delijim 12:47, 23 September 2011 (EDT)"--Strebig 08:33, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- But it is/was really an other problem --> notation I, II, III ---> problem that should be discussed more seriously ... Marc ROUSSEL --Markus3 09:11, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Just as Markus has noted above, the "change" to names [referred to above] was an entirely different issue. Markus was simply changing the surname from UPPER CASE to Normal Case, which is the naming rule on WeRelate. Since we don't "own" a Person Page on WeRelate, and must work together and collaborate, we all need to follow the same general guidelines, and surnames in normal case is one of them.
- If you think this site has too many rules, I'd invite you to try adding a page to Wikipedia, where within 15 minutes, 10-15 Administrators will summarily delete and dismiss your work. Every site has rules. This one doesn't have too many rules that are imposing upon most serious (and fair-minded) genealogical researchers and hobbyists. That's just the way it is, so it's much easier to accept the way it is and continue to contribute your information to WeRelate, or start your own website with your own rules. Delijim.
I apologize for suggesting you are a CaseNazi -- I'm much more vehement about ALL CAPS than you are about standardizing the Wiki's style. I read your links, and now appreciate your efforts to improve the wiki. My wish is that you will focus on some of the other areas they identified as needing work, perhaps those that lack sources, or fixing notes, changing "living" people into "[blank] Surname", or writing a bot program to remove un-needed data/notes/sources (_UID, etc). And your English is very good. I admire your work on French place names -- we need more people doing that, for many countries!--Strebig 16:22, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks ! But my english is so poor that I do not often understand all the nuances of a long argument. That is why I can not really and effectively participate to discussions in the Watercooler and somewhere else. And the tool "Google Translate" produces only gibberish and nonsense.
- In your response "I'm much more vehement about ALL CAPS than you are about standardizing the Wiki's style.", I do not know if you agree that I continue to replace uppercase letters for surnames. I do not have any desire to continue irritate so many contributors. I can do anything in genealogy and especially in collaborative genealogy. And I have my "own" researches ...
- I did not intend to limit my remarks/contributions on surnames. I also started to correct and improve well other things, removal of duplicates in notes, ... adding sources with direct links to records of France, etc.
- I wanted to give and give again (if possible) priority to surnames, because that is what consulted first by "web visitors" and future contributors. At first, I asked myself why there were some surnames in uppercase and others in mixedcase ... I would like the potential French speaking contributors and others are not disturbed by this oddity. Clean detail a particular record was and is my second priority.
- Systematically to capitalize surnames is interesting for aesthetic or graphic reasons. It is important and necessary when names of persons cited in the texts (way to avoid confusion) or official acts. With a software or a website specialized in genealogy (such as WeRelate) it is useless, because everything is built and displayed from a database. With a database (one person per page, no text, no sentences in the "header") it can never be any confusion between given name and surname ... for 2 reasons : 1) input fields are completely independent 2) the given name is always noted before the surname
- Marc ROUSSEL ---Markus3 07:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Marc, just an FYI - Dallan will be updating the gedcom importer within the next week or so to automatically convert ALL CAPS surnames to Normal case, so you (and other Admins) don't have to change them in the future (except those that are added manually). I hope also that he updates the gedcom upload advisory page to make the WeRelate Naming Convention a bit clearer to those submitters that would otherwise be "blindsided" by such changes....
Best regards and have a great weekend,
Jim:)--Delijim 19:03, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you, Jim ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 14:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
"clean up" [1 May 2014]
Re: Person:Samuel Hubbard (27)
You are cleaning up bad information: what is the point? better to do research and correct the information.
Here date was wrong. The page will still look like a joke to people who know the right answer.
"Samuel died soon after birth" - this is obvious from dates, why add this note?
The note was wrong, he was born dead. He probably was not named Samuel. When information on pages is wrong, anything you add based on that information will be wrong also.
You don't watch so if you make a mistake, you never learn.
