User talk:Beth/Archive 2009

Some recent names added not showing up in "categories" [7 January 2009]

Hi,

The last several days I have added many individuals with the VINER surname. Most of them are not showing up when I look at Categories: Viner Surname and Categories: Viner in England. I haven't noticed this problem in the past; I do usually check the Categories for my entries later the same day or the following day and they are usually listed but not this time. --Susan Irish 23:42, 6 January 2009 (EST)

Beth, I see no change. The VINER family members I have added do not appear on this page http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Category:Viner_surname

or

http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Category:Viner_in_England

--Susan Irish 14:04, 7 January 2009 (EST)

Ooops -- I just looked at those pages in a different browser and all of the names I have added appear to be listed. This may be the first time I have noticed this issue with my usual browser. --Susan Irish 14:31, 7 January 2009 (EST)

County Census Title [10 April 2009]

Hello Beth,

I noticed this source page Source:United States, Georgia, Walker. 1880 U.S. census population schedule. Maybe it was created before the census titles were standardized? Should I retitle it with the C, P, and S capitalized? Thank you!--Jennifer (JBS66) 19:11, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Yes, thank you Jennifer; retitle the source.--Beth 20:13, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Robert Austin Changes [27 June 2009]

Beth, I received a message on Saturday that you merged two family file of Robert Austin of RI.

Ref. “Robert_Austin_and_Unknown_Unknown”

In doing so there is now a marriage date for Robert and a unknown wife. This is a date that has been floating around on the internet for some time but has never showed up with any documentation. I suspect that it was used by a LDS church member when Robert was married (sealing?). It's defiantly not in source # 1, "A Genealogy Dictionary of RI", by John Osborne Austin, I have a copy that I use all the time. I have researched this family for many years and there is only one known fact on Robert ever found and that is his name on a tax list. I have a database of over 15,000 Austin RI descendants from several Austin families the originated in RI.

Art Sikes Robert Austin of RI compiler Austin Families Association of America. ArtSikes@aol.com--ArtSikes 10:52, 20 April 2009 (EDT) Replied on Art's talk page.

Best Changes [23 April 2009]

Beth, I noticed that you removed Person:Sebastian Best (4) from his parents card based on the "fact" that his DOB was not consistent with the family. Your statement was

Removed from parents page. Birth date makes it impossible for this person to be the son of the mother listed.--Volunteer Administrator-Beth 21:29, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Why do you believe that its the family that's wrong, not the DOB. Perhaps all that needed to be done was remove the DOB. Q 17:33, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Hi Bill, Now I have no idea; you can turn it around and do it the other way; just obviously not correct as presented. As I recall there were 2 children removed and I think I merged 3 or 4 pages. I think there was only 1 page with these 2 children listed. Have to go back and look later or you can check the history and see if the DOB was on any of the other pages. --Beth 17:44, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

The physicians motto is "Do No Harm". Q 18:48, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

That's great Bill, sorry but I don't understand the reference in the context of my change or in the context of WeRelate. See this page Family:Wilhelm Baest and Anna Michael (1). There is already a Sebastian Best on this page. My thoughts were that perhaps there may have been 2 Sebastians and the researcher confused the generations. What harm did I do? As a volunteer I did my best in merging pages that I know nothing about and that has no sources. Feel free to change the pages in any way you feel does no harm. I don't have a personal interest in the Best family or in the pages on the Best family. --Beth 19:02, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

If you are going to take the responsibility of changing someone else's hard work, then you have a responsibility to take the time to get it right. In this case you saw something that was inconsistent and assumed it was an error. You probably have it right, but you overlooked other possibilities. While you left a note on the card that was detached, explaining why you were detaching it, you didn't leave a similar note on the card it was detached from. It would be fairly difficult for the original creator of that card to refind it. While its most likely that this WAS an error, you don't really know that. Perhaps the original creator just placed it there while they mulled over the matter.

Also, your stated explanation was incomplete. You did not explain that there were "TWO" Sebastian Bests on that card; that it was unlikely that they named two children "Sebastian". That's part of your reasoning and is an important factor in your decision to detach the card. And that would have been reasonable had this been, for example, a Scots Irish family, or English family...but wasn't. Its Palatinate German...and palatinate Germans DID give children (sons in particular) the same name. It would not be uncommon to find that every son in this family had "Sebastian" as part of their name. Long before the Scots Irish were using middle names, the Germans were using trinomials. "Johan Sebastian Bach" being an obvious later day example. The way it worked was that they gave the child a "family given name"---for example, "Johan", plus a Saints name--for example "Sebastian". Sometimes the Saints name was repeated from child to child. So you could have a "Johan Sebastian Best" and a "George Sebastian Best" in the same family (usually not, but also not uncommon).

