User talk:GayelKnott

Archive 2007-2012


Welcome [3 September 2015]

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 Wiki basics tutorial video to learn how to make ancestor web pages.
  3. Explore the 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 23:45, 23 September 2007 (EDT)

Thank you so much, Gaye--I appreciate your finds and letting me know about them. Theodore Havert's first wife was Catherine Joly, Marie's older sister. Our family tradition was that she died on board the ship in childbirth and the baby died very soon after, but I've been unable to find any record of her death. I did find the immigration records and Theodore Havert is listed as arriving on 7 Jun 1847 in NY on the Adonnis, the same boat as the Joly family, including Marie. Thanks for your help in filling in the missing Havert children. --Mary Jean--Jaynes931 17:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for tidying up my person, Phereby Bishop. ( 04:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Gayel, I have also seen this name, "Phereby", spelled "Fereby" or Pharaby or Feraby. I've done a little research just now on Lawson's Fork. I see that in another place, it is listed as Larsen's Fork. I see many references to "Lawson's Fork" in Spartanburg, South Carolina. Which, incidentally, is where the Bishop family came from, before they went even further south. If you put the words "Lawsons Fork" into Google, there are several hits and all the ones I saw were in South Carolina.

I need to do a little more research and see where these folks lived. Did they ever live in Alabama? I think the answer is "yes". Did they call a creek in Alabama after a fond memory of the one in South Carolina? Possibly.--Maggie 05:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. South Carolina was all I found, too. Good luck with your search. Gayel --GayelKnott 01:06, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much for correcting my info on Elijah Land and his wife. I agree that the Kentucky Marriage source must be a mistake, but I couldn't figure out how to take the source off. I know so little about what I'm doing, although I've been trying for a long time. I really appreciate the help you give me. Thank you for fixing my mistakes, --Mary Jean--Jaynes931 23:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC) [1 January 2013]

Are you aware of the genealogy project in stackexchange? Reading your user page made me think you might be interested. The site is in beta at moment - stackexchange uses a crowd sourced way to evolve from proposal to beta to a launched site and it could use more participants. Some links if you are interested:

Your user comments "I believe that the results of our research should be available to others without their having to subscribe to some company owned website" made me think stackexchange would resonate with you and your 'why werelate' made me think I'd appreciate your voice being heard on stackexchange - that community seems to resonate with your "Sources, Documentation, and Good Genealogy" but some seem to be down on crowd sourced wiki's (and I'm a strong proponent of werelate so I'd like others who feel same way to join and speak up).

My apologies if you are already aware of the site and/or not interested.--Sparrell 11:02, 1 January 2013 (EST)

Primary does not mean original [2 February 2013]

You just went through all the sources on Person:Robert Danks (4) and marked them all secondary, including, for example, Northampton VRs.

Primary sources are based on contemporary information of an a first hand participant or collected by an official whose job it is. Secondary sources are sources that add analysis and therefore include assumption and guess to complete the picture, or have no basis indicated at all.

Original records are the original documents, not copies, transcriptions, or even photographs. Non-original records are derivative.

Thus the Northampton VRs are derivative primary information. They were contemporary and the published records attempt to convey only the information in the original, though the formatting has been changed to suit the medium.

The reason why I think this is important is because facts that are based on primary information, even if copies or transcriptions, are orders of magnitude more correct than secondary information based on no evidence, estimates, guesses and assumptions. Obviously original is better than derivative, but whereas there is great benefit in making sure all facts are based on primary information, pursuing those sources to the original copy, if even possible, yields benefits in such a small number of cases as to not be worth the effort unless contradictory primary information arises.

