User talk:Scot

Topics


Welcome [18 December 2008]

Welcome to WeRelate, your virtual genealogical community. We're glad you have joined us. At WeRelate you can easily create ancestor web pages, connect with cousins and other genealogists, and find new information. To get started:

  1. Take the WeRelate tour to see what you can do.
  2. Watch the "Getting Started" tutorial video to learn how to make ancestor web pages.
  3. Explore the Step by step Tutorials, if needed.

If you need any help, I will be glad to answer your questions. Just click on my signature link below and then click on the “Leave a message” link under my name in the upper left corner of my profile page. Thanks for participating and see you around! --Ronni 08:33, 14 November 2007 (EST)


violaguess Dec 18 2008 My parentage is Darden, Pennington, Lewis and Street.--Violaguess 13:37, 18 December 2008 (EST)


Whitlock33.ged Imported Successfully [12 December 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 18:59, 13 November 2007 (EST)

I know some Virginia Whitlocks. Do you have any names?--LollyJo 17:11, 12 December 2007 (EST)


Austin1.ged Imported Successfully [15 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 20:31, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Austin1.ged Imported Successfully [16 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 13:47, 16 November 2007 (EST)

stoddard.ged Imported Successfully [16 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 14:50, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Error importing Test.ged [20 November 2007]

We had an error while attempting to import your GEDCOM. This is most likely our fault. We will review the error and should have your pages ready tomorrow (or Monday if tomorrow falls on a weekend). There is no need to re-import your GEDCOM file.

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

--WeRelate agent 14:58, 18 November 2007 (EST)
I took a look at this GEDCOM, and it appears to be corrupted. Would you try re-exporting this GEDCOM from PAF and then try again at WeRelate? Thanks! And let me know if you have any trouble with it or if I can help clear anything up. -Nathan 10:19, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Let me explain what I am trying to do. I was experimenting with editing a GEDCOM and, yes the first attempt was corrupted. I had done a find and replace in microsoft word which included new paragraph characters. The GEDCOM did not accept them and returned a missing delimiter error when I tried to load it back into PAF even though they looked ok. If you have experience editing GEDCOMS in a text editor, preferably MSWord, especially with macros, let me know and we can continue this discussion. Otherwise I'll have to look for help some where else. Thanks --Scot 10:52, 19 November 2007 (EST)

What kind of edit on your GEDCOM are you trying to do? -Nathan 11:04, 19 November 2007 (EST)

In order to satisfy my association, they want a link back to our site for data contributed to WR to show for every individual. Adding a source to the root individual for each GEDCOM displays A link in the source text. I want to write a macro to add the source reference to every individual in the GEDCOM. In my test GEDCOM this is: "1 SOUR @S87@". If an individual entry has a source reference, the tag is inserted directly preceding the change tag "1 CHAN" If I create a macro to run a loop to find "1 CHAN" and paste "1 SOUR @S87@" including the carriage return directly above 1 Chan it will repeat until it reaches the end of the document where it stops and I can stop it.

When I go thru this process and then import back into Paf I get some weird error messages, but it loads fine. I was trying to upload the test GEDCOM to WR to see if there were any problems and then remove it immediately. As you stated my first attemp was corrupted, the second might have worked but WR didn't accept it because of the duplication. I will try again with individuals I have not yet uploaded. If it works, the only thing I have left to do is to create the macro. A daunting task for my limited experience.--Scot 11:39, 19 November 2007 (EST)

Nathan, I don't have the files yet that I want to add the links to. I juast wanted to test the process. When I get them, I'll let you know. Thanks for your help.--Scot 20:54, 19 November 2007 (EST)

test.ged appears to overlap a previously-imported GEDCOM [18 November 2007]

The pages from this GEDCOM have not yet been generated because they appear to match pages from a GEDCOM you have previously imported to WeRelate.

If you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in this GEDCOM and you want to replace that tree with this GEDCOM, you need to delete that tree first so duplicates aren't created when you import this GEDCOM. Go to the Family Tree page, scroll down to the bottom of the page, and click on the "delete" link next to that tree. Please be aware that any pages in that tree that are being watched by others won't get deleted. Once that tree is deleted you can create a new tree and re-upload this GEDCOM into it. (We're planning to make re-uploading GEDCOM files much simpler later this Fall.)

If you don't think you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in this GEDCOM, or if the two GEDCOM's don't overlap that much, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org and we'll go ahead with the import.

--WeRelate agent 18:26, 18 November 2007 (EST)

marietta.ged Imported Successfully [20 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 12:45, 20 November 2007 (EST)

test.ged Imported Successfully [20 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 14:42, 20 November 2007 (EST)

gray.ged Imported Successfully [24 November 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 14:11, 24 November 2007 (EST)

gomes1.ged Imported Successfully [7 December 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 15:18, 7 December 2007 (EST)

gomes2.ged Imported Successfully [7 December 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 15:49, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Pereira.ged Imported Successfully [7 December 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 16:17, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Jeremiah Norcross [12 December 2007]

I see you are watching the Jeremiah Norcross page. I am a Norcross, but I descend from Jeremiah's brother John. I recently took a trip to Ribchester, Lancashire, England (motherland of ALL Norcross's). Are you connected?--LollyJo 17:09, 12 December 2007 (EST)


Madeira.ged Imported Successfully [15 December 2007]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 20:43, 15 December 2007 (EST)

Responding to your Quigley message [7 February 2008]

You're getting messages because I'm merging pages you created into the existing records for the Francis Cooke family. There should only be one page for each person, and right now there are several for the Cookes. You'll probably get more tonight if I get back to it. Speaking of which, you might want to look at your Francis Cooke page compared to Francis Cooke (2) and see if there's anything else you want to add to (2), then delete yours as the duplicate.

As for the Quigleys, my Quigley connection also comes from the unfortunately named John Quigley, who lived in Grant and Crawford counties, WIsconsin in the 1860s and 1870s. He was born in 1841 in Ohio, so it sounds like he's a half-generation off from your Eliza. Thanks for the info, though. --Amelia.Gerlicher 22:11, 6 February 2008 (EST)


Merging pages [29 March 2008]

Hi Scot,

In general, I agree with you on the quality of sources from trees, etc. My most objectionable is WFT # so and so; which tells me absolutely nothing about the source of the information.

The users of WeRelate need to construct a plan for handling differing opinions on merging a page.--Beth 18:21, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

I do believe they are working on that. Offer your opinions as they are looking for input. WFT remains my biggest aggravation. 10 or 15 years ago thy invited users to submit their data which they promptly copyrighted and offerred for sale without verifying anything. My wife bought FTM (which I refuse to use) and received 6 cdroms with it. Some data, or different versions of some data appeared on all 6 discs. A total rip off, both of the submitters and of the purchasers.--Scot 12:47, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

Some flawed merges... [30 March 2008]

I've been working through a lot of merging and I'm sure I made a few mistakes. Thanks for paying attention!--Jrm03063 20:12, 29 March 2008 (EDT)


Thanks again... [30 March 2008]

I've been running about doing a lot of merging since Dallan put in some helpful features for that.

I've restored the Richard Church of Plymouth as a separate person, along with your citation from Savage. I've also added your remark as a comment on that page and on Richard Church of Hadley's page. I would appreciate it if you would give the two pages a quick proof.

Thanks!--Jrm03063 22:26, 29 March 2008 (EDT)

All of the source references from Laura Nelson need to be moved from Richard of Hadley to Richard of Plymouth. I am not sure how to do this.

Ralph Gorham and Margaret Stephenson [3 April 2008]

Which child of Ralph's are you related? I'm related to him through his son John who married Desire Howland.--LeeMartin 06:37, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

I too descend from John and Desire through their daughter Elizabeth who married Joseph Hallett.--Scot 11:56, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Probably None! :) I've just made a hobby over the last few weeks of merging pilgrims/puritans out there in the werelate person page universe.--Jrm03063 07:54, 3 April 2008 (EDT)


Mayflower [4 April 2008]

I'm not sure if you're aware but the General Society of Mayflower Descendants published and continue to publish the 5 generations project of the Mayflower passengers. I have 3 vols of John Howland and another is forthcoming for the rest of his children.--LeeMartin 23:42, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Our library here in Santa Clara, CA has the full collection. I descend from John Howland's 5th generation descendant, Gideon Cobb, who married Abigail Dyer. Abigail is a 5th generation descendant of William Bradford. I also have descents from William Brewster, Francis Cooke and William White. There are two additional descents I have seen from Isaac Allerton and from Mary Chilton, that once were accepted by the Mayflower society, but are no longer. Both because alleged daughters are not mentioned in the purported father's will.--Scot 12:22, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
On my Dad's side of the family I'm descended from the John Alden through Moses Tichenel's brother David who married Anna Byram the daughter of Ebenezer Byram and Elizabeth(?) Alden (I can't remember her name offhand). On my mother's side I'm related to John Howland and Edward Doty. Through various marriages, I'm related to most of the Separatists who came on the Mayflower.--LeeMartin

Austins [4 April 2008]

Yes, thank you, I have heard of the site. My Great Grandmother's maiden name was Austin. I have a cousin in Cincinnati who did quite a bit of research on the Austins.--LeeMartin 19:03, 4 April 2008 (EDT)


Dubious ancestry... [6 April 2008]

I know what you mean. Perhaps instead of a full lock-down, one approach might be to omit anything older than 1550 or so when it arrives in a GEDCOM. If folks want to go to the trouble of putting things in by hand, it's probably on the basis of some source worthy of note and discussion - even if that discussion winds up discounting the source.--Jrm03063 13:51, 6 April 2008 (EDT)


Norman Merge... [8 April 2008]

I saw the discussion fly by - it's a mess to be sure. If I didn't have a well developed appreciation for ignorance, I would call this vandalism. Do you suppose there is such a thing as negligent vandalism? Anyway, as irritating as what I've found is, I'm more concerned about it happenning in the future. I would prefer that inbound GEDCOMs are filtered for anything before 1600, unless by special arrangement, because It's pretty easy to build up a GEDCOM full of this sort of trash on "ancestry.com". In this case, I think we're looking at a very unsophisticated user who found several different routes leading to the norman ancestry. Rather than recognizing that he already had some of these folks in his database and connecting them properly, he went on to add that entire body of lineage (both real and fiction) redundantly.