It is better to be interested in the page. Any cleanup that it is possible to do without interest or knowledge, is not very valuable cleanup. It can wait for the next interested editor. If it bothers you, take the time to do research. Otherwise, just let it go. --Jrich 14:38, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- Excuse me but I think your message is unfair, discourteous and unnecessarily aggressive ! Did you look at the history page ? Have you really read my edits ? the first and the second ? I added nothing, no note ! ! I just moved an information and removed the "!" beginning the sentence. My edits are limited mainly to replace uppercase for surnames and remove references UID. A wiki site such as WeRelate it is not a battlefield, and the work is collective ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 16:15, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Lafon [29 May 2014]
Let me know what you can find with Lafon. I don't know a word of French, and when I was shown the French parish records I about ran away screaming (They are not available as bulk files like the ones for Mexico are).--Daniel Maxwell 07:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Also, since the city of his birth was misspelled in his marriage record, I also thought it might possibly be Coutras rather than Cestas (exact wording/spelling:"..Villa de Ceuttas de los Reinos de Francia..)." Daniel Maxwell 08:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Further: the age estimate comes from 2 passenger lists. (no age is given at the time of his murder in 1832) - on 21 Oct 1820, 'Raymond Lafon', aged about 28, arrived at the port of New Orleans on the James Lawrence. Then again, on 16 May 1823, 'Raymond Lafon' aged about 32, arrived at New Orleans from Germany aboard the Little Sally. It is likely that these are the same man, considering Ramon Lafon's piracy and frequent travels that eventually got him killed. Daniel Maxwell 08:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Wow. Guess what? I was right. It was indeed 'Coutras'. Near the very back of the baptisms for the 1791 period - image 137 of 138. I see Catherine Barbaron having her son Ramon Lafon baptized in Dec 1791!!! I could kiss you for finding this archive. But I still need some help with the French language, so perhaps get ahold of me on my talk page. Daniel Maxwell 08:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Correction - baptism is on page 106. That record on 137 relates to them though. 'Raymond Lafon' legitimate son of Antoine Lafon and Catherina Barbaron? I could use your help. I will be up for awhile, this has me excited. Daniel Maxwell 08:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- December 1791 ---> birth (baptême) of Marie (a girl) and not Raymond ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 08:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- See the one on page 106. Daniel Maxwell 08:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- "Jean Lafon" image 88, a sibling. Looking good (sorry for all the messages, you have no idea how much I appreciate this). Daniel Maxwell 09:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Could you tell me what the baptism of Raymond Lafon says? I couldn't find the marriage of his parents (yet) but I found their marriage investigation. "Publication de mariages 1765-1791" image 73 covers it. I could use some help transcribing/translating (don't worry - if it turns out I need alot of this, I would probably pay you). It appears that Antoine Lafon is the son of Pierre Lafon and Catherine 'Renaen?', and Catherine Barbaron is the daughter of Pierre Barbron and Jeanne 'Bouchier'? Daniel Maxwell 09:48, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again. I suppose at least for Barbaron I will someday have to pay an agent to search for those records in France. So then, my chance would be to research the Lafons instead, but I cannot read what the Marriage Bann says is their home parish (Coutras itself?) Daniel Maxwell 16:32, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Pay somebody to search these Barbaron records in Sauveterre or Le Puch ? Only if you have no patience ! Les Archives de la Gironde put perhaps on line the records, in some months ... It takes time for this administration and these "Archives" must have the money ! An other method ist to ask on some "regional genealogy forum" !