Lumping everything into secondary makes any rating system useless. Decades of genealogical research and I can count on my fingers how many actual original documents I have used. --Jrich 16:15, 31 January 2013 (EST)

I think this is an extremely important issue. As I've said before, it's unfortunate that WeRelate uses outdated concepts to define sources, but apparently it's done at least in part to maintain compatibility with computer based genealogy programs.
A primary source is, and I quote:
"a traditional concept within the humanities that is variously defined as an original record, a contemporary account, or a firsthand account, but not necessarily all three simultaneously. The term is no longer used in sound genealogical analysis because any source (and any statement within a source) can be a combination of both firsthand and second hand information." [emphasis added] Shown Mills, Elizabeth, Evidence Explained (2007), p. 827
The Northampton VRs are not a primary source, they are a derivative source. They have been both copied and transcribed, which introduces one or two levels of potential error, no matter how careful the copier or the transcriber. (And assuming that they have been copied from town records, there are other potential issues.) While I agree that many New England derivative sources are reasonably reliable, I have found errors in them, including other VRs (the "Tan Books") and Torrey's Marriages Before 1700. Nor am I the only researcher I know who has done so.
"are not a primary source, they are a derivative source". These are not complementary properties. Because it is derivative does not mean it is not a primary source. See for example the BCG website. They are independent properties of information. It is original vs. derivative, and it is primary vs. secondary. Different dimensions, so to speak. --Jrich 22:36, 31 January 2013 (EST)
Information may be primary or secondary. Sources are original or derivative. Primary/secondary is not a different dimension of the same entity (sources), its a rating for a different entity (information). In other words, trying to rate sources as "Primary" or "Secondary" is like trying to decide how orange an apple is, and how dimpled its skin.
If sources are rated "Primary" or "Secondary" based on the information they contain, then many derivative sources (including compiled genealogies that contain transcriptions and even perhaps extractions -- where does one draw the line?) would/could/should be considered "primary sources". The whole practice of referring to sources as primary or secondary (not to mention "reliable"/"unreliable") becomes a quaqmire, based on personal/traditional inclination. The distinction between source and information, and the different terminology used to describe sources and information, reduces the need to rely on personal/traditional inclination.
The rating, as used on WeRelate, is for the source, not the information. If the rating referred to the information, then it should be associated with the information at the point of entry, or, alternatively, the source would have to be entered every time it was used to cite a specific bit of information. While that might be a possibility in an ideal world, in practice it's highly unrealistic, since it would consume all kinds of time and energy that most people (probably including me) would be unwilling to expend. Rating sources does at least alert everyone to the possibility that the quality of sources and the quality of the information they contain should be questioned. We seem, unfortunately, to be stuck with the Primary/Secondary terminology, even though it's inappropriate for describing sources. But once the possibility of questioning quality is opened up, then discussion can ensue, particularly where there are differences or questions regarding specific items of information. And since discussion is the basis of evidence and ultimately "proof" (I word I really dislike), then discussion is good. --GayelKnott 16:42, 1 February 2013 (EST)
Most vital records, with a few exceptions where town clerks have added their own genealogical notes, are almost entirely primary. One could also argue that it applies not to the whole source, since it isn't on the source page, but to the specific use made of it in the citation. But regardless of this and various other nits, bottom line, the whole rating seems pointless, and perhaps then, you might consider not rating sources? Dallan has indicated it will eventually move to the Source page where hopefully it will be out of sight and ignored since its usage would never be consistent enough to be useful. --Jrich 17:13, 1 February 2013 (EST)
I wonder if the problem is with the whole idea of "rating"? Perhaps we should be considering these as "descriptions". I'm beginning to think the whole idea of rating (except possibly for downloaded gedcoms) is so dependent on personal inclination that I would agree with you -- rating is pretty much useless, particularly when applied to a source. On the other hand, I do find the idea of descriptions helpful -- specifically the original/derivative distinction. Within that, for derivative sources, I found it really useful to know if they contain source citations, transcriptions, etc., and have sometimes added that information to a source page. If Dallan does move the "rating" to the source page, I would hope it would be original/derivative, but I'm not going to hold my breath. This primary/secondary concept for sources seems to be pretty ingrained. If/when he does I guess we will all have to make more use of dialogue/discussion to convince some researchers that just because "cousin Suzie said so" doesn't mean it's right.--GayelKnott 19:43, 2 February 2013 (EST)
I have no problem with using derivative sources. I do have a problem with insisting that a derivative source be considered "primary" just because it has traditionally been so considered, or because it is based on primary information. I do agree that there is a problem with the rating system, but until the proper terminology is used, the best approximation of "derivative" is "secondary". Not doing so, in my opinion, simply reinforces some researchers' (including some with years of experience) assumption that the sources are error free. (And please, for the record, I'm NOT referring to you!)
Ultimately, of course, what is important is what you do with your sources, particularly how you use them to create/provide evidence. Like everyone else, I mostly don't bother to explain why I think a source is reliable in a particular instance, or how it provides evidence, but one of the things that I like about WeRelate is that there is plenty of space and opportunity to do so if any questions should arise. But that is another issue.
And just for the record, I do sometimes have problems with Shown Mills, but not in this instance. --GayelKnott 21:53, 31 January 2013 (EST)