As for the current state of this data, unless there's a lot more than I've seen, I would suggest leaving it alone for now. My merge strategy is actually fairly mindless. I simply try to merge obvious duplication. Whether that data is accurate or inaccurate is not something I worry about initially. I'm trying to push things in the direction of some theoretically unique set of relationships. Then, rather than just purging the stuff that's wrong, we find the places where reasonable ancestry goes off the rails. We drop the parent and/or spouse relationships where appropriate, and add a note to each of the formerly connected pages citing the other as not a correct spouse, parent, child, etc. Let's take this opportunity to debunk screwey stuff - otherwise, I think we just wind up fighting this battle again in the future.

I mean, we've got lemons here, you know?--Jrm03063 16:04, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

I believe that Dallan is in agreement as to filtering submissions for historic and medieval persons/families but points out someone or several someones need to provide that function. I am certainly not qualified to do so. But, I have been lurking around the SGM newsgroup since it was first formed in 95 or 96 and have read many discussions conducted by some very knowledgible people such as Don Stone, Todd Farmerie, Nathaniel Taylor, William Addams Reitweisner, Paul Reed, Leslie Mahler, Chico Doria and even from time to time Christian Settapani and many others. Many of them are noted genealogists, authors, researchers and journal contributors many of them carry FASG letters, fellows in the American Society of Genealogists. Here are some comments by Paul Reed who was a member ot the committee formed to to do just this for the ancestral file.[1]Lemonade?--Scot 18:14, 8 April 2008 (EDT)

Merging tips... [16 April 2008]

Merging is easier than it was even a couple of months ago, so have heart.

To begin with, I merge on families - you've probably already noticed it's the easiest way to see matches. In the many hundreds of merges I've done so far, I think I've found two situations where a fully qualified family name (given and surname for both spouses - no "unknown") was a duplicate. One of those is actually probably an error in a GEDCOM. The other was a case of two common names in two nearby families happening to coincide about 100 years later.

I always merge higher numbers down to "1" (even if it means recreating the "1" family because the initial family occupying the spot was deleted). If there's a lot of stuff in the two pages, I'll open them both in edit mode in separate windows. Then, it's an exercise in mouse copy-paste operations to get the contents of "2" (or higher ordered families) down to "1". When all the non-family link content (text, sources, notes, date events, etc) has been copied to "1", you can put #redirect [[Family:John Smith and Jane Doe (1)]] in as the only piece of text in the body of the page. Formerly, the linked children and spouses would have to be relinked to the new page by hand, but no longer. Now, when a family redirect page is checked in, any attached spouses or children are detached from the old page and attached to the redirect page. I do this for all instances of a duplicated family creating a family page that is a superset of all the content on the previously separate pages.

So now, you have a "super" family. If there's a non-trivial amount of content there, it may take a while to work through all the stuff, so I then note the name of the family on a "to do" user page (finding your way back can be a hassle if you have to break). I then begin merging people rooted at that page. I usually start with the spouses but it really doesn't matter. Unlike family pages, where I put a high value on the "1" spot, I may use any family page if one is plainly superior to the other copies for the person. If they're essentially equal, I again favor "1" over any higher numbered page as the destination for all content for the person in question. As with families, I will open each page in edit mode in a separate window. I then duplicate content from the page to be redirected into the page that will become the single result after the merge. Also like with family pages, spouse and parent links are left alone. When the page to be redirected is checked in, the families that the person belonged to as a spouse or child are replaced by pointers to the redirection target.

One more thing about the inter-page links. When a page is redirected, if there are duplications (say two people who were already in the same family but are really one person), the redirection only preserves the unique set of links. So duplication at all levels just fades as people and family pages are merged.--Jrm03063 22:01, 15 April 2008 (EDT)


Jonathan Deming and Elizabeth Gilbert, etc [16 April 2008]

I'm afraid in my rush to merge things, I may have made a mess of some of that stuff. Presumably not too much worse than what was there before, but as it collects together it starts to become clear that some things are wrong and/or out of place. That's one of the other things about merging - you discover inconsistencies between trees that prove that at least one of the trees is in error. Feel free to dive in if you think you know what needs to be done. I'll try to continue working to tidy things up as my time permits.--Jrm03063 11:10, 16 April 2008 (EDT)


Person:Caleb Nichols (1) parents? [16 April 2008]

What do you think the story is on the parents of Person:Caleb Nichols (1)?

-jrm--Jrm03063 12:03, 16 April 2008 (EDT)

This has been the topic of much discussion and the conclusion is that his father, Sgt. Francis was not the brother of Gov. Richard nor the son of Francis and Margaret Bruce. see SGM[[2]]

and [[3]]--Scot 12:25, 16 April 2008 (EDT)


Merging technique [25 April 2008]

I don't use the werelate search stuff at all. I find locations to match/merge based solely on finding duplicated family names. Provided that a family name isn't "Family:John Smith and Unknown", the presence of a sequence number greater than one almost assures that you are looking at overlapping trees. The first place I looked for these was in my tree. I opened the list of pages and went to the families. I then did a browser search of the page for "2", "3", etc. When I find that sort of thing, I then go to the page in question. Then, I just tweak the sequence number digit directly in the URL field of the browser, to see "1", "2", or whatever, of that family name. Some quick forward and backward operations on the browser will let you flash back and forth between the pages, and decide if you're looking at duplication.

Having found two or more family pages that represent the same family, I start the match merge right there. I always move the larger numbered family page down to the lower numbered page, even if there's heavy copying involved. It's rarely an issue and I always know which direction I'm going. Anyway, I copy over the family page citations, marriage date(s), and any body text (there usually is very little - typically only a marriage date). Then, I redirect the higher numbered page down to the lower numbered page, preferrably page "1". Dallan's recent changes kick in at this point, and automatically reparent the children of the redirected family to the new family. The parents are likewise dropped in as spouses or additional spouses as appropriate. So you now have a family page that represents the union of the parent and child linkages of the previous duplicated pages for that family. If the family page you're merging has a lot of children, or you there seems to be a long tree associated with each fragment being merged, it's a good idea to create a user page that points at the place where you're merging, so you can remember where you were merging when you are inevitably interrupted. It's also typical, when merging large tree fragments, that you have to stop merging at some point up or down the tree, at least on a temporary basis, so that you can get the area around the original target page merged. Those places are also the sort of thing you'll want to add to your user page of stuff to get back to.

Anyway, having merged one or more family pages, you'll next move to merging duplicated children and/or spouses. When merging the people, I still prefer to merge from the higher number down to a lower number, other things being equal. On the other hand, there's sometimes a large disparity of information so it makes sense to merge to the higher number. In the same manner as family pages, you first copy citation and source content of the page to be redirected, to the target page. It may be convenient to open a browser window on each page. Also in the same manner as family pages, you no longer need to worry about the various parent and spousal family linkages on the page to be redirected. When you redirect, they will be automatically copied to the destination of the redirect, giving you a union of the unique set of spousal and parent relationships for the person in question.

So the pattern is to merge a family, merge the duplicate children and spouses, and then work outwards layer by layer. You'll find that this approach also yields a very important side benefit - in matching up duplicated trees, you'll find differently spelled names that are obviously the same person. Since you're working within the duplicated context of two or more trees, you won't have to wonder that a Smithe, Smith, Smythe, Smit,.... is the same person - since you're looking at otherwise duplicated tree contexts.

It is possible to get quite fast at this as you get used to the process.--Jrm03063 16:15, 25 April 2008 (EDT)


Merging info [26 April 2008]

I was initially very cautious during merging, not wanting to step on toes and such. A few thousand or so later, I've become a bit more ruthless. In principal, you want to preserve anything you find from the original pages, even if some of it seems impossible. I tend to put the most probably birth and death information into the primary fields, and the less probable variants in as alternates. If something seems like a transcription error, say putting an 18<nn> where the correct value was 17<nn>, I'll just make the fix and drop the bogus data. Using notes can be a real help - add a note about stuff that jumps out at you as odd or impossible. If the original people involved with the page are paying attention, they'll see the modification notice and get back there with additional information. If not, well, we can do what we want. An awful lot of the data is of the abandoned GEDCOM variety, so any reasonable intelligence applied to it has to be an improvement.

I also generally try to take the opportunity, when editing a page, of getting the place names standardized, moving attribute information that landed in place fields over to description fields, cutting away duplicate citations (a common ancestry.com GEDCOM artifact - double, triple and even quadruple copies of the same source info) in favor of a single one. If I see a "MySource" for which I immediately know the appropriate "Source", I'll tend to change that too (any version of MySource:Savage gets that treatment from me). I don't preserve useless sources - stuff like what gedcom this came from, AWT, and sources that are just a credit for someone who once touched that piece of data. Only actually published works or still extant web sites and so forth.

