|
|
Recent text changes [21 March 2020]
Hi Gayel. I noticed your recent text changes following my attempt to add some more detailed information to this template. I'm sorry that you found the tone too strong. My use of the phrase "enough reliable sources" came about because I was trying to cover both cases where there was no source and cases where the only source was a GEDCOM or someone else's family tree that might actually be reliable. I added the word enough out of respect for your recent water-cooler comments regarding the removal of these types of sources from the pages.
Can you help me come up with a better way of phrasing this so that we can also capture the cases where there are sources on the page, but they are trees or websites, and we are really asking the users to pull the primary sources through and post them? Regards, --cos1776 11:40, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, Cos, I think it already says what you want it to say -- there are no reliable sources -- you don't have to say "enough" reliable sources, because then we're into another thorny topic of how many is "enough". It also says there need to be citations to original records, with a list of examples. The one place that might still be changed, that I can see, is the last line, and that is mostly because the people the template is aimed at probably won't get it. I think the earlier version, which spelled out "Ancestry Trees, One World Trees" etc. might be better, but that is a judgement call. I would certainly add Ancestral File to the list of undesirable sources, although I have used it on occasion when I'm doing preliminary research on a particular line. It doesn't get used as much anymore, but I had to deal with a series of pages yesterday where that was the only source, poorly done. I'd be a little bit careful about including "websites", however, as there are some good ones out there.
- As far as "tone" is concerned, I think we want to be careful not to appear too snobbish, too judgemental, while still trying to maintain some standards -- and hopefully still promote some learning about the nature of different kinds of sources, and how to evaluate their quality. The latter is obviously not going to be easy, since even people on WeRelate can't/don't agree, and because people do use the site for different purposes. Just as a comment, I am also putting information on WikiTree, because of the DNA capabilities, and they have a code of "Thank yous", and a very explicit policy of politeness. It's corny (or whatever), doesn't always work, but it has been a useful reminder of the need to remember the importance of civility. (And no, I'm not going to suggest that we try to implement something like that here, as you can imagine how it would go over.) Gayel --GayelKnott 14:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
I tend to use this template on a marriage page, although in many cases it deserves to be on the page of each of the (possibly numerous) children as well. Could we alter the wording to say "This family's pages do not include citations to reliable sources."? Pat --Goldenoldie 16:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe a similar template for families? That would allow flexiblity. Gayel --GayelKnott 17:39, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
|
|