My Family [26 February 2013]

Gayel - Curious about your interest in my family. Are you a cousin?


Paluch--Paluch 11:54, 26 February 2013 (EST)

Thanks Gayel [26 February 2013]

This not an easy site to use. Apparently no one is interested in the same folks I am.

Again thanks for straightening things out.

Paluch--Paluch 14:35, 26 February 2013 (EST)

I think any site can be difficult at first, so don't give up. As for shared family, I haven't seen many other sites with Italian families as well-documented as yours. But again, same thing goes for other areas of Europe. I have one line from Austro-Hungary (now Slovakia), and there are very few others who have even heard of it. But at least my information is out there for others to see. Same for your family -- and it will show up on a google search.--GayelKnott 15:26, 26 February 2013 (EST)

Carlton V. Knott [8 March 2013]

Hi GayelKnott: I am the granddaughter of George R. Knott from Raymond, Minnesota and writing a book about his experiences in World War I. We must be related, but I am not sure how. My mother is Dorothy Knott Rude. I saw the photo of Carlton Knott's marker on the werelate page. Do you know if his remains are there? Also, do you have any information on his widow and child? Do you have any idea where they were married? If you have any info about his war record, or any letters home, please let me know. I do have a copy of the Kandiyohi County in the World War," so I did see some letters he and his brother Raymond wrote home. Thanks for your help. Please keep in touch. Jennifer Rude Klett Delafield, Wisconsin--Jrudeklett 14:51, 4 March 2013 (EST)

Hi again: We must be 3rd cousins. Nice to meet you. I just sent away for Carlton's World War I pension/service records. BUT, most were damaged in a fire in St. Louis in the 1970s, so I am not hoping for much. I will let you know if I find anything out. It will take about 2 months to hear anything. Jennifer--Jrudeklett 17:12, 4 March 2013 (EST)--Jrudeklett 17:15, 4 March 2013 (EST)

Thanks.--GayelKnott 18:23, 4 March 2013 (EST)

Hi Gayel: I don't believe Alice Phiefer (Raymond Knott's wife) was Carlton's wife as she is listed in the 1920 census as single, age 22 and living in Minnesota with her father and step mother. Also, I spoke with LuAnn last week and she did not know anything about Carlton's wife. One question: Can you please tell me what cemetery Carlton's headstone is located in Clear Lake, WA? Thanks a bunch. Jennifer--Jrudeklett 17:07, 6 March 2013 (EST)

I don't really think Alice is his wife, either, but the suggestion was made. I couldn't find any marriage in Minnesota in Kandiyohi, Renville, Chippewa, or Hennepin counties, nor in Montana in Cascade county. I have contacted the Clear Lake Historical Association for help in locating burial information, but have had no reply, and don't know when/if I will. I would be very surprised if Carlton was actually buried there, to be honest, but one never knows. I think there are some Federal Records regarding having bodies shipped home, but have never pursued them. For one thing, he would have had to have been moved yet again, when the family moved from Minnesota to Clear Lake.
There is only one cemetery in Clear Lake, the Clear Lake Cemetery. Clear Lake is a very small community, classified as a "Census Designated Place" -- i.e., no (longer) any local governance. In terms of governance, it is considered part of Mount Vernon. In terms of geography, it is (now) virtually a part of Sedro Woolley.
The Skagit Valley Genealogical Association might have some information, but contact/queries seem to go on a Query Board, or else need to be sent into the Society for research for a fee. One other possibility might be the Lemley Funeral Home in Sedro Woolley, which seems to be the only one there, and one that was used by other members of the family at various times. They might have information about either the stone or who to contact for cemetery information.
If Carlton was married -- as he stated on his WWI Draft Registration -- the best source of information is still likely to be through his military records. The only other source I can think of at the moment would be newspapers in Great Falls. There is a local library there that seems to have microfilm copies of newspapers. Whether or not they allow ILL, I don't know. (Getting ILL loans of microfilm across the border -- I live in Canada -- is often more of a pain/expense than it is worth.)
If/When I hear back from Clear Lake, I'll certainly let you know. Gayel --GayelKnott 20:03, 7 March 2013 (EST)