At the end of the day though, don't worry too much about your merging decisions. If someone is really irritated and thinks you got something wrong, they'll have to get back to the site, make the appropriate changes, and probably back it up with source material - which is pretty much all we want anyway. Also, even with redirections, you can look at what is redirected to what, and check the history of the various originating pages and the target merge page. While it can take a few clicks to find stuff, nothing is really ever lost (even though a good bit of it probably could).

Oh, one more thing, from time to time you'll find some sort of "classic error". Say, a fabricated marriage to an early puritan or such - something that current research discredits. In those cases, I'll make whatever changes are appropriate to indicate the current research, but I'll add in a note or even the body of the page that a particular relationship is often attributed but has been subsequently debunked. If the discredited information is a marriage, I'll redirect all the family page copies down to a single copy, and leave it without any parental or child links on the fields for those links, but I'll put something in a note or body indicating the people normally cited as part of that relationship and whatever information there is on why it's not true.--Jrm03063 17:05, 26 April 2008 (EDT)


Pake/Parke, you say tomato..... [2 May 2008]

I don't admit to any knowledge not present on the pages, and even then I reserve the right to disbelieve stuff! By all means, if you have sources that support one name or the other, add them and make use of the rename option!--Jrm03063 14:21, 2 May 2008 (EDT)


Children of James Ward Reid and Mary Estella Wait [4 May 2008]

Scot:

I am just learning how to use this site. Does this page mean that you do not have any children for this couple? In the booklet I have there are six children born betwen 1882 and 1892.

Marilyn--Marilyn Adair 16:24, 4 May 2008 (EDT)


medeiros.ged Imported Successfully [24 May 2008]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 17:25, 24 May 2008 (EDT)

madsen [13 June 2008]

I've been in touch with Dallan on this user. I think a lot of this is pretty dubious too, but I've done a lot of work with it already, and I would venture that most of it came from an online or purchased database of some sort. That being the case, I was thinking that I should leave it in and try to get the errors documented unless it's just absolute junk.--Jrm03063 14:20, 13 June 2008 (EDT) I haven't seen anything from this user that is of value, in fact it seems made up. My opinion is that it is exactly that, absolute junk. I don't see the point in this site being a repository of garbage. Even including AFN's seems counter productive if it encourages uploading of data found in the AF. Why duplicate questionable data? If you spend hours merging verifying and checking and then some one uploads a lot of overlapping junk, your work has been in vain.--Scot 14:30, 13 June 2008 (EDT)


Oldham citation [28 June 2008]

Good idea adding wikipedia as a source, but I generally avoid all-up duplication because it's only a click away and I would rather send a person to the latest version of something like that anyway. We're already drowning in data we don't have time to maintain... or at least, that's what I think....--Jrm03063 14:23, 28 June 2008 (EDT)


Merge? [14 August 2008]

Dear Scot,

I am currently looking through Portugal's places for duplicates. I found these places that are named like they should be merged, but their contents seem otherwise. What do you think?

With these two, I was wondering if we should merge their contained places as well.


--Taylor 10:47, 14 August 2008 (EDT)


In both cases these are not really duplicates, the Azores were divided into 3 districts under Salazar, but there are 9 populated islands. Since the Azores were granted Autonomy, the three districts no longer exist and the first subdivision is by island. There are several places named Ponta Delgada, The National district included all of Sao Miguel as well as Santa Maria, while the Concelho contains only a portion of Sao Miguel, including the city of Ponta Delgada. Likewise the National District of Angra do Heroismo contained all of the island of Terceira plus the islands of Sao Jorge and Graciosa, the concelho of Angra do Heroismo contains only a portion of Terceira. The third District, Horta contained Faial, Pico, Corvo and Flores, but now the concelho contains only Faial. If there are places listed under the National districts that don't appear in the concelho of the same name, they are probably in another concelho or even on a different Island. The short answer is yes, the contained places should be merged, but finding the places they should be merged with could be tricky.--Scot 11:32, 14 August 2008 (EDT)


It sounds like the National Districts and the Concelhos shouldn't be merged, just places taken out of the National districts and moved into the right concelho. I think I'll leave this up to someone else. --Taylor 12:06, 14 August 2008 (EDT)


Done [14 August 2008]

Dear Scot, Hey it's me again. I'm done with Portugal. Tell me if you need anything else checked out.

--Taylor 13:41, 14 August 2008 (EDT)


Portugal website [21 August 2008]

Hello Scott,

Could you take a look at a web site for me I am volunteering for the Werelate Research Assistant?

I have come across a website that is about Portugal. Unfortunately it is not in English. It is referred to as "Portugal Historical GIS" on the "ECAI Project List". I think it might be handy for Portuguese genealogy, or not.

http://www2.fcsh.unl.pt/atlas/

Have you heard of it?

Thanks, Debbie Freeman --DFree 18:28, 21 August 2008 (EDT)


Probable duplicate page [18 October 2008]

Hi Scot,

I found a page of yours in the new Probable Duplicate Families Report. Thought you would prefer to merge your own pages. Here is the link . [4] Yours is the first one on the C list. --Beth 07:53, 18 October 2008 (EDT)


Andrew Keffer married to Marietta [13 November 2008]

Mr. Austin,

As an ardent Keffer researcher, and the Historian of the Kieffer Family Association, I was quite surprised to see your entry on Andrew Keffer and Jenny Marietta. Although I have been researching this surname for many years, I have not previously heard this name.

I am hoping you can tell me a little about this couple, especially the source of the information.

There was a Joel Marietta Keffer born 1821 in Somerset Co, PA. I was wondering if they might be related.

I am not related to Joel, but my family does hale from Virginia. They seem to have moved to Shenandoah County around 1770 from Berks Co, PA.

Jim Keffer, Fullerton, CA--JiimyK 17:01, 13 November 2008 (EST)


Note on Edmund Freeman [24 November 2008]

What was wrong with the note on Family:Edmund Freeman and Margaret Perry (1): "Margaret Perry was probably a widow, and it is presumed mother of the Edward Perry mentioned in Edmund Freeman's will"? In Source:Ferris, Mary Felton. Dawes - Gates Ancestral Lines, p. 350, it says: "She may have been a widow Perry and may have had a son Edward, for Edmond in his will called Edward Perry his son. It has sometimes been assumed that this man was called son because of his having married a Mary (Freeman?), surmised daughter of Edmond, but careful study reveals no evidence of the existence of such a daughter and leaves the stepson theory the more tenable." So, this note was important to indicate that there is a real possibility that this person's birth name is not Margaret Perry. To show this note wrong (which is implied by deleting it) you should provide some evidence to show she was not a widow, possibly by identifying her parents to show her birth name was indeed Perry. --Jrich 18:16, 23 November 2008 (EST)


Margaret Perry was not a widow she was b abt 1624 and married Edmund Freeman,Jr. Edmund Freeman, Sr. called Edward Perry his son because he was married to his daughter, Mary Freeman. Son was common usage at the time meaning son-in-law. Ezra, Margaret, Edward, Hannah and Deborah Perry were siblings but their parentage is a matter of controversy. It is commonly believed they are the children of an alleged Edmund Perry and his widow Sarah who died in Sandwich in 1659, but this is highly unikely. Edmund Freeman's 2nd wife was Elizabeth Rayment or Gourmley or possibly Perry, a widow. Edward Perry and Mary Freemen were the ancestors of Commodores Oliver Hazard, and Matthew Calbraith Perry. I expect there will be much discussion in the near future about these families on these pages as they have been the subject of much controversy for years. Send me an e-mail to scotaustin at comcast.net and I will forward recent discussions between me and Bill Wright. We first talked of this family several years ago--Scot 19:15, 23 November 2008 (EST)


This is obviously an issue where there is still some disagreement. I tend to favor the widow scenario.

I notice you did not bother to provide any sources. I have read several sources supporting your argument but none based on primary evidence. All are speculative and based on assumption. I think the argument that Edmund Freeman had a daughter Mary is circular, based on the assumption that Edward Perry was a son-in-law by Edward's marriage, instead of by Edmund's marriage. Why did he not mention a daughter Mary in his will? Edward Perry's wife Mary was alive at the time. The speculation about the Perry's of Sandwich being related is based on coincidence of name and location, and while it may be true, there are reasons to withhold acceptance pending real evidence of the fact, to wit, only Ezra is mentioned in Sarah Perry's will, and wording of the town records seem to indicate he was not an ideal choice as executor, suggesting he wasn't immediate family, hinting at multiple Perry families being present. Some Perrys were Quakers while others were not. Your telling me Margaret Perry was not a widow and b. about 1624 does not give me any basis for this fact, other than it is what you think.