- For the Lafon, it seems that they resided in Coutras ... but since what date ? I began to search in the records ... but it takes time ! Be patient ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:03, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I am looking too. I noticed that there is a large gap in the records in Coutras from 1739 to 1763...unless I am missing something...very bad as that is the time period that Antoine was probably born. All I have found so far is a Lafon burial, with no obvious connection to my Lafons. From trying to assemble the words in the Bann record, it doesn't seem to give ages (I am used to Mexican Catholic Church records, which usually do give ages in Banns and Marriage Investigations). Daniel Maxwell 17:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Where is this "Lafon burial" ? On what date ? I have found no Lafon in Coutras, but I saw some Barbaron ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:15, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- It was early in the 1760-1783 book. I will go back and note the page once I am done looking through this one ( i am about 1/2 way, but I dont know French so I can only look at names/obvious dates). I am going to note ALL Lafon records, not just ones related to this group. I found a 2nd Lafon record - a marriage record for an (Ambois?) Lafon and a Jeanne ?? it is on image 60 of 175 in the 1760-1783 set. Daniel Maxwell 17:17, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
- Another - a marriage between a Lafon female and someone else, image 70 of 175. Daniel Maxwell 17:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
More records [3 June 2014]
I went through almost all of the books in the relevant period (I still need to hit the bann book completely and go through the 1790s book again). When I am finished I will give you a list of all the Lafon records I found. There are almost no records of any Lafons before the 1760s. I found a single possible Lafon record in the 1730s books. One thing I was wondering if you could check for me. Do the books of Coutras from 1740-1760 exist at all, but are perhaps available only in person? Before I do some more deep research I'd like to know that.--Daniel Maxwell 03:47, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know, this period 1740-1760 seems to be not online, and the site says nothing about this "hole" (gap ?). Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 04:13, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, perhaps the books were lost then. It happens. Sad though, because that period is probably the most important one for figuring out the Lafons! Now if only the probate records for the area were available, it might still be possible to figure them out. But then there is still the civil registrar, at least in the Mexico, these sometimes will give a good amount of detail about the life of the deceased - in Raymond Lafon's marriage record, his mother is said to be deceased, so I may check up to 1824 in it. Daniel Maxwell 04:16, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- What do you mean with "probate records" ? What is the "single possible Lafon record in the 1730s books" ? I searched between page/sight 150 and 192 ! Nothing !... Yes, I can (and it's a pleasure) check all the records you found. Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 10:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- I am wondering if the probate records exist or are available (probate records are basically the court record of wills, estates, etc). I will give you the rest later on today. Daniel Maxwell 15:48, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- I finished the bann book. It was not as fruitful as I thought it might be. I still need to get through 1) the 1764-1775 book, and the later (to 1791) book again, but here is what I found 1) - Baptemes mariages - sepultures 1728-1739 Image 119 of 192 (possible Lafon baptism? Tafon?); 2) Baptemes - Mariages - Sepultures 1760-1783 Image 20 of 175 (Lafon? child baptism, Image 25 of 175 (another Lafon child?), Image 28 (Lafon marriage?), Image 50 of 175 (Lafon on one page?), Image 60 of 175 (the Ambois Lafon and Jeane marriage you added, Images 70 and 71 of 175 (a female Lafon marriage), Image 79 of 175 (another Lafon? marriage), Image 155 of 175 (Jean Lafon? record). 3) Banns book - Image 16 (a 'Labron' marriage?), image 41 (another 'Labron'? marriage), Image 68 (the only new Lafon record I found - Jean Mathieu Lafon marriage), Image 74 (the Antoine marriage we already knew about). BONUS - started going through the Civil registration books. In the first deaths book, I found a single Lafon record - (deces book 1793 to year IV - Image 52 of 75 - a Lafon death). Lots more to do! Taking a break right at the moment. Daniel Maxwell 03:43, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- Fine ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 04:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've created a source page for the Gironde records (on the model of how the Mexican records are done on Familysearch, since they have similarities). It's a WIP of course. Source:Gironde, France. Catalogue des Microfilms de Complément de L'état Civil des Communes de la Gironde 1538-1912 (note: better the department level source instead of splitting them down peicemeal)Daniel Maxwell 07:13, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- BMS 1760-1783
- Image 20 of 175 (Lafon? child baptism) -> it's OK, done yesterday ---> see Person:Marie Lafon (2)
- Image 25 of 175 (another Lafon child?) -> not found ! where did you see such a record ? on the right, on the left, down, on the top ?
- Image 28 (Lafon marriage?) -> on the right, in the middle ? --> no ! the surname of the husband (and his father) is "Forton" and not "Lafon".
- Image 50 of 175 (Lafon on one page?) --> where ? not found !
- Image 60 of 175 (the Ambois Lafon and Jeane marriage you added --> it's Ok, done yesterday ---> see Person:Ambroise Laffon (1)
- Images 70 and 71 of 175 (a female Lafon marriage) --> it's Ok, done yesterday ---> see Person:Jeanne Lafont (2) --> no direct interesting witnesses to understand/build the "Lafon family"
- Image 79 of 175 (another Lafon? marriage) -> on the left ? --> no ! the surname of the husband (and his father) is "Tison" and not "Lafon".
- Image 155 of 175 (Jean Lafon? record). -> on the left ? on the 8 December ? --> no ! the surname of the dead husband is "Besson" and not "Lafon".
- BMS 1728-1739 Image 119 of 192 (possible Lafon baptism? Tafon?) -> on the right --> no ! the surname of the child (and his father) is "Tison" and not "Lafon".