Hi Gayel: Spoke with Lemley Funeral Home in Washington, they knew nothing but referred me to someone. I called the referral but his cell mailbox was full; I will keep trying. As I work in library, I will pursue ILL of Great Falls Tribune microfilm. Thanks for your help, I will let you know if any news breaks. Jennifer--Jrudeklett 12:26, 8 March 2013 (EST)

I was there many years ago, researching someone on my mother's side of the family, and they seemed quite nice, so hope it works out. --GayelKnott 20:41, 8 March 2013 (EST)

User status [31 March 2013]

Hi Gayel,

I would like to suggest to the Overview Committee that your user status be changed to Administrator. I believe it would be helpful as part of your work on the Duplicate pages patrol to be able to delete pages for Living people. I wanted to first check with you before I proceeded. Would you have any concerns with your status being changed or do you think it would be helpful? --Jennifer (JBS66) 18:18, 17 March 2013 (EDT)

No problems, Jennifer. I do seem to be slowly working my way through a lot of "Living" people! --GayelKnott 15:41, 18 March 2013 (EDT)

I changed you User Status to Admin, so you can now delete pages. You may want to look at the recommendations on the WeRelate:Speedy delete page and watch it for future updates. Some pages for living people we delete on sight, but others we give a 14 day SD warning. If you have any questions at all, just let me know. Thanks! --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:11, 24 March 2013 (EDT)
Thanks, Jennifer. This should cut down on the number of Speedy Deletes I'm creating from the Duplicates list.--GayelKnott 12:32, 24 March 2013 (EDT)

I no longer wish to use this site nor have my tree involved because the changes made are not right. I went to a lot of hard work went to Mingo county and Pike county records and a few family Bibles to get a lot of the information as well as all living relatives I could get to. I started this while all my aunts uncles and grandparents could help me before the internet was available and I hate seeing things changed. I have deleted my tree and deleting this account.--Deboriahbfree 02:03, 31 March 2013 (EDT)

Email for [4 April 2013]

I'm a bit new to WeRelate. Where can I find your address? Bill P.s. I may wait a bit as I'm having sync problems.--Robinsonbill 13:07, 4 April 2013 (EDT)

Hi, Bill,
Not a problem with the wait. As for my address, WeRelate (like Ancestry) does not list an email address, although you can contact me privately by using the menu on the right, under "more", where it says "Email user". Alternately, I do also have an Ancestry account, (same user name), which may be accessible at . (I often get annoyed with ancestry by their lack of transparency for finding people.)
Hope this helps. --GayelKnott 15:36, 4 April 2013 (EDT)

We Relate Featured Page - Week of April 29, 2013 (#4!) [1 May 2013]

Hi Gayel, another one of your Person Pages, Hendrik Tjeerts Knot has been selected as this week's WeRelate Featured Page - congratulations! (Your 4th Featured Page!) Great sources, narrative and documentation, wish there were more contributors like you on the site:) Keep up the good work!

Best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 17:02, 1 May 2013 (EDT)

Discussion on categories 6 May 2013 [7 May 2013]


I do so agree with you. If we don't browse within WeRelate, how can we possibly use it to expand our knowledge of our families beyond what we have found in other sources?

You might be interested in some comments I made under Help talk: Categories titled: "Categories of places first, surnames second", discussion started 4 Apr 2013. Obviously, that didn't really see the light of day.

(I didn't want to put this on the Watercooler along with my comments about decisions of the Overview Committee.)

Regards ----goldenoldie 03:05, 7 May 2013 (EDT)

Locations and TimeZones--and Hello [7 May 2013]

Hi Gayel

As well as a Canadian flag, I have to wave a British one because that's where I live! I was somewhat surprised to find two messages from you at 10am to messages that I had written between 7 and 8 this morning. Good thing you put Vancouver with your signature.