There's significance to that naming practice for genealogists. The use of the Saints name had more significance for the Palatinate's than we would normally attribute to it. The Saints name was the name used in the official records. The family name was used in the family. So, when momma called for "Johan Sebastian Best" she asked for "Johan". But when Johan came of age and started signing his name to public records, he'd sign it as "John Sebastian", or just "Sebastian" In Germany, they understood and expected this convention. In America it made no sense at all, and was not recognized by public officials, particularly before 1760 when binomials were the rule. So when "Johan Sebastian Best" came to America, and registered with authorities in Philadelphia as an immigrant German, he would have given them his official name "Johan Sebastian Best", or perhaps just "Sebastian Best"---and that's the way he would have appeared in their records. But after awhile, when he'd been in this country a bit, he might start using his family name in everyday affairs. So when he bought land he might now give his name as "John Best". So, the same person could be known in the records under "John Best" and "Sebastian Best". That makes it difficult to associate records with the right person. That's one reason we started adopting the german practice of trinomial names, beginning about 1760...needed to keep straight what records belonged to what person. Same reason the Germans probably adopted it in their homeland, long previous to this.

So, yes, its likely that the Sebastian Best you detached with a misfiting DOB, was probably not the child of this family. But he could have been, depending on whether the DOB is right or not, and b) whether the records for the original inclusion of two Sebastian's reflected two separate persons, but using the same middle name in Germanic style in records. Q 08:53, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

You are correct that I should have taken the time to leave notes on both pages. The original family page has the death date of the mother. There seems to be a problem with recovering the history of the other merged pages; can that be done, without undoing the merge? Other than not leaving a note, I stand by my decision. I don't think it would be proper for me to remove the death date of the mother nor do I feel it would proper to leave this child on the page with a birth date after the mother's death. Now these 3 users should get a notice that I changed their pages. If they are at all interested then they should come back and discuss the matter and decide how best to edit the pages. Without being able to evaluate the evidence, I don't see any other options. Thanks for the information about the naming conventions of the palatinate Germans. --Beth 11:20, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

John Bandy family [27 June 2009]

Hi Beth, thanks for the update of information on the John Bandy family. Where do you fit in along this line? My home email is ranger46@mts.net Regards, vic--Vicd 22:15, 30 April 2009 (EDT) emailed Vic

Bailey [27 June 2009]

Hi Beth, Noted your interest in my family tree (Baileys) Do we have a connection, pl contact me ken.hall1@homecall.co.uk

 Regards,  
             Ken.--Ying 06:59, 23 April 2009 (EDT)Emailed Ken on 23 Apr 2009.--Beth 17:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Beth,

When you made a change to Jeremiah Cloud & Elizabeth Baily, adding that Ann Bailey was JeramiaH's second wife, I believe you have confused and combined Jeremiah Senior with Jeremiah Junior into one person - so, please, what ever you have done to Jeremiah Senior, please undo iy!--JFBailey 15:11, 8 June 2009 (EDT)

There, I have undone your change! - Joseph Baileey--JFBailey 15:14, 8 June 2009 (EDT) Replied on Joseph's talk page.--Beth 17:45, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

William Bradford, etc. [27 June 2009]

Please feel free to add the sources and edit the pages yourself. My interest was only in merging those pages and adding wikipedia source references whenever possible.--Jrm03063 15:31, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Well, I decided to play nice and I just added stuff on the talk page.--Beth 20:14, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

KENNETH BURNS AND ROSETTA HEDBERG BURNS CAFFIO [26 April 2009]

I HAVE HAD GREAT RESULTS RESEARCHING MY FAMILY TREE AND MY HUSBANDS. I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET IN TOUCH WITH MY GODMOTHER ROSETTE (AUNT ROSE) FOR YEARS. USING ANCESTRY I WAS ABLE TO FIND MOST OF THE BURNS AND HEDBERGS ANCESTORS. IN MY SEARCG FOR ROSE I FOUND AN OBITUARY 4/29/2008 FOR HER DAUGHTER CAROLYN BURNS MATTHEWS, WHICH LISTED HER ENTIRE BACKGROUND, HUSBANDS DEATH, CHILDREN, AND HER BROTHER ROBERT AND MYGODMOTHER ROSE CAFFIO, (SECOND MARRIAGE)AS BEING ALIVE. HOWEVER I CANNOT LOCATE ANY OF THESE LIVING RELATIONS, TO FIND OUT WHERE MY GODMOTHER IS. CAROLYN DOES NOT COME UP IN SS DEATHS.