You are entitled to your position, but it is not right to suppress an opposing view simply because you say so. If you had added a note to say that many people don't believe Margaret Perry was a widow, or if you had cited a source, I would not be so bothered. But you just erased my note. In my own survey of sources, even those that support your argument, I see no piece of primary evidence, such as a will, or vital record, or deed that establishes that Edmund Freeman had a daughter named Mary, that Margaret Perry was related to Ezra Perry, or that Margaret Perry was or was not a widow. Unless you can provide one, I think I am justified putting my note back. I will change to wording to indicate it is only one theory, rather than saying probably. --Jrich 20:55, 23 November 2008 (EST)

I have been confusing my Edmund Freemans and see that it had nothing to do with Margaret Perry. Further, I encountered the source Source:The ancestry of Lorenzo Ackley his wife Emma Arabella Bosworth, p. 26-7, which does make a good argument based on a primary source that Edward Perry was not the son of Elizabeth Perry. While none of this proves whether Margaret Perry was a widow or not, it removes the things that were leading me to conclude she was. --Jrich 23:17, 23 November 2008 (EST)


Fair enough. In the parlance of the day a stepson would have been called son-in-law. I don't know what many people think, but this is the first time I have ever heard that Margaret was a widow and married Edmund,Sr. the ships log is quite clear that his 2nd wife was Elizabeth. Whether it was Perry, Rayment or Gourney is unclear, but it was not Margaret. There is some speculation that his cousin Thomas accompanied them on the ship, died of small pox during the voyage and left two daughters Mary and Margaret, whom Edward and Elizabeth took into their household. Send me your e-mail address and I can provide you with more.

I had written much more that was lost due to an editing conflict, I will try to reconstruct it, but stay tuned.--Scot 12:16, 24 November 2008 (EST)


Common ancestors? [9 December 2008]

Hi Scot,

I see that you have changed a number of pages (BOOTH and HAWLEY) at WeRelate. It is a site that I no longer use. At this time, I do all of my work on-line at Geni.com (which I highly recommend).

Nonetheless, I am always interested in cousins - are you part of this old BOOTH/HAWLEY line?--Slknowles 21:00, 9 December 2008 (EST)


Calkins [12 December 2008]

Hi Scot,

Curious as to your activity with Elen Payne and Rowland Calkin. What is your connection to the Calkins?

As an aside.  I realize HP is a large Corporation but by any chance have you ever ran across Rick Jones.  He is as I understand it a Network Specialist.  Whenever the HP crew at AOL back east have a problem Rick has to go back and solve it for them.

I am also into Genetic Genealogy. Am R1b1. If you wish can contact me at: al.calkins@gmail.com--Calkins1931 17:49, 12 December 2008 (EST)


Too much Savage? [14 December 2008]

I noticed you inserted verbatim several sections of Savage into several pages. While I think the primary sources (wills, VRs, etc.) backed up one or two respected genealogists giving the big picture is a good amount of documentation, I am not sure Savage is a good choice.

  • Savage used such a crabbed style, it is difficult to read
  • The sections describe whole families, or when a father's entry is put on a child's page, most of the verbiage is irrelevant.
  • I think all of Savage is on line. It might be easier for readers if you wrote an abstract and included a link to the online version.

I think the section you put on Person:Hannah Kettell (1) belongs to Person:John Kettell (5).

--Jrich 21:18, 13 December 2008 (EST)


We've corresponded before [15 March 2009]

Hey Scot, we've corresponded before. This is Christine Austin (Dr. Austin now :)) In fact, I gave you the information you have posted for Harmon D. Austin by his g-grandson George and gg-granddaughter Patricia Horrigan. I am related through marriage to Lafayette Carver, Perry's brother.

I'm thrilled to see the gen-wiki start up. This is a great way to collaborate.--Chris 21:45, 14 March 2009 (EDT)


Merging [15 March 2009]

Thanks Scot for the note, I'll take it under advisement. I usually choose the lower number as the target merge, guess I missed it this time.

Thanks:)--Delijim 19:26, 15 March 2009 (EDT)


Ralph Chapman and Lydia Willis [8 July 2009]

Scott, I think forgot to save the page when I left the following message for you.

Thank you for all your helpful feedback. Regretfully I'm finding the WeRelate process a bit too problematic as the following message to Scot will illustrate. Good luck to everybody at WeRelate. It is a very good concept and a good way to collaborate. The merging/matching process may need some tweaking.

Lou Lehmann


Scott,

I've reviewed all of your messages. I think some serious problems are arising from merging. None of the problems you mentioned correspond to the material in the tree which I originally uploaded. Unless there is some system problem, I'm guessing that I didn't scrutinize material enough to notice the errors in other trees - although I must wonder why those errors in the other trees weren't caught during the import process. For the record, I did not use and did not upload any of the following three sources noted in this dialogue: ...."From: Ancestors of Douglas Christian LUSTY http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~lustypetersen/d5705.htm ", "From: Family Trees - Throop. monica@odi.ca <monica@odi.ca> ", "S1. New York Genealogical & Biographical Society, "The Record", 36/123, Jan 1905 1 ". Nor did I submit any birthdate at all for Lydia Wills. Of course a 1618 birthdate is absurd but it did not originate with me. Nor did I use any Ancestral Files or World Family Trees as sources. I am puzzled by your allegation that I did not use The "Chapman Genealogy" as a source for the family of Ralph Chapman and Lydia Wills. Here is a copy of my notes about Ralph Chapman. Please note that the last two items are referenced to The Chapman Genealogy, which is also listed in my sources along with "Thirty-one English Emigrants Who Came to New England by 1662" and "Genealogical notes of Barnstable Families"

"Ralph Chapman became a ship carpenter and moved to Southwark, Surrey, across the river from London. On the 13th of April 1635 he sailed on the 'Elizabeth de Lo' (Elizabeth of London) for Massachusetts. His age on the list of passengers was 20 years, which is not quite right according to the date of baptism in the church register. All those sailing from Southwark 'brought cert: from the Minister of St. Saviors Southwark of their conformitie' Ralph settled first in Duxbury and continued his trade as a ship carpenter there. He bought land the 8th of October 1639 and again in 1645. He married in Marshield the 23rd of November 1642 Lydia Wells/Willis who was in all probability the daughter of Isaac and Margaret Wells of Marshfield. She is almost surely the Lydia Wells who came to New England in 1634, apparently as a servant to William Hatch. Her period of servitude would, most likely, have ended in 1641. Isaac and Margaret Wells later moved to Barnstable, Ralph and Lydia Chapman remained in Marshfield.......Ralph Chapman made his willl the 28th of November 1671 and as he did not mention his wife, we can assume that Lydia Chapman died before that date. The will was 'exhibted to the court held att Plymouth 4 June 1672.. .He had a long terminal illness and was unable to sign his will because 'of weakness of body and lamness and swelling of his hands..' " From: "Thirty-one English Emigrants Who Came to New England by 1662" by Dorothy C. and Gerald E. Knoff Gateway Press 1989 pages 52-56

Ralph Champan appeared before the General Court at New Plymouth (4 March 1651) for striking Herman Haddon.. (The Chapman Genealogy by John Harvey Chapman - p. 9)

Ralph Chapman's will was not signed - causing the Court to question his capacities. Witnesses testified that his body and and hands were too swollen to hold a pen or antything else. (The Chapman Genealogy by John Harvey Chapman - p. 12-13)

   I really do appreciate all of the reviews by you folks at WeRelate and I do think that the Wiki concept is a very good one.   I guess I didn't realize how very accountable I would be for someone else's mistakes if I missed them during the review and matching process.  (I still wonder how those trees got imported with the errors which were were attributed to me, apparently as a result of the merging). I think all this is getting to be a bit too much for me so I will just take my tree off of WeRelate.   But I do want to express my thanks for all the very helpful feedback I received during this process.   I certainly don't regret it as the whole experience has helped me to clean up my notes and sources.  Please share my appreciation to everybody who was so helpful and patient during my time with WeRelate.  (I'll send a copy of this to a few of them)

Lou Lehmann--Loulehmann 18:18, 8 July 2009 (EDT)


My aplologies [13 July 2009]

Scot, My sincere apologies. In reviewing my notes more carefully I do see that I did carelessly use the Ralph Chapman segment form "Ancestors of Douglas Christian Lusty" in my notes for Mary Chapman which I failed to review when I responded to you. I honestly thought I hadn't used it as I looked only at my materials for Ralph Chapman and Lydia Willis and didn't find it there. I should have looked further b before responding. Although I did not enter that erroneous information as a birth date for Lydia, I should have noticed it in the Mary Chapman notes. and I never should have included that segment in my notes. I am now taking it out of my notes. Thank you for spotting it and I once again apologize for all the fuss I caused.

Lou Lehmann--Loulehmann 12:51, 10 July 2009 (EDT)


Lou,
"All the fuss" you "started" was actually an excellent wake-up call for at least some of us. Your experience here, and our response to it, has been a much needed eye-opener to what we as a community (and WeRelate as a research-sharing tool) need to pay attention to and model and support in order to continue to attract *and retain* valuable contributors such as yourself. So THANK YOU for "all the fuss" you "started". jillaine 08:39, 13 July 2009 (EDT)

LDS/RIN/AFN numbers [27 July 2009]

Agree 100% with your observations on these types of numbers that get loaded in to some ancestor's pages. It amuses me when I see an "LDS baptism date" (usually in the 1950's or 1960's) in the "baptism" field, of an ancestor from the 1700's..... LOL. There is so much inaccurate information on Familysearch.org, I hesitate even bothering to use it as a source in most instances. Bests regards, Jim:)--Delijim 17:02, 27 July 2009 (EDT)


Sources needed [1 August 2009]

It seems slightly ironic that you plaster a Questionable Information banner onto Elizabeth Cole (well, onto Thomas Pierce and Elizabeth Cole, but I moved it since it was questioning her birthdate, not anything about their marriage), and yet you feel comfortable renaming Family:Ryse Cole and Arrold Phipps (1) without providing any justifying source and leaving all the existing sources that mention Arrold Phipps, and never mention Dunnington. I am not familiar with this family, so don't doubt your change except the lack of source, but find this combination of actions somewhat inconsistent. --Jrich 15:08, 1 August 2009 (EDT)


I was questioning her ability to bear children at age 52 which I believed pertinent to the family page.