- Banns book
- Image 16 (a 'Labron' marriage?) -> on the left --> no ! "Jeanne Sabron", fille de "Pierre Sabron" -
- image 41 (another 'Labron'? marriage) -> on the left --> no ! "Catherine Sabron", fille de "Pierre Sabron"
- Image 68 (the only new Lafon record I found - Jean Mathieu Lafon marriage) -> not found ! bad page ? Amicalement -- Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 09:50, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- Mistake - that one is actually on Image 64, top left. Daniel Maxwell 17:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks ! ---> done, see Person:Jean Lafon (4) - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 19:25, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- I am now doing the book that ends the era of church record keeping to > 1791 book. After this, I will move on to the civil books. Do you think it is worth it to do any of the books before the 1730s? (the next earliest is a book containing records from 1714 - 1728)? Daniel Maxwell 19:28, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know ... Can we perhaps find some death records, for example for Person:Jean Lafon (5). He died before July 1784. The Lafon are not numerous, the records we found are "poor" : no age, no link to siblings or uncles, etc ... The records after the revolution are always better ! Tomorrow and on monday I will have no time to "play" with genealogy, records and WeRelate. Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 19:46, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, they are. I had expected them to be similar to those of Mexico, which I am much more used to. Depending on the priest, grandparents of the person being baptized are given (even in the marriage records as well), often the birthplace, and as well as sometimes the age. If it weren't for this level of detail, I wouldn't have been able to trace my family back as far as I have. I had thought a fellow Catholic country like France would be like this, but alas, not at least in Coutras. Sometime, I will have to add photos of the Lafons. I have photographs of Raymond Lafon's wife, his son that I descend from (Dr. Antonio Fernando Lafon), as well as two of his daughters (Maria Euphrosina and Maria Felipa, my great-great-great grandmother, at her wedding in 1876). I own a couple of Lafon family miniatures, too. Oh, and a break is fine - that will give me more time to gather more records. Daniel Maxwell 20:03, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have gone through all records in Coutras through to the 1810s, and the death records to 1840. It seems certain that this Lafon family moved to another parish sometime after the late 1790s. There are a tiny handful of Lafon records after that, and they don't seem to relate to this family. I will be posting what I find here later: http://www.werelate.org/wiki/User:DMaxwell/Lafon_Records The only thing related to Antoine Lafon/Catherine Barbaron I found was another child's birth record - which is also the last sighting of that family. Daniel Maxwell 21:04, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Brigitte Heger [19 August 2014]
Bonjour Marc, I have a question about the sources for Person:Brigitte Heger (1). When I click the links on her page and go to archivesdepartementales.lenord.fr, I cannot find the correct acte.
- 1 acte n° 542, vue n° 279, en haut à gauche
- 2 acte n° 148, vue n° 21, à droite --Jennifer (JBS66) 23:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
May have overwritten your change to typo [17 January 2015]
I was working on adding more links to the H H White WWI Diary transcript when I got notice I might be overwriting other changes. I appreciate your taking time to make this page better. Can you check again to make sure your changes are in place?
My next step is to add a bit of info to the various Place pages I have linked to. Probably just to pull in information from Wikipedia which is usually quite limited.
From the topics on your Talk page it appears you are overseeing pages with French connections. If you can suggest some "boilerplate" text regarding genealogical research in France I will be happy to create a template and include it on these pages.
Rick----RGMoffat 12:13, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
New categories needed [28 January 2015]
Hello ! Please, see here ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hello, Marc. Hope you don't mind that I respond to your message on your page rather than mine.
- As you may be aware, I was quite active in developing and recommending changes in the Categories subject a few years ago when I had been a more active contributor in WeRelate, but the subject seemed to be taken over by a more persistent and domineering WR user who seemed not to want to compromise on the subject. So I moved my effort more quietly to work on the Uncategorized Categories page, Uncategorized Pages listing, and Wanted Categories list page, adding what I felt were logical and appropriate parent categories and reducing the number of Uncategorized Subjects, Categories and Pages quite substantially without interference from that other user. Then after she prematurely deleted a couple GEDCOM files I had been working on for awhile a couple years ago, I backed off WeRelate, and only recently returned to update some of my family files and special interest subjects that I created or maintain here on WeRelate. If you notice, all of those pages mentioned above have seemed to balloon in size over the past couple years with little maintenance being done on them.