I HAVE CALLED EVERY SIMILAR NAMES OF HER CHILDREN TO NO AVAIL. I CALLED THE FUNERAL HOMES, THEY HAD NO INFO.

I FOUND A SITE ON ANCESTRY, I BELIEVE WAS STARTED BY CAROLYNS GRANDAUGHTER (BRITBRAT13P), WHICH HAD SOME DATA, BUT I CANNOT GET IN TOUCH WITH HER. THEY DIDNT SHOW LIVING RELATIVE INFO. SHE PROBABLY DOESNT USE ANCESTRY ANY LONGER, AND HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SEE ALL THE RESEARCH I HAVE ADDED. I WOULD LOVE TO FIND MY GODMOTHER ROSETTE CAFFIO BORN 1913 APRIL 1 BEFORE SHE PASSES AWAY. ANY IDEAS

LINDA SMITH BOOKARAMA2@AOL.COM--LINDA 09:21, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Linda, I an not related to your family. In the social security index on Ancestry, there is listed a Carolyn Matthews Evans who died in Tampa, Florida. Would this be the record for Rose's daughter? Did you search the Public Records Index on Ancestry? I hope that you find your godmother Rosette. What was her last known residence? --Beth 10:22, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

OH MY GOD BETH THAT HAS TO BE HER EXACT DATE OF DEATH SAME BIRTH YEAR I NO LONGER HAVE MY SUBSCRIPTION TO ANCESTRY HOW WERE YOU ABLE TO COME UP WITH EVANS? LINDA--LINDA 10:42, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

THE LAST ADDRESS I HAVE FOR ROSE AND RALPH CAFFIO WAS 8827 STILLWELL PLACE BROOKLYN NY 11236 RALPH DIED 10-26-2005 I HAVE NO INFO ON HER SON ROBERT EDWARD BURNS BORN 9/11/1930 LINDA--LINDA 10:48, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Linda, I searched by date of death and place of death Florida, and New York for place she acquired social security #. They have a free SSDI on Rootsweb. You can get a copy of the information there. Have your tried the New York phone numbers for the Stillwell Place address? If so I have one more phone number for her in Bohemia, NY. These are not always current but worth a try. If you need the phone# email me off list. --Beth 10:55, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

I SEARCED CAROLYNS DEATH BY NAME DATE STATE ON EVERY SSDI AND CAME UP BLANK I AM NOW SEARCHING THE NAME EVANS THAT WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE OBIT. I HAVE MAILED NOTES TO THE STILLWELL ADDRESS AND THEY HAVE BEEN RETURNED UNABLE TO BE FORWARDED THE SHAME OF THIS WHOLE ISSUE IS THAT I LIVED SO CLOSE TO CAROLYN ALL THESE YEARS AND DIDNT KNOW IT. I AM ASSUMING THAT SHE REMARRIED TO AN EVANS , AND FOUND A FEW GENE E EVANS. EUGENE E EVANS, EDWARD G, AND CHERYL THROUGH PEOPLE SEARCH . THATS A STARTER ALL I NEED IS TO FIND ONE OF LIVING RELATIVES TO FIND ROSE LINDA--LINDA 11:21, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

what is the phone number you found and the name in bohemia--LINDA 11:38, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Linda, email me at bethg@integrity.com. --Beth 11:50, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

David Finley [4 May 2009]

Hi Beth, thanks for the note on David Finley, I'll try to review Carmen Finley's paper this weekend (I'm sure I can google it). I know there are a few problematic Finley's in my file that I have to research and get corrected, but I need to review Carmen's source information. Unfortunately, there are several conflicting versions of the early Finley family out there....

Thanks again and best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 14:34, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

Jim, If you cannot Google it, I can scan the article and email to you.--Beth 14:42, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

UPDATE:

Hi Beth, I found and reviewed Carmen Finley's paper "Correcting the Record", but I am confused because I consulted Carmen Finley's website and found that she has David Finley as a son of John Finley who lived in Augusta County, VA and died bef. 19 Aug. 1782 in Montgomery County, VA:

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~cascgs/finley/aqwg01.htm#1C

I'm going to contact Carmen and find out if the John Finley that died in Montgomery County is the same one that was in Wythe County, or if it is two different people. If it was two different John's, you'd think that her own website would reflect that.....

What is your take on this situation? It's amazing how many different (and incorrect) Finley genealogies are posted throughout the internet....

Let me know if you see anything else that I'm missing.

Best regards,

Jim:)

Jim, thanks for the update, most interesting. Going out of town early morning; I hope that Carmen Finley replies and you can sort out the conflicting data. Let me know the outcome. If you still need me to analyze the data; I will give it a go, but I usually "live with my research families" for many years to get comfortable with asserting opinions. I am looking for a candidate for a case study or client report for the BCG application but Virginia is not in my most researched area. I know a little about the weird probates and deed transactions. --Beth 19:43, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

Hi Beth, I received a quick response from Carmen Finley, and the John Finley from Augusta County, Prince Edward, Wythe and Montgomery Counties are the same person. Here is her response:

Hello Jim,

Yes, this is the same John Finley, first in Augusta, then in Prince Edward, then in Wythe/Montgomery Counties. The David Finley article you found was the first I wrote and I had not traced him back to Augusta. If you want to read it all, I did finally write "The John Finleys of Augusta County, Virginia, Correcting the Record." If was published in four parts in The Virginia Genealogist in 2002. There was something like six John Finley in Augusta County and I sorted them all out.

A lot of my "in between" stuff on Finleys is available online at Sonoma State University, but not the one I mention above.

If interested you can take a look at:

http://library.sonoma.edu/regional/special/finley.html

Regards,

Carmen Finley Santa Rosa

So it looks like things are OK with this John Finley. I've added an advisory to other researchers, just in case they get as confused as we were... ;)

Best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 22:57, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

Wonderful Jim, I am delighted and isn't this a great example of how one can work together on WeRelate to have the most up to date pages. --Beth 23:07, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

You are so fast! [2 May 2009]

I was about to add the Data entry design link to the Watercooler, but I see that you beat me to it :-) --Dallan 11:55, 2 May 2009 (EDT) Yes, Dallan, just happened to check the watched pages about the same time it was posted.

How is your search engine improvement going? I suggested that they add the Death certificate number as a search option for the record set, Texas Death Certificates. They said they would but have not. Sometimes I know the record exists and have the number but cannot find the certificate image using the present search feature.

Regarding the data entry design, have you examined the templates available on Familypedia? I think I will browse around over there to see if any their page designs seem suitable for WeRelate.

Q is trying to improve my writing skills, perhaps a hopeless task. Anyway I am working on paraphrasing an article for the William Bradford page. Wish me luck. --Beth 12:52, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

I'm doing a prototype. Searching by certificate number is included in the prototype (it was on the list of feature requests that I saw; that request probably came from you :-), but they'll ultimately decide which pieces of the prototype they want to adopt in the final system.

I haven't looked at the templates available on Familypedia, so I'd appreciate it if you took a look at them.

Good luck with your writing skills :-) --Dallan 13:56, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Charlie Berry [27 June 2009]

I got an e-mail of an edit for Charlie Berry by you are we related? Emily--Emilyfauxbull 17:33, 3 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on Emily's talk page on 3 May 2009.--Beth 17:49, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Email [27 June 2009]

Beth, I've attempted to respond to your email message, but our email is bounceing. The answer is "Yes".Q 08:13, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

How are We Related?

HI: Beth We are related HOW? I have two email addresses knip1937@msn.com knip1937@yahoo.com I do want to hear from you thank you Pete--Knip1937 07:46, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Don't understand. Who added what page?--Knip1937 09:36, 13 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on Knip's talk page.--Beth 17:50, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Comments Requested [16 May 2009]

Beth

Could you take a look at this article and give me some feedback? Source Value

Thanks Q 19:22, 13 May 2009 (EDT)--Q 19:24, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Bill, I have a problem with the usage of tertiary source. I don't find the term in The Chicago Manual of Style or Evidence Explained, Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace. The definition in Wikipedia for tertiary source is also not applicable to the sources listed in this category; see [1].

I'll take a look at the wikipedia's definition again. The idea of primary, secondary, and tertiary sources is well entrenched in academia. I understand BCG's desire to have something more accessible, and easier to understand (hence their use of "Original Source"; unfortunately, their definition is at best idiosyncratic, and not likely to have long legs. Still, I use the term because for most folks, its easier to understand.

The wikipedia article defines "tertiary source" as "... a selection, distillation, summary or compilation of primary sources, secondary sources, or both." That's pretty much what a Gedcom is, especially if it lacks sources.

I don't know the term used for citing sources that are not sourced. The citation properly shows the origin of the information; however the source is not an acceptable source by genealogical standards.

The term used to recognize that you have not seen the original source (or in this case, the source you've seen doesn't even point to the original) fide as in "fide Smith, 1932"---meaning 'taken on faith of Smith, 1932'.

I have an encapsulation of the genealogical proof standard as my wallpaper on my desktop which explains the methodology; [2].

Super idea and I love the chart. Happy to work with you later on this; going out of town tomorrow and returning on Friday. --Beth 20:33, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Bill, the terms original source and derivative refer to the actual source not the content. Primary and secondary refer to the data found in the source. A copy of the original death certificate is an original source. A transcribed copy of the certificate is a derivative source. The information in the death certificate regarding the death is primary, but the information regarding the person's birth and parents is secondary. --Beth 21:15, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

I believe I understand the distinctions you are trying for. However, your definitions are at odds with the usual definitions of these terms. From Wikipedia:

In library and information science, historiography and other areas of scholarship, a secondary source[1][2] is a document or recording that relates or discusses information originally presented elsewhere. A secondary source contrasts with a primary source, which is an original source of the information being discussed. Secondary sources involve generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of the original information. Primary and secondary are relative terms, and some sources may be classified as primary or secondary, depending on how it is used.[3] An even higher level, the tertiary source, resembles a secondary source in that it contains analysis, but attempts to provide a broad overview of a topic that is accessible to newcomers.

BCG does make the distinction you point to, but this is at best idiosyncratic:

A piece of information is primary when it is recorded by a knowledgeable eyewitness or participant in that event, or by an official whose duties require him or her to make an accurate record of the event when it occurs.

Secondary information is supplied by someone who was not at the event and may include errors caused by memory loss or influenced by other parties who may have a bias or be under emotional stress.

BCG is trying to make a distinction between the nature of a source, and the nature of the information it contains. There's merit to the thought, but the truth is, BCG is the only one pushing this particular view. The rest of the world would probably not recognized their definition. The rest of the world will continue to use Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary to describe sources. Surplanting the existing definitions with their own (read Elizabeth Shown Mills) definitions, is probably not the way to go.

One of the issues Mills and other professional genealogists have is that their field of work is looked at with condescension by other professionals. Some of the issues you are concerned with contribute to that. Hard to gain respect when work is poorly done...and the lack of understanding of the nature of sources is a clear pointer to work poorly done. The BCG's problem is that they need to develop rigor in their own work. They probably can't do much about the vast majority of amateur genealogists, but in their own work they can show rigor expected by professionals in other fields. Something similar happened with Sociology as a profession. At the turn of the 20th century it was regarded with considerable contempt by other professions---mostly because as a discipline it was considered "soft" and lacked rigor. In the 1920's professional sociologists began to change that, doing things similar to what BCG is attempting. They've largely succeeded, and sociology is now a respected discipline. Perhaps Genealogy will one day be similarly regarded. Q 09:48, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

Prompted by your comment, and some observations by Jrich, I took a closer look at what BCG has to say on this topic. They have a FAQ page, and item 10 is relevant. I've basically copied to the page Original Source. You'll note that here they clarify their use of the term "primary" and "secondary", using them as modifiers to "information" not sources. They aren't saying "primary source is information recovered from an original source". What they are saying is that data recovered from a primary source is "primary information". The language they use for this tends to leave them open for us to misinterpret their meaning. But I think the intent is clear enough. Mixing terms like this a simply asking to be misinterpreted. Subtle distinctions like this are lost on most of us. At least they were lost for the moment on me. It took me several readings to see what they were really saying. Q 21:26, 15 May 2009 (EDT)

There are frequent debates on the APG list on Rootsweb regarding APG and the profession and who is a professional; the future of professionals ad nauseum; please do subscribe and give your input. Be wary; some of the "professionals" obviously never completed Debate 101.

The BCG guidelines have been revised once since I have monitored the site; so they are evolving and not opposed to positive input. --Beth 22:31, 15 May 2009 (EDT)

Hi Beth. Yes, they are an evolving organization, somewhat like Rootsweb. There's a fair bit of interaction between the two. Many of those on APG do not feel positively about Wiki's. Which is fine, I understand their reasons. Ultimately, they aspire to be seen as professionals by other communities. The fact that most genealogy practitioners are amateurs makes being recognized as a profession a difficult problem. Q 07:37, 16 May 2009 (EDT)

Alice Mildred Calkins [19 May 2009]

I received this today: The following page has been changed by Beth at 16:16, 19 May 2009. Edit summary: Add data from merged page(s): Person:Alice Calkins (46) in merge of Family:Eugene Calkins and Frances Van Gorder (1) - review/undo

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

Why? Clearly she was born in California as it shows on her marriage license and two censuses. What proof do you have that she was born in Canada?--Rootsonline 18:19, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Alice Calkins [27 June 2009]

I received this today: The following page has been changed by Beth at 16:16, 19 May 2009. Edit summary: Add data from merged page(s): Person:Alice Calkins (46) in merge of Family:Eugene Calkins and Frances Van Gorder (1) - review/undo

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

Why? Clearly she was born in California as it shows on her marriage license and two censuses. What proof do you have that she was born in Canada?--Rootsonline 18:20, 19 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on Rootsonline's talk page on 19 May 2009. --Beth 17:53, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Buchan/Finnie [27 June 2009]

Hello, Beth: What is your relationship to my grandparents? You are missing their eldest son, Alexander, born Jan. 1, 1900 (interesting birthdate I have always thought). As far as I know their only relatives to move to the US was the Kindnesses, sister of Elizabeth Finnie Buchan who I believe now live in upstate New York.

Jean Buchan Doherty--Jeandoherty 20:16, 19 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on Jean's talk page on 19 May 2009.--Beth 18:20, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Callopy [27 June 2009]

I got 4 messages from werelate saying you had made some changes to Frank Callopy, but I just don't see anything new. Can you help me with this? How are you related to Frank?

By the way, I am helping a friend with her family history. She is a Coker. Her earliest ancestor that we have found is from Illinois. Thomas Mason Coker Sandie--Fhxnut 20:42, 19 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on Fhxnut's user page. --Beth 17:55, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

Volunteer Hours - User: DFree [20 May 2009]

Hello Beth,

Thanks for leaving a message. The reason I have not entered my volunteer time on the volunteer page truthfully is that it is too difficult for my limited computer skills. I was able to do it once after 20 minutes of frustrations. I am volunteering, but not entering the time on the volunteer page. Debbie Freeman --DFree 10:53, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

Hello Beth,

I tried your suggestion. It almost worked. It is so friustraing. I counted the Welocmes I did in April. If I counted right there is 275 new user. 1 minnte per makes that 275 minutes, if my math is correct that makes 4 hours and 30 minutes for the month. Thanks for trying I hope I did not screw up the Volunteer page. I am pretty sure I did not. Debbie Freeman --DFree 11:55, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

Hello Beth, Thanks for the help. I added my signature, and saved. The rest of it is a problem. I need to find a web page that has the wiki commands explained as keyboard strokes so I can refresh my memory. I know part of it is shift, etc. --DFree 12:33, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

Yes. The shift + backslash is a example of what I am talking about. --DFree 13:12, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

That would be a "pipe". Very useful command on a wiki. A page for things like this would be a good idea. I keep a small list of things that I keep forgetting, (or never knew until someone clued me in) at Quolla6/Helpful Hints and Reminders. Its not comprehensive, but you might find something of use there. There are a lot of specialized commands involving the use of ":" "{}" "[]" and the "pipe" "|" in varying combinations to do various tricks. Something useful is the pair of double curly brackes. Put a page title between the paired curly braces and the contents of the page will appear on your target page. Its intended for use with templates, but you can leave out the template namespace and it seems to work anyway. I've not explored these that much myself, but some of them are really magic. Comeing up with a page to illustrate all of these would be very helpful. Q 18:48, 20 May 2009 (EDT)

Writing [26 May 2009]

Hi Beth

Have you been doing anything more on the writing front?

Q 16:28, 26 May 2009 (EDT)

Hi Q, no I have not, but appreciate your input. Been busy with family stuff and trying to work on my Coleman pages also; will get back to it eventually.

Also need to let you know that the questionable template was suggested by our own brilliant Dallan Quass; I simply implemented the suggestion. Will post on the watercooler after I finish fiddling with the template.--Beth 17:21, 26 May 2009 (EDT)

Casteel addition [27 June 2009]

Beth I see you made changes to the Archibald Casteel information although I can't seem to tell exactly what. How are you related to the Casteels? Betty--Finallyretired 07:58, 27 May 2009 (EDT) Replied on 27 May 2009 on Betty's talk page. --Beth 18:21, 27 June 2009 (EDT)