The following is from an Article written by Leslie Mahler, FASG for TAG. He has articles in nearly every recent issue of TAG. Based on his research he was elected Fellow in ASG one of only 50 awarded that honor.


The American Genealogist # 311 Vol. 78, No. 3 published, July 2003, page 183; "Rice Cole was first of record in Massachusetts in 1631, when he was admitted to the church in Boston. His wife had the very uncommon name of Arrold. When we collected information on the family of Thomas Dexter, the following record was found at Great Bowden: "Rice Colles & Arrold Dunington maried 7th June" 1612, which is about the time when Rice and Arrold of Massachusetts would have married, their eldest son Robert estimated to have been born about 1616. Rice and Arrold arrived in Massachusetts with five children (Robert, Elizabeth, Mary, John, and James)..." "Rice Cole's baptism was not found at Great Bowden; however, Arrold's family is found there, the only Dunington's in the parish. Edward Dunington was born say 1554. He was married at Great Bowden on 3 February 1579 to Margaret Cox. Their marriage lasted less than a decade, as Edward died a relatively young man; he was buried at Great Bowden on 26 April 1588. Margaret was remarried there on 4 December 1589 to Myles Poole." "Arrold Dunington, bp. ("Harrolwlde") 21 Sept. 1587.

Before I edited it, the page showed her as Child of family

   Edward Dunnington and Margaret Cox (1)

My next trip to the library I will review the article and cite it.--Scot 15:46, 1 August 2009 (EDT)


BTW some of my edits were based upon reading the source citations already posted there.


All the sources that would or would not justify Elizabeth's birth date would be given on her Person page. In fact there was one there already, from Great Migration Begins, which says "say 1619", but since "say" indicates it is a guess, not based on documentary evidence, it did not seem appropriate to erase the existing date without a little more confirmation that it was wrong.

I finally realized the source you put on Arrald's Person page actually gives the Dunnington information you cited above. I am sorry I did not recognize that, but the title "Phipps Family Pages" fooled me (and it was the sixth and last source). But it only shows the baptism on the Person page with no hint that that somebody by that name married Rice Coles. The marriage record from the Great Bowden parish registers shown on the website needs to be cited on the Family page once it is verified. Next time I go to my library, I will also verify it in TAG, and if that is before you get to your library, maybe I can save you the work. I am surprised that the Great Migration Begins website doesn't give Dunnington if it was published in TAG though. Maybe they are waiting to see if they can explain why she called Solomon Phipps her brother? --Jrich 16:15, 1 August 2009 (EDT)


Calling him her brother could mean any number of things. TGMB was published in 1995, the TAG article in 2003. Most of Leslie's articles deal with English origins of NE colonists. He works at Good Sam Hosp in Los Gatos and lives in San Jose or Fremont. I have corresponded with him a few times over the last 10 or 15 years. Have never met him though. I don't know how he manages to research in England from here.--Scot 16:57, 1 August 2009 (EDT) I hesitate to cite a source I haven't seen which is why I cited the website until I could read the TAG article, but as is obvious from these pages, people copy source text somewhere and post it without even reading it eg Arrold's death in Sep 2 months before she wrote her will.


Without ever verifying it, I guess I had assumed they updated the online copy. Oh well.

Believing that sources need to justify the displayed information, I added the source you gave to justify the marriage and its date, and modified some of the source citations for Arrold to hopefully make things clearer to the reader. Following what seemed to be a consensus on a recent discussion, I noted that the source given, a website, cited another (highly respected) source, implying that I haven't personally verified that other source (but will). --Jrich 19:29, 1 August 2009 (EDT)


Next step: Review your GEDCOM [3 September 2009]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded McJunkin.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 11:55, 3 September 2009 (EDT)

McJunkin.ged Imported Successfully [3 September 2009]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

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

--WeRelate agent 13:42, 3 September 2009 (EDT)

Townsends loaded with your latest gedcom [14 September 2009]

Hi Scot, I noticed on my watchlist that you've loaded several Townsends in your latest gedcom. The following "duplicate" has been created, and appears to have incorrect dates. Don't you think you should attempt to resolve these date/spouse discrepancies before loading the gedcom?

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Family:Richard_Townsend_and_Deliverance_Coles_%281%29

Thanks,

Jim--Delijim 18:03, 3 September 2009 (EDT)


Jim, I am a bit confused by your note. the only discepencies I see in Richard's birth date which you show as bef 1612 without supporting documentation other than a 1985 letter. You have omitted his second wife, Elizabeth Weeks, whose will you have quoted. If I am missing something here let me know. The bot did not identify a duplicate Richard so I did not merge those pages. By all means, let's get it right.--Scot 18:55, 3 September 2009 (EDT)


Hi, I was fooling around with my birthday present, Google Your Family Tree, and decided to use your Townsend family as a test subject. This book is on Ancestry and includes a chapter on Richard: A memorial of John, Henry, and Richard Townsend, and their descendants. There is also some interesting information about why they moved from New Amsterdam to Rhode Island, etc. on this site: [5]. Have fun researching. --Beth 20:05, 3 September 2009 (EDT)


Scot, you've added a father (Thomas Townsend, which "may" be their father) and another brother, with no birthdates for any, besides Richard. Beth sort of beat me to it, but I was going to recommend that you read the Townsend book she mentioned, to see if your information agrees with it. The "Memorial of John, Henry and Richard Townsend" has been pretty much of the "gold standard" for information on this early family, so I'd highly recommend that you consult it before adding information on this family (you can download it free on the internet), especially when it contains very little date and/or source information, and adds relatives that I'm sure the Townsend Society of America would not necessarily agree with. The Memorial of John, Henry and Richard Townsend appears to be very well researched and documented, so I'd defer to its contents before I discounted the information. I agree that John was a bit older before he married and had children, but it appears to be backed up in the Townsend Memorial Book. If you have other sourced data that seems credible, let's compare notes. Agree that we should attempt to "get it right" :) There is much conflicting information on this family, with very wide-varying dates.

Regards,

Jim--Delijim 22:10, 12 September 2009 (EDT


Jim, I only began working on this line last month after the death of my brother -in-law who was a Townsend descendant. Until I heard from Beth, I had not heard of the book you mention, a google search yields only 5 hits, worldcat only 3, all of which seem irrelavent.

Cutter says the following:

"Henry Townsend, the immigrant ancestor, came with his brothers Richard and John Townsend, from Norwich, county Norfolk, England, to Boston, in 1636. The day after their arrival they were incensed at witnessing the abuse of some Quakers. The stalwart young Englishmen took the part of the Quakers, for which they were arrested and banished from the colony. They went to Flushing, Long Island, where in 1645 Henry Townsend became one of the patentees of the town. Persecuted there because he became a Quaker, he went to Rhode Island, where he became a prominent citizen. He was chosen assistant and was representative to the general assembly in 1653. He returned to Long Island, however, and was a patentee of the (own of Jamaica, but was again persecuted by the Dutch on account of his religion, and he moved beyond their jurisdiction, locating at Oyster Bay, Long Island, becoming a proprietor of that town. In 1661 he had a grant of land on Mill river and erected a mill. He is alluded to in the Dutch records in 1657 as "a person of wortli and consideration among the people of Flushing." He was employed in making surveys, adjusting boundaries and procuring patents. (See Thompson's "History of Long Island," vol. II. pp. 285-288 and 344: "A Memorial of the Townsend Brothers." Mrs. J. C. Townsend, 1865.) Henry, Richard and John Townsend were sons of Thomas Townsend, of Norwich, county Norfolk. (See "The Townsends," by Malcolm, 1895.) Henry Townsend died in 1677. (II) Henry (2), son of Henry (i) Town- send, died before 1/03. He married Deborah, daughter of Captain John Underbill, whose second wife was Elizabeth, stepdaughter of Robert Field, and known by the name of Field, but who was, however, granddaughter of Governor Winthrop, of Massachusetts, son of Henry Winthrop. Governor Winthrop married, in England, April 25, 1629, his cousin, Elizabeth Fones, and had a daughter Martha Elizabeth baptized May 9, 1630, at Groton, England, while her father was at sea with his father seeking his new home. He was drowned on landing at Salem, and his widow came to this country with the younger Winthrop and soon married (second) Robert Field (Feald or Feake), who adopted the daughter."

However, it wasn't Quakers being persecuted in 1636 as the society had not yet been founded, as I mentioned before. Also, I have Elizabeth Feake as the daughter of Robert Feake and Elizabeth Fones with her daughter by Henry Winthrop as Martha. I don't know what level of credibility can be given to Cutter, but he cites the Townsend Memorial, If youhave access to the "gold standard" of Townsend research, then by all means enter that data. I have no Townsend ancestry that I know of, but I do have Weekes, Feake, Palmer, Reddock ancestry from Long Island.--Scot 11:54, 14 September 2009 (EDT)


There were pages, probably multiple pages, on the Townsends, so the "collaborative" thing to do would have been to merge with one rather than create a new one. After all, most family lines that trace back to that long ago on Long Island will probably be connected to the Townsends, so the chances of being first is slim...