- I'm not sure why the Categories subject was/is so contentious. To me it's a simple cross-reference tool, matching specific pages to other similar pages with similar subjects to make people aware of those possible related subjects. In an effort to develop and organize the Categories tool, I added to and modified the Category Index listing page quite substantially from 2010-2012. I had hoped the logical organization and graphic illustration of the outline would enhance the use and reliability of Categories in WeRelate. (I see you've already found that last page by your note on the associated Talk Page asking for more categories.) I encourage you to add to either page.
- You may want to review some of the discussion of Categories on the Categories Help page and the debate on its related Categories Help Talk page. There was also quite a bit of discussion on the Categories Project Talk Page, with a lot of input from, questions asked by, and responses to Dallan, consolidated from the lengthy Watercooler topic ("Shared research vs. Surname in place") from 2010 that expanded beyond that page and the discussion's initial subject.
- While I am still interested in the subject, I am not willing to devote the time in further developing it and facing the accompanying frustration in dealing with the contrarians here at WR who argue for the sake of arguing. I agree that some of the categories seen and used on WR pages are a poorly used, some a bit ridiculous, and others nonsensical, but I just can't invest the time or energy in correcting or modifying them without facing that frustration and community objection to toying with people's pages.
- Let me know your thoughts.
- --BobC 19:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you BobC ! All genealogy associations, forums or sites and all wikis have this big problem of "authority" and "domination". I know it sinces decades in my region (Picardy) and since years as contributor of Fr-Wikipedia. I don't repeat here in details the caricatural terrific drama with Rodovid. My other problem is my bad english. I don't agree with the too hard "deleting action" of some people. They interprete as living some persons who are clearly dead (with parents born abt 1880-1890 ... it's stupid !). For our "subject" categories, I will try to change the "vision" of the community. I think too many are the contributors who think genealogy as list of generations. Genealogy is not only "persons", but villages ... I know, they said to me "genealogy is not history and not sociology". I ask me how long these contributors are really working with registers and old documents ... For example, they give no information about the occupation ! it's very ridiculous ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL ---Markus3 16:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Marc. History adds context to our genealogical data and needs to be included. To me they are intertwined. Where possible, links to existing entries in other sources (Wiki's, etc.) may be appropriate, but where they do not exist or are inadequate, the history should be included on this Wiki. Rick ----RGMoffat 17:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, RGMoffat ! An "empty and dry" list of persons, organised by generations is not genealogy ! Finding if someone has an ancestor pirat or king is only the first degree of genealogy ! What is important is to try to discover and understand how all these dead persons lived, what professional and "political" relations they had. WeRelate is a tool with the possibility to "note" and rank all these informations. Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 17:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
- Great discussion. I too agree that genealogy is more than statistical recitation. I like the Wikipedia definition and methodology of genealogy: "Genealogy, also known as family history, is the study of families and the tracing of their lineages and history. Genealogists use oral interviews, historical records, genetic analysis, and other records to obtain information about a family and to demonstrate kinship and pedigrees of its members. The results are often displayed in charts or written as narratives." Note that its emphasis is primarily on the study of family history, with the resulting display of the information as secondary. Merriam-Webster also defines it as, "The study of family history, and the history of a particular family showing how the different members of the family are related to each other." In his article for the Journal Of Popular Culture in 2008, "In the Grand Scheme of Things: An Exploration of the Meaning of Genealogical Research," Ronald Bishop writes about a genealogist's motives, "The pursuit of family history and origins tends to be shaped by several motivations, including the desire to carve out a place for one's family in the larger historical picture, a sense of responsibility to preserve the past for future generations, and a sense of self-satisfaction in accurate storytelling." (Bolded portions are my emphasis.)
- Unfortunately, here at WeRelate, there are a few high-power users who seem obsessed with legalities of potential copyright issues of information used as sources and the recitation or use of sources referencing possible living people. For an example of the first, I look at Obituaries as excellent sources of information that should be referenced in full, not only because they are usually an on-the-spot recitation of family connections, but many times highlight important events in the individual's life that may be difficult to reference or prove elsewhere, and often contains information that helps bring the "life" to the individual's life story. My view of obituaries is that they are an uncopyrightable recitation of facts and information, and that obituaries do not reach the unique creation test of a copyright. (A biographical sketch is different.) The fact most newspapers copyright the entire newspaper does not in itself mean the obituary is subject to copyright law, and therefore should not be considered as legally copyrightable. On the subject of living people, I understand and support the WR policy of not adding living people to its database and to the genealogical record. But documents used as sources that make reference to a living person and provide insight to the family history should not be excluded because it might mention a living person's name (such as a property transfer record, death record, newspaper article, obituary, etc.).