I got busy on the "Wanted places" for a while and removed a whole lot of problems in the Ontario area, but there are still an awful lot of them. Someone who probably left WR years ago after providing us with 10,000 people lacking any sources whatsoever, insisted on adding "Tp" to every township his people came from. At least he knew the difference between Upper Canada, Canada West and Ontario. Altering his entries I encountered a boredom factor and stopped. Now I am working on my own family in their root location of Kirkcudbrightshire, Scotland and guess whose ancestors I am finding in "what links here"? So his work is getting more corrections made--both in Canada and in Scotland.

Here's a problem you might be able to help with. I notice you have been given your "admin certificate" for your work on duplications. I have been adding county maps to the Scotland pages (traced and labelled by yours truly), and I don't think I have managed to upload a perfect map once yet. As a result there are maps to be deleted, but for some technical reason images don't go into the Speedy Delete cubbyhole. I would be glad to supply a little list to anyone who could perform the operation.

It will be interesting to see if our use of the word Browsing carries any weight. Searching is like putting blinkers on a horse. You are never tempted by morsels that might just be within arm's reach (and that includes making contact with other WR users).

Cheers, Pat (--goldenoldie 05:43, 7 May 2013 (EDT))

Dorner Lehrer [17 June 2013]

Hello Gayel,

I got a notification that you put a do not merge against two different Dorner Lehrer families and I understand why because they are different but what I am wondering is whether you are looking at / researching these families or did you come across them because of another reason.

Thank you Jeffrey--JeffreyRLehrer 22:30, 16 June 2013 (EDT)

We Relate Featured Page - Week of June 17, 2013 (#5!) [24 June 2013]

Hi Gayel, time for you to "rack up another" Featured Page! Your MySource Page: MySource:GayelKnott/George_Jones_Documents has been nominated and selected as this week's WeRelate Featured Page. Nicely done, keep up the good work!

Best regards and have a great week,

Jim:)--Delijim 16:04, 20 June 2013 (EDT)

Thanks -- --GayelKnott 23:29, 24 June 2013 (EDT)

martien jacobs tonnis jacobs [22 June 2013]

Hello, I am a descendant of Martien Jacobs and TOnnis Jacobs. Are you also related to them? Kindly regards, Metha Hoeksema--Metha Hoeksema-Westra 12:48, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

martien jacobs tonnis jacobs [22 June 2013]

Hello, I am a descendant of Martien Jacobs and TOnnis Jacobs. Are you also related to them? Kindly regards, Metha Hoeksema--Metha Hoeksema-Westra 12:48, 22 June 2013 (EDT)

Marriage Date for Jonathan Doolittle & Rebecca Ranny [25 June 2013]

It's not clear to me whether I had the wrong date for this marriage and you corrected it or if you added an alternate date that predates his birth. At any rate I've checked Barbour and the present date is correct, so I'll just delete the alternate date and add the Barbour source. If I got it wrong I was probably reading his father's marriage date when I put it in,

Hal--HBWhitmore 01:26, 25 June 2013 (EDT)

rockwood family [19 August 2013]

I get more information on the rockwood family is go back to Thomas Rockwood 1420. he marry ann clopton. Iwill be put it down here.--Diann2013 12:51, 19 August 2013 (EDT)

rockwood family [23 August 2013]


Put the name richard rookwood and date 1602-1662.look up it in the internate you will see a list of him and his wife Agnes Lovell.That were I got my information. There is a book on  the Rockwood Family to. I never saw the book.

For Richard Rockwood partens it is them Robert Rockwood and Elizabeth bachier.On the Clopton family I got up to Walter de Clopton 1298-1339. Diann--Diann2013 19:36, 23 August 2013 (EDT)

rockwood family [24 August 2013]

Hi I know that you can not help me with things. I got all done and makeing chace to it. I am trying to put things down on this site. In as family and as a person too. Same on this site is all really do for me because is the same things. I am trying to meger the infornation I got with other on this site to help out. Diann--Diann2013 10:58, 24 August 2013 (EDT)

Hammerback and Tyberg [14 October 2013]

Hi Gayel, I received 6 messages about merges with Charles Hammerback and Alice Tyberg in my tree that I have not worked on in many years. I was wondering what your relationship is with them if any. They are my GG?Grandparents. thanks, Kathy--Xena5011 01:54, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Knott family [18 October 2013]

Hi Gayel: I sent you an email yesterday about the Knott family. Did you happen to get it? Jennifer Rude Klett--Jrudeklett 20:14, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

[11 November 2013]

First time I've used this "User talk" feature. I have received a note about possible change to Thomas Thacker & Margaret from GayelKnott. Does this relate to Thomas Thacker of Repton, who married Margaret Blakesley, widow of John Blakesley in 1542, or another couple with these names?--Houseofthacker 15:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Spudic Family Updates [11 November 2013]

GayelKnott, I notice you have been quite active in updating pages for the Spudic family. I am curious about your interest and connection to those pages. My wife is a Spudic, and there are not many around!

Thanks,--Lbeaumont 22:19, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Thomas Hopkins [30 November 2013]

Dear Gayel,

This is a different Thomas Hopkins (and Katherine). The one I have added lived in Derbyshire, the one you draw my attention to is in Bristol/Gloucestershire. It's a relatively common surname, and the forenames are very common in that era. These Thomas Hopkins need to be kept separate.

I am still a newcomer to WeRelate, and need to learn some of the possibilities, particularly concerning merging of duplicates, or removing incorrect near duplicates, and as in this, guiding not to merge two different (but similar) entries.--Houseofthacker 16:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Updates to Leah Weaver [5 January 2014]

Hi. Thanks for making some updates to Leah Weaver, but I am a little confused by the summary you left.

You said you added some census data to distinguish the parents from another set of people with the same name. Could you explain your analysis? How are you sure which couple goes with this person as the parents?

Also, in your summary of the census data, you list other people which I presume are siblings to Leah Weaver. It would be nice if you could make the profile for Leah Weaver more complete by adding new persons with these names and relate them accordingly. (This way other people searching the wiki would be able to see the existing connections.)

Lastly, could you make a copy of the census data that you have and link it? I would like a copy for my own records.--Wolfmanmi 01:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Shervington/Matthews [6 January 2014]

Hi GayelKnott- I noticed that you have done a merge with Fanny Phoebe Shervington(Matthews) - are you a relative? I am directly descended from Fanny's sister Ada Matthews.

Best wishes - Steve--Goddard 09:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info and advise etc, yes I am very much a newby on here but slowly getting my head around it. Love the idea of having only one page for each person/family etc. A daunting task though... Steve--Goddard 12:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Another WeRelate Featured Page [9 January 2014]

Hello, one of your Person Pages: John Dunn has been nominiated and selected as this week's WeRelate Featured Page! Thanks for the good work, keep 'em coming!

Best Regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 00:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

WWI Knott book [9 January 2014]

Hi Gayel: The book about the Knott boys in World War I is now available. It is titled Alamo Doughboy: Marching Into The Heart Of Kaiser's Germany During World War I. Please see my website to find out where to purchase. Also updates are on my Facebook page at or search for Jennifer Rude Klett: Nonfiction Writer on Facebook. Jennifer Rude Klett--Jrudeklett 00:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Klaaske Douwes Hellinga [20 January 2014]

Hi Gayel: I merged the 2 "Klaaskes" for you. Kind regards,Beatrijs 02:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Cochran/Tassell Corrections [2 February 2014]

Greetings! I want to know if this is a current tree you are working on and I would like to know what sources you have if you are. This is my family and I would greatly appreciate any holes in my tree.

Thank you!--Jeany0078 08:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Covington Caution... [5 February 2014]

Saw your edits relating to an incorrect child. Some of the standard templates that a few of us worked on were created to help mark situations like this, so I hope you don't mind my dropping them in. I can't admit any familiarity with the situation in question, but I'm always impressed with efforts like yours to debunk things that were too quickly accepted at one time or another, and seem to gain inadvertent credibility only because no one has looked at them closely. It's an impressive level of diligence - and (in creating the templates) I know I wanted to highlight both such efforts and the findings - lest things backslide (all too easy in a world of GEDCOMs...).

My best, and feel free to revert anything I did if you find fault. --jrm03063 15:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, jrm. I've used your Speculative templates a lot -- they're very useful -- but guess I just hadn't remembered that you created Refuted templates as well. (Hhmm, now where else can retrofit them?) --GayelKnott 17:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Reader - Corlett marriage Liverpool [9 February 2014]

Hi Gayel, I've just started on this so apologies if there are technical errors in my input. I note that you have changed the details of the Reader Corlett wedding in 1897 in Liverpool. I have the original records which show the following:

Marriage: 28 Aug 1897 St Thomas, Liverpool, Lancashire, England John William Reader - 19 Fisherman Bachelor of 26 Strand St Margaret Jane Corlett - 24 Spinster of 26 Strand St.

   Groom's Father: John Reader, Fisherman
   Bride's Father: John Corlett, (deceased), Sailor
   Witness: William Henry Corlett; Margaret Ann Holland; John Reader
   Married by Banns by: J. A. Cooil
   Register: Marriages 1876 - 1905, Page 140, Entry 280
   Source: LDS Film 1546064

I think you have changed the church to St John's, Liverpool. Do you have some more information on this? Many thanks, Adam--Adamhoque 09:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

One Place Studies [25 February 2014]

Many thanks for passing on details of the One Place Studies website to me. It has scads more to say for itself than two of the three placename study sites I reviewed for WR on Friday.

I have just spent half an hour browsing. Nether Winchenden isn't exactly just up the road, but it is a village that I used to take a detour through on the way home from work sometimes. It is one of a number in that area that have the atmosphere of another age. Columbus, Ontario, is in the same county that my paternal grandfather's family lived in during their farming generations. The diagram of relationships between names in the cemetery was really interesting. Malton, Yorkshire, also has links to my paternal grandfather's family: the couple who emigrated to Canada lived in Swinton and Settrington, two villages within five miles of Malton.

The article on copyright law in the UK was very worthwhile. In WeRelate I have taken to telling people that a website has information on a topic rather than quoting it. Though I sometimes wonder if these very protective website owners would have a higher profile if they allowed more publicity.

/cheers, Pat --Goldenoldie 21:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Another day. The day the where-do-we-go-from-here discussion has "officially" wound up. I don't doubt that some members will continue to try to make a buck out of their two cents worth.

But as I read through the results of the questionnaire I was reminded of the presentation of the One Place Studies site and compared it with ours. I don't think it was just the pretty pictures, though they did wonders for it. There was something very friendly in the wording as well. These are things we should think about at WeRelate. How often does any one of us look at our home page? It's not just the logo that's all wrong. The whole thing is too heavy. It needs tabs so that we can say more about more things. Right now it's just the door to a filing cabinet where we each have a little niche--and I've met some members who have a large sign saying Private on their door.

But here I am talking to only one fellow member about this. I don't dare put my head above the parapet and tell the group.

/cheers Pat --Goldenoldie 07:24, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

At the moment I'm feeling rather discouraged -- which may be because I'm doing my monthly long-distance visit with my memory-challenged mother.

I like your point. I've said several times, perhaps not in terms other people understood, the need to consider how we actually sell WeRelate. Selling by simply stating "the facts" went out well-over a hundred years ago. Today, selling is about image, life-style, etc.

I just went back and looked at One-Place-Studies, along with WikiTree, FamilySearch, and Ancestry. We definitely need to improve our presentation! We've discussed the logo, but not the total presentation.

I'd say go ahead and say something - probably the only thing that will happen is that you'll be ignored.

Cheers, Gayel --GayelKnott 04:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Smith Family (again) [28 June 2014]

Hi Gayle - I am getting tons of notifications this evening that you are editing the Smith pages again that we spoke of before. Looks like you are renaming pages, such as this one, where you changed the Page Title from "John Smith and Sarah Unknown" to "John Smith and Sarah Smith" but did not provide any evidence to support that Sarah's maiden name was Smith. Is the evidence forthcoming? Are you actively researching these pages now? --Cos1776 01:05, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I just got an email stating that you changed information on James Kelly and Anne K Keoughan. Don't see that any changes were made, but would love to know if you have some connection to this family. Name has been changed to Kelley.

Barbara Kelley--Bkelley414 00:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [30 March 2014]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [27 June 2014]

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 ALHGed2014.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 17:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

ALHGed2014.ged Imported Successfully [27 June 2014]

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

--WeRelate agent 18:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Martha Chitwood [10 July 2014]

It is my understanding Martha came from Ireland with her mother and brother as indentured servants to Reuben Stringfellow.--Williammuny 23:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Soules of the Mayflower compact [26 July 2014]

thanks for the information on the Soules.
I left them as a separate page because the information I have I got from my cousin and hasn't been proven out
some of the information differs so as to not stomp on someone elses work I left it as a separate page until my research is completeStephen W. Kissee12:33, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

John Meador Will [20 August 2014]

Hi Gayel, got your note on the Will of John Meador (Meadows)... I've added the transcript of his will from the same source I found the original information and although there are minor differences, it appears that the abstract is basically the same... Feel free to add whatever other records and/or info you feel appropriate to provide other researchers a clearer view of their family. Appreciate your input and assistance.

BTW, this is not one of my families, they likely married into one of the Virginia families that I've been working on as part of one of the Virginia projects currently in progress...

Best regards, have a great week,

Jim:)--Delijim 19:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Gayel, the changes make much more sense now to John Meadow's page.

Thanks for separating them, it really helps other researchers, too.

Take care, have a great week,


Featured Page Nominations [2 September 2014]

Hi Gayel, thanks for adding some Featured Page nominations:) If you see any other good ones, feel free to add them in the future.

Thanks and best regards,

Jim:)--Delijim 15:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Will do.

Gayle, Is this a good way to collaborate with you. I have some new info I found reading my Wm H Scott File. Let me know before I t ype a lot in error. Sharon--Sharon K Johnson 01:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Henry & Sarah Mattox [17 September 2014]

Hi, Gayel---

Yes, those two pages are the same couple. I recently found evidence, through a distant cousin, that Peter (my direct ancestor) and Henry were brothers, so I've been tracking down all of Henry's descendants. I have just uploaded about 500 Family & Person pages on Henry's line and I'm now beginning the page-by-page clean-up, so I just haven't gotten around to merging those two pages yet. (For some reason, they didn't show up under the family-merge tab in the upload process.) I'll get that done in the next day or so, though. --MikeTalk 17:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Handwerk [8 November 2014] name is Yolanda and I received notifications of changes on my family tree. I am curious as to the relationship. I welcomed the changes. I am the granddaughter of Marvin Brown...daughter of Edna Brown. Years ago we went to a family reunion and received a pamphlet of the family in which I copied the information on to the family tree. I like to learn more about the family.

Thank you again for the information.

Yolanda--Yomomma858 19:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [17 January 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

FWIW: Connection [25 March 2015]

That one is an actual connection. Harm Veldman's sister Gepkelina is the grandmother of the husband of my grandfather's first cousin. (I took a close look because I also have another Veldman line of direct ancestors.) --pkeegstra 00:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd say "Hello, Cousin" -- except that it looks like the connection is sort a bit out there for both of us. Harm Veldman did have another family. I haven't added it, again, he's the second husband of the wife of a something or other cousin, and you do have to draw a line somewhere (don't you?). Gayel --GayelKnott 00:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Once I have someone in a well-indexed part of the Netherlands I'll usually follow the marriages back to 1811 just to see if I run into any other interesting connections. --pkeegstra 10:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
I can see doing that with sources on-line and adding them to a wiki. One of the things I like about a wiki is seeing how some lines weave in and out with each other over the generations. And, it really is nice having a place to post the miscellaneous information you pick up about one person while researching someone else, so that hopefully it will be of use to another researcher. Gayel --GayelKnott 15:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [24 April 2015]

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 Horsfall Family_2015-04-24.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 01:23, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Parents of Eleanor Means [12 May 2015]

    There is apparently controversy regarding the parents of Eleanor Means, wife of John Diven.  My Means family attributed the parents of William Means, brother of Eleanor, to John Means with his parents as Robert Means