The one I have looked at is Person:John Townsend (3) (sigh, and I notice also Person:John Townsend (25), and now Person:John Townsend (58), and probably others). The talk page Person Talk:John Townsend (3) says the following regarding the identification of John's father as Thomas (I only quote it because it was there to be seen at the time of the upload):

"If this is supposed to be Thomas Townsend of Lynn, his son John was born in 1640 and married Sarah Pearson of Lynn.

The John Townsend who married Elizabeth Montgomery and settled on Long Island appears to have emigrated from England about 1640, first to Boston briefly, and living at various locations on Long Island, dying 1669. One source, Source:Cocks, George William. History and Genealogy of the Cock, Cocks, Cox Family: Descended from James and Sarah Cock, of Killingworth Upon Matinecock, in the Township of Oyster Bay, Long Island, N.Y. seems to have traced the family back to England and says John was the son of Robert, thus a nephew of Thomas of Lynn, and not his son."

Just to be clear, I don't have any proof that Elizabeth's surname being Montgomery, but any exposure to Townsend literature is sufficient to make it clear that this is meant to be the first John Townsend who came to Long Island.

Further information on the English origins of Thomas Townsend may be found NEHGR 29:101-2, and does not include the Long Island Townsends among his children.

--Jrich 14:36, 14 September 2009 (EDT)


When I uploaded my Townsend data I merged 18 pages with existing pages. Cutter has the father of John, Henry and Richard as Thomas pf Norwich, Norfolk probably too old to be Thomas who came to Lynn. The birth dates given for these brothers range from 1598 to 1631 so they would be brothers or cousins of Thomas of Lynn, if they were related at all. I uploaded only a Richard line along with his brothers. Thomas (25) appears to be in error as only a son James is given who emigrated to Virginia. John (56) looks to be at least 4 generations later than John (3). Read my comments about the time frame of Quakerism and the birthdates of these men which seems problematic to me.--Scot 15:36, 14 September 2009 (EDT)


I a little confused by your reference to Person:John Townsend (56)? My reference was to Person:John Townsend (58), who along with Person:Henry Townsend (22) and Person:Richard Townsend (14), were listed as sons of Family:Thomas Townsend and Unknown (9) at the time I posted my comment (i.e., before you deleted John-58 and Henry-22), along with Thomas Townsend (29). The father Person:Thomas Townsend (28) was identified by your comment on his page as Thomas, a farmer in Lynn. Since this is one of the few concrete details on any of these pages uploaded from your GEDcom I naturally assumed Thomas-28 was meant to be the guy usually referred to as Thomas of Lynn (who was already in WeRelate as Person:Thomas Townsend (2)).

The reason you can't find a matching Thomas is because their father was probably not named Thomas. You are basing your search on one source, which appears to be wrong.

After saying they are sons of Thomas of Norfolk, Cutter cites "The Townsend's" by Malcolm Townsend. This book cites three sources, one that say they are, one that says "perhaps" John is, and one that says they definitely aren't sons of Thomas of Lynn (who was from Norfolk, by the way, see that NEHGR article I cited). So he is citing a secondary source here, and it appears Cutter is wrong, as is Bunker in her Long Island Genealogies, since Thomas of Lynn had his own son John who was not the one in Long Island.

The only thing that seems to be for sure is that they are from Norfolk, but even that is only based on a descendant's letter and circumstantial evidence. There is no actual documentary evidence identifying the origins of the Townsends.

The earliest documented appearance of John Townsend in New England I am aware of, is his mention in the Artillery Company of Boston 1641. Still too early for formal Quakers to be in existence, but still a time when religious dissenters were being persecuted. So the reference to Quakers is probably an anachronism by Cutter. Not his worst error in the passage.

John was married by 1640 but that only suggests a birth before 1618. I have seen other estimates based on life events as early as 1610, but no credible estimates earlier than that unless they were based on some assumption about who his parents were, etc. So he was probably born in the window 1610-1618. He is supposed to be older than his brothers Richard or Henry, the other Long Island Townsends. They couldn't have been born much later than 1620, as they had all emigrated by early 1640's. --Jrich 17:32, 14 September 2009 (EDT)


Townsends [15 September 2009]

Scott, I added a few estimated date ranges to the Townsends based upon marriage dates, etc. and combined the duplicate persons (and added alternate spellings to hopefully keep everyone satisfied). I enjoyed our conversation last night, we'll keep working on this family until we get it as close to correct as we can.

Best regards,

Jim:)


I think I goofed... [17 September 2009]

Hello Scot, you don't know me, but we are close to each other, I'm in Chicago : ) My name is Amelia James. I'm pretty new to WeRelate and I think I may have screwed up one of your pages. You have a Susan Dorcas Mitton, daughter of Michael Mitton and Elizabeth Cleeve. I was pretty sure that Michael Mitton and Elizabeth Cleeve were the same couple as Michael Mitton and Elizabeth Cleeves, (Cleeves with an S) so I dove in without thinking, assuming I had found a duplicate and moved your Susan to the Michael Mitton & Elizabeth Cleeves family. Please forgive my newbie zeal. Anyway, looking in the Brackett Genealogy, p.46 Mr. Brackett has a Sarah marrying James Andrews.... You probably know way more about this family than I do. My connection is through Anthony Brackett's second wife, Susannah Drake. Please let me know if you want me to undo what I did, though I still think it might be a possible duplicate. sincerely, Amelia James (88buckaroo)--88buckaroo 11:24, 17 September 2009 (EDT)


Next step: Review your GEDCOM [30 October 2009]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded EdwardWyatt.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 15:45, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

I saw some of the pages you uploaded. I assume this is from one of the medieval sources that we were discussing out on the WC. It's good data to add but I'm a little surprised that the sources are being added as a bare list in the narrative body. Also, that "facts" are appearing as narrative content as well. I changed a couple pages, but thought I'ld see what you thought before messing around with it very much. --Jrm03063 20:32, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

GEDCOM follow - up [31 October 2009]

I hope it didn't sound like I was complaining. I think picking up what you did is a really important experiment. If you don't do it, someone else will, and we should sort of get an idea about what there is in these files AND what we want to do with it when it lands on a page.

The narrative content with labels like "KINSHIP: <stuff>" and so on, to my mind, that stuff really should be on the fact list. Do you agree?

Also, I guess some of the pages generated real source list items, but others had sources that were just listed separately in the narrative body - I would tend to push those onto the formal source list too... ?

Thoughts?

-jrm--Jrm03063 21:35, 29 October 2009 (EDT)


Here is a Kinship label. it appears as part of a note tag for Thomas Wyatt, the elder. Therefore will end up in body text, I believe 0 @NI9613@ NOTE
1 CONT KINSHIP: Son and heir.
1 CONT
1 CONT OFFICE: Poet to King Henry VIII.
1 CONT OFFICE: Exquire of the Body.
1 CONT OFFICE: Marshal of Calais.
1 CONT OFFICE: Sheriff of Kent.
1 CONT OFFICE: Ambassador to the Emperor.
1 CONT


The first thing I did was to convert mysources to sources. One problem, some citations are incomplete so it cannot be determined which edition or author is meant. For example, the current edition of Plantagenet ancestry is by Douglas Richardson, the previous by Shepard. Weis' Ancestral Roots is in at least 7 editions, etc.

0 @S7@ SOUR
1 TITL *Plantagenet Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families
1 ABBR *Plantagenet Ancestry: A Study in Colonial and Medieval Families
--Scot 14:19, 30 October 2009 (EDT)


So are you saying that some of these new "fact" types are potentially recognizable by the GEDCOM import, or not?
Also, was wondering, do you agree that these sorts of "facts" should appear in the fact list? I've messed with the results of the upload for a couple of pages, and it struck me that was the right thing to do. Still, what do you think?
--Jrm03063 14:31, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

I think you are right that these facts can go in the fact list provided that event tags are supported within the program that generated the data base. I have used PAF for the last 17 years to assure compatibility with the GEDCOM standard, but WR has many more tags that are unsupported by GEDCOM so it would have to be done manually, if I am not mistaken. Sounds like a lot of work, but you are used to that, right?--Scot 14:47, 30 October 2009 (EDT)


Well, I've done a couple pages (let me know what you think) If WR is going to know about a superset of fact tags, there's no reason Dallan shouldn't add the ones were finding in these GEDCOMs: "OFFICE", "HONORS", etc., etc. I assume they can be emitted (on export) as an "Other" label, with the WR type automatically pre-pended. Ideally, the WR import would honor our own superset of types when it encounters them on import too.
On the matter of tags, I'm not totally sure - for all cases - when to use what, and how. I assume that the GEDCOM standard has some rules, but I've never seen such a document. Also, to the extent that we're going to have a superset of tags, maybe we should have a document that nominally identifies what the WR "Superset" tags are meant to be used for. Any chance you want to take a crack at that? I think it will be needed as people start to bring in more of this stuff.... ????
--Jrm03063 16:57, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

I don't know what the Gedcom standard says, but when I do an import there are often error messages about unrecognized tags, so this is a question for Dallan. I know FTM has added tags not covered in the standard which work in and out of FTM but are unrecognized by other programs. The problem isn't whethere WR has a "superset" but whether the programs you are importing from or exporting to can handle them. The fact tags are now under note tags. to convert them would require a macro to delete the note tag and convert the fact to a tag, even to other. I have tried running macros on GEDCOMS without success. I suspect because MSWord adds formatting that corrupts the file. Do you want to take this to Dallan?--Scot 17:32, 30 October 2009 (EDT)


I figured there was a catch-all "other" tag, that any non-standard tag type can be rendered into on the export side. On import, presumably the import could look for "other" tags with an appropriate prefix, turning them back into the full WR set.
Editing a GEDCOM can be a dicey business to be sure. Certainly a raw text editor seems a safer tool for the task. More generally, I've had my doubts about GEDCOM as a sufficient vehicle for the iterative upload/download process that Dallan eventually envisions. It almost seems like you would need to support different dialects on export.
--Jrm03063 20:49, 30 October 2009 (EDT)

Another quick follow-up [30 October 2009]

I was wondering, some of those narrative body "facts" (KINSHIP, etc.). Can you look in the GEDCOM and see if they were represented there as GEDCOM facts or not? If they were, and the GEDCOM import is deficient, we need to get that to Dallan quick before we start getting swamped with this stuff. If it's mired in the page body, well, we'll just have to live with it I guess... --Jrm03063 21:39, 29 October 2009 (EDT)


I'm not sure if I follow your comments, I haven't really figured out how the data Is organized, but that is part of the experiment.--Scot 13:43, 30 October 2009 (EDT)


I just found a list of seemingly 3,901 sources, at [[6]]238 apply to the "Tree: British Isles: Peerage, Gentry and Colonial American Connections" database which contains 207,276 individuals and 101,194 families. Perhaps we should start with Gary Boyd Roberts "RD600" as an entry point. I'm sure Hawte Wyatt is in there as a gateway ancestor.--Scot 14:28, 30 October 2009 (EDT)


Gideon Cobb and Abigail Cobb [8 November 2009]

Scott,

I've got a considerable amount of information on your Cobb ancestors, down to Abigail who married William Stoddard. I'm preparing a website for this Cobb family that shows them, but it's not ready for public linking yet. If you contact me privately, either with the email link on my User page here or by use of the Contact us link on my website I will give you the address for the current draft.

Terry--Treigel 19:23, 8 November 2009 (EST)


EdwardWyatt.ged Imported Successfully [18 November 2009]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

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

--WeRelate agent 12:34, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [26 January 2010]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded catlin.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 15:45, 26 January 2010 (EST)

catlin.ged Imported Successfully [26 January 2010]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

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

--WeRelate agent 20:28, 26 January 2010 (EST)

GEDCOM Export Ready [16 February 2010]

The GEDCOM for tree whitlock33a is ready to download. Click here.


"America" Jane Mitchell? [1 March 2010]

Hi Scott, could you please check your files and see if you have any sources for the name of Jane Mitchell?? I don't have anything that indicates that her name was anything but Jane.

Thanks and best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 20:21, 28 February 2010 (EST)


Malone Family [4 March 2010]

Hi Scot, yes, I believe your dates make more sense than mine. I looked again through my Malone tree and found that none of the information I have is sourced at all. My brother-in-law has been researching this line and I believe I just made a copy of his GEDCOM file and uploaded it. I know, probably not the best scenario, but before I uploaded it I had no idea pages existed for these individuals. I've never ran into a Malone researcher before. I thought we were the first. I would love to work with you on these folks and hopefully be able to discover the truth about them.--Mmal526 19:39, 3 March 2010 (EST)


Jacob Van Meter [21 May 2010]

Scott, I noticed that you removed the suffix that I added on Jacob Van Meter "of South Branch, Potomac River, VA". Was there a particular reason?--Delijim 13:56, 21 May 2010 (EDT)


your page on Robert Jackson (74) [24 July 2010]

Hi Scot, I believe this Person:Robert Jackson (74) is a duplicate of Person:Robert Jackson (1). I gave Robert Jackson (1) a good start but have not gone back to finish it. I do have a lot more to add and links to fix. If you have access to NYGBS "The Record" to read Mr. Harry Macy's article on the wives of Robert Jackson it would be worthwhile. He challenges the info that Robert's wife was Agnes Washburn. My website is dedicated to the descendants of Robert if you're interested: http://www.jacksonfamilygenealogy.com--Janiejac 13:20, 24 July 2010 (EDT)


wilson.ged appears to overlap a previously-imported GEDCOM [27 August 2010]

The pages from this GEDCOM have not yet been generated because they appear to match pages from a GEDCOM you have previously imported to WeRelate.

If you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in this GEDCOM and you want to replace that tree with this GEDCOM, you need to delete that tree first so duplicates aren't created when you import this GEDCOM. Click on Trees in the "My Relate" menu, then click on the "delete" link next to that tree. Please be aware that any pages in the tree that are being watched by others won't get deleted. Once that tree is deleted you can create a new tree and re-upload this GEDCOM into it. (We're planning to make re-uploading GEDCOM files much simpler soon.)

If you don't think you have already imported a GEDCOM containing people in this GEDCOM, or if the two GEDCOM's don't overlap that much, leave a message for Dallan or send an email to dallan@WeRelate.org and we'll go ahead with the import.

--WeRelate agent 20:24, 27 August 2010 (EDT)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [27 August 2010]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded wilson.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing.

Note: if your gedcom contains many errors or multiple families, we’d ask that you resolve and correct the errors, delete this gedcom and re-submit it without the errors before merging it with families already on WeRelate. If the gedcom is very large, we’d suggest breaking it up into separate lines and importing them one at a time, which makes the review and correction process easier.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 00:22, 28 August 2010 (EDT)

wilson.ged Imported Successfully [28 August 2010]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

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

--WeRelate agent 12:23, 28 August 2010 (EDT)

Frances Foote [9 September 2010]

Susan, I see you deleted abt from the birthdate for Frances Foote. Do you have information on her specific birth year, or was the deletion accidental?--Scot 17:57, 8 September 2010 (EDT)

Retrieved from "http://www.werelate.org/wiki/User_talk:Susan_Irish"

Scot, I did a merge involving Frances Foote and did not intentionally delete an "abt" but I becoming negatively distracted by this new "Kingdom of England" default which kept popping up. --Susan Irish 21:58, 8 September 2010 (EDT)


William who m. Faith Godfrey [15 November 2010]

Both Judge S.B. Coleman and Sherrianne Nicol show William to be the son of Roberts Brother Joseph not of Robert and Ann Spilsby. There was no Reference on the page and so I put them down before seeing that you had Williams name their. Either the Reference or Williams name needs to be removed. I'm a I1 Haplo also. Warren Coleman--Warr 16:29, 15 November 2010 (EST)


Roger/Robert Terrell [16 December 2010]

Hi Scott, got your message on Roger Terrell. There were several different Terrell/Tyrrell families that appeared to be the same. I tried to merge them as best I could, given the information/sources on the pages (few if any), and what I could find. It seems that several others have confused Robert with Roger, because they are listed inter-changeablly on several sites.....

I'd recommend that you re-add Roger and place a do not merge template on both his and Robert Terrill's pages. Sorry, I tried to do the best I could. I noticed you on one of the pages, but since there was little documentation or no-merge templates, there didn't seem to be anyone with a "vested interest" in the pages... Most of the contributors hadn't been active on the site for at least 2 years... I'll send you a message first in the future.

Best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 17:39, 16 December 2010 (EST)


Thomas Townsend [22 January 2011]

Hi Scot, I noticed you added Thomas Townsend as a brother of John, Henry and Richard Townsend of Oyster Bay, without any dates (estimated or otherwise), notes, sources or citations. Since it is generally accepted that the three brothers were early settlers and I don't believe a Thomas Townsend was mentioned in the Townsend Memorial book, do you have any information that you can add to the family page to prove him as a sibling?

Thanks and best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 22:02, 21 January 2011 (EST)


James Call, the Wanderer and 3 wives [5 February 2011]

Scot, have you done any research on descendants of James Call and any of his wives. We have. Are trying to locate actual proof that Silas Call born ?1769 (unknown on our end) who married Polly Whitney is the son of James Call and his 2nd wife Rebecca Hannah Masters. We have lots of information on his 3 wives and all their children. We are only suppsoing by "coincidences" that this Silas Call is indeed our Silas Call and that HE is son of James Call. Thank you.--KatKing 19:41, 4 February 2011 (EST)


Civil War category [13 April 2011]

Hi, Scot. I amended your category for the 52nd Kentucky Infantry; the word "Infantry" had been left off. So if you see a message that the category was deleted, that's what was up. Thanks for adding those links to your Civil War pages. I do appreciate it! --Amy (Ajcrow) 07:46, 13 April 2011 (EDT)


Martha Montague [15 June 2011]

Nice catch on the duplicate husbands! Thanks. It was a bit of a chore wading through Myrtle Hyde's neat sorting out of that family in England, and I may even have missed a couple of more details when I was finishing up Richard's family in Hadley.--jaques1724 20:32, 14 June 2011 (EDT)


emma austin endsley [16 June 2011]

SIR: I am presently compiling a book, "Tales of a Town Named Bull City", using 1930s and 1940s letters about the first 15 years of Bull City/Alton KS that were sent to Orville Grant Guttery by people who grew up as children in the town. Several of these are by Emma Austin Endsley, Charles Austin, and Cassius P. Austin.

I would like permission to use the long essay reprinted here by Emma in the book. Full credit will go to Emma as the author.

Sincerely, Von Rothenberger 410 West 1st Street Lucas KS 67648 vonrothenberger@gmail.com--Vonr5 16:53, 16 June 2011 (EDT)


Stepney vs. Isle of Dogs vs. Tower Hamlets [20 June 2011]

Scot, I note you revised the place page for Stepney -- but it appears you went at it from the wrong direction. "Tower Hamlets" didn't even exist before 1965; it's a completely artificial modern construct resulting from post-WWII reconstruction that includes much of what used to be the East End -- the old areas of Stepney, Bethnal Green, Wapping, Spitalfields, Limehouse, and so on. If we're using 1900 as the official date for place names, then there's no such thing as "Tower Hamlets" anyway. The Isle of Dogs is an ex-island that used to be south of the river, and it's nowhere near Stepney. It's also included in the new Tower Hamlets administrative borough, but that has nothing to do with anything -- and the Isle of Dogs certainly is not an "alt name" for Stepney. (Tell that to a Londoner and you'd get a strange look.) And I'm not sure why you've linked the FHL cat as a source, since it's not meant to be a source for place names. What you linked to is simply their authority file for internal use; it's not a gazetteer. Anyway, Stepney is the area where most of the Huguenots of the early 18th century lived (including some of my ancestors, which is why I'm interested in it), and I've tromped all over that area. --MikeTalk 13:11, 20 June 2011 (EDT)


Mike, I redirected a couple of bot generated pages as there seemed to be several separate pages for Stepney plus the St. Dunstans page. one called it a Hamlet, one a District one unknown and one a Borough. It turned out to be a bigger mess than I thought when I started to edit it. The information there came from those pages.The source reference was from a page created by Dallan. the alt name of The Isle of dogs" was on one of those pages[7]. The WP entry says"It is in the eastern part of London and covers much of the traditional East End. It also includes much of the redeveloped Docklands region of London, including West India Docks and Canary Wharf. Many of the tallest buildings in London are located on the Isle of Dogs in the south of the borough." The disambiguation page says "a division of the historic county of Middlesex in East London, abolished in 1900." I only picked up what was already there.--Scot 14:22, 20 June 2011 (EDT)


Joanna Christophers [8 July 2011]

Might want to revisit Person:Joanna Christophers (1), I think you attached her to the wrong parents. --Jrich 16:51, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

P.S. According to Mayflower Descendant, p. 32:30, there is no known birth record for Grace, only a baptism 2 Aug 1668, o.s. She was named Grace Christophers in her father's will. --Jrich 17:06, 8 July 2011 (EDT)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [14 July 2011]

You're not done yet!

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing to WeRelate you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

Now that you have uploaded Rod.ged, your next step is to review what your pages will look like, review any potential warnings, and combine (merge) people in your GEDCOM with matching people already on WeRelate. You need to review your GEDCOM before it can finish importing. We will keep your GEDCOM in the queue for two weeks to give you time to review it.

Note: if your gedcom contains many errors or multiple families, we’d ask that you resolve and correct the errors, delete this gedcom and re-submit it without the errors before merging it with families already on WeRelate. If the gedcom is very large, we’d suggest breaking it up into separate files (or families) and importing them one at a time, which makes the review and correction process easier.

Click here to review your GEDCOM

Once you have finished your review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import, one of our administrators will review your GEDCOM and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24 hours. You will receive a message here when the pages have been created.

--WeRelate agent 14:06, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

Rod.ged Imported Successfully [14 July 2011]

The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully. You may now:

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

--WeRelate agent 17:20, 14 July 2011 (EDT)

Evergreen Cemetery [16 July 2011]

Hi, Scot. I initially renamed your Evergreen Cemetery page since "cemetery" was misspelled. But when I went to add more info to the page (coordinates, link to FindAGrave, etc.) I found that there is no Evergreen Cemetery in Hardin County. Some digging in FindAGrave showed that the cemetery is in Geneva, Ashtabula County, not Geneva, Hardin County. (Looks like the importer defaulted at the wrong location). Anyhow, I fixed the links on the 3 Person pages that had Evergreen Cemetery in Hardin County, made a new page for Place:Evergreen Cemetery, Geneva, Ashtabula, Ohio, United States, and deleted the pages for Evergreen Cemetery/cemetary in Hardin County. When I created the new Evergreen Cemetery page, there wasn't a way I could add you to watch it like you were the page you originally created, so you might want to go to that page to add it to your watchlist. Thanks. -- Amy (Ajcrow) 08:15, 16 July 2011 (EDT)


Possible Match? [31 August 2011]

Hi Scot, I was adding a person from IGI and noticed that you'd added a person that might be a match (I don't have any further info):

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Elizabeth_Beadle_%289%29

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Elizabeth_Beadle_%285%29

Thought you might want to check your records to see if this is the same person.

Have a great week and best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 13:39, 31 August 2011 (EDT)


Joseph Beadle [10 September 2011]

I would love to communicate with you. I would love to find out your information connecting Joseph Beadle to William and Sarah Beadle. After years of research I think he may be the son of William's Brother Osborne who lived very near William and the brother of Joshua Beadle of Madison Co Alabama who lived near William's brother Abraham. I have been looking for proof of Joseph's paternity for several years. Hoping we can collaborate. My email address is kab@sti.net Kathy--Katsmountain 10:56, 10 September 2011 (EDT)


[22 February 2012]

Scot

Do you have a reason for blanking out the information that's been added to Person:Alexander Montgomery (9) since your last edit in 2007? Q 20:22, 19 February 2012 (EST)


Hi Bill, It seemed to me that "of Amherst County, Virginia and Orange County, North Carolina" is not a title, but places of residence, I didn't blank it out but just moved it. It didn't seem appropriate in the person namespace.--Scot 13:06, 22 February 2012 (EST)


Billingsley connection [10 March 2012]

Hi Scot, I was working a few Virginia families and made a couple of connections with your Billingsley family:

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Person:Jesse_Billingsley_%281%29

You'll probable see them on your watchlist. I've added to citations to their pages with the rootsweb pages that they are on.

Take care, have a great weekend,

Jim:)--Delijim 12:07, 10 March 2012 (EST)


GEDCOM Export Ready [15 March 2012]

The GEDCOM for tree sync_AF is ready to download. Click here.


GEDCOM Export Ready [15 March 2012]

The GEDCOM for tree JAStamford is ready to download. Click here.


Philip Leslie Austin [18 May 2012]

Recently the Library received a scrapbook from Luetta Unruh B Bremer's family. Luetta graduated from Three Oaks High School in 1929. Included in the scrapbook were a sketch of a lighthouse and a birthday card/watercolor, both by Philip Leslie Austin, dated 1927. If you would like color copies of these items, please contact me at threeoaksgenealogy@yahoo.com Jane Ward Three Oaks Township Library Genealogy and Local History--ThreeOaksGenealogy 11:59, 18 May 2012 (EDT)


John Doak of NC [19 January 2013]

My direct ancestor, the above I don't agree with the 1693 dob, although that might work for Robert's son No evidence whatsoever for Julia or Nathaniel as siblings of the 3 Doak bros who settled in Augusta Co 1738/9 Much more - if you're interested - from Ralph ralphdoak@gmail.com--Redoak 07:22, 19 January 2013 (EST)


Latin Surnames [22 March 2013]

Hi Scott, I noticed your Message Board comment regarding Portugese names. The same is also true for Spanish, Cuban and Mexican surnames.

I did some recent additions of the de Cárdenas family of Spanish and Cuban descent and I was questioning the "correct" way to enter their surnames, for instance:

Nicholas de Cárdenas y Cárdenas, where the first part of his surname [de Cárdenas] was from his father's side and the second [also de Cárdenas] was from his mother's side. I decided it made more sense to place the entire surname in the surname field, instead of trying to "break it up" and put the latter part (from his mother's side) in the surname suffix field, which I believe should be used only for titles (such as "Esq.") or for other identifying information to distinguish them from others contemporaries.

For Mexican families, their naming is similar to the one listed above, except that they drop the "y" in between the father's and mother's surnames.

For instance, "Juan Tomas Perez" would have been the son of Carlos Tomas and Rosanna Perez. So for Spanish, Cuban, Mexican and (likely) other Latin American families the mother's surname actually becomes the "last surname" of their children. As yet, we don't have many Spanish, Cuban or Mexican families listed on WeRelate, but we might want to address and advise new WeRelate Users on how to enter latin surnames correctly..... Since my wife is a Latina, I have been adding some of her family recently to WeRelate.

Best regards, have a great week,

Jim:)--Delijim 19:48, 21 March 2013 (EDT)


Hey Jim, Actually there are quite a lot of Portuguese on WR, look for contributions by user Gregobhte1 and Cc4all I have also entered some of my wife's family, all portuguese. Her grandmother's tree Maria pereira shows a wide variety of naming practices. I have also traced my son-in-law's family as far back as 1665 in Merida, Yucatan and found them to be quite consistant appending their mother's maiden name, then when a woman married she and her children dropped her mother's name inserting the husbands name before her maiden name and so forth. browse the Portuguese links above and you will see pretty much no pattern at all. I once was talking about it with a bartender in the Azores who said he had 9 siblings, each had a different surname. When I asked why, he shrugged and "It is what my father named us."--Scot 11:56, 22 March 2013 (EDT)


That's funny Scot, thanks for sharing. For most of the Spanish/Cuban/Mexican families that I've compiled, the children have kept their mother's surname, so I guess it depends upon where they were from....

Best regards,

Jim:)