- The Wiki format at WeRelate is an excellent way to expand on the typical genealogical data that is absent or limited in other standard on-line genealogical applications, and a good way add the narrative in a person's life story and his or her family history. That is why I am still drawn to it despite the frustrations I sometimes have here and the near-obsessive personalities I've sometimes crossed paths with in the past. And with the exception to the above, I also appreciate the high standards of applying and documenting sources. So it's still a mixed bag. When you say you will try to change the "vision" of the community, I ask you to prepare yourself for a wall of contrary debate and frustration. Good luck.
- --BobC 23:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Married surnames for women in USA [20 February 2015]
Hi Markus3. Recently you have moved the married surname from the married surname field to the married given name field, leaving the married surname field blank, on several of the pages I watch. Can you explain why you are doing this and how you decide which pages to do it to? It doesn't make sense to me, and it removes a data point from the page which affects searches. Regards, --Cos1776 13:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Markus3: I too came here to ask why you were moving the last name of women's married names from the surname field into the given name field. A page I was watching had this change, and I saw that you had done this kind of change for a bunch of women on 16 Feb. I don't see any point in doing this, and it will have serious consequences for the search mechanism. I think most English-speakers, at least, expect the married last name to be in the surname field, and will search for it in that position. That convention is the one that is used on major genealogy sites like FamilySearch. I don't think you should continue doing such changes unless and until some consensus to do so is reached (say, on the Watercooler page). Please let Cos1776 and I know your thoughts about this. --robert.shaw 04:53, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- Markus3, I suggest you end this silly Watercooler controversy about a married woman's given name (i.e. personal name) versus surname (i.e. family name), and just chalk it up to language or procedural misinterpretation. This seems to me to be an almost embarrassing argument you can't win and has no basis in commonly accepted genealogical recordkeeping. Please review the Person Page Tutorial for further rules for designating names here at WeRelate. Hopefully that will clarify the rules and format for data entry of names and end this fruitlessly trivial argument. I also invite you to review the definitions and historical use of "Given Names" and "Surnames" at Wikipedia. No response to me is necessary, because I don't want to share any further in this senseless discussion, and that is why I write this here on your Talk Page rather than add to the Watercooler Page. Take care. --BobC 15:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Capitals [18 April 2015]
I spell it "Bef" on purpose because I believe it is like at the beginning of a sentence. Please do not change it. It is unnecessary since you don't even watch the page, annoying because I get notified of a change that is meaningless, and pointless since I continue to put them in with the first letter capitalized. Since I wrote the Help page on date conventions, following the GEDCOM standard, I know there is no rule against it. Thank you. --Jrich 05:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- WeRelate and GEDCOM has no convention that says it needs to be lower case or that it needs to be sentence case. Personally, I think sentence case looks better, looks less sloppy. I like to call attention to the qualifier because so many people leave it off, and it can drastically change the meaning. Other reasons. But whatever my reason for liking it is, the point is that it is not wrong. So I, who am interested in that page, built the way I liked, and you, who aren't even interested enough in the page to watch, come along and change it without contributing any genealogy, simply because your preference is different. If wiki-etiquette is based on the golden rule, then you wouldn't mind if I visit your pages and change to sentence case the way I like them? I think it is clear that that reasoning quickly leads to an edit war. I think a better rule is, if it isn't wrong or misleading, don't change it. If you are adding genealogy to the page, then that is somewhat a different story because that is a good time to do any needed cleanup, but if you aren't interested in a person enough to add a source and new information, or explain and correct mistaken information, why not, out of respect for previous contributors, just leave it alone? There are plenty of pages that break the rules and need attention, where the date is entered in all numbers, where the month is spelled out, and of course, the cases we should be focusing on, where the date is incorrect. Every change notifies the watchers, and if they are diligent about watching as I am, they go review every one. It is much more in the spirit of collaboration to make sure there is something worthwhile to review. Thank you. --Jrich 14:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Help fund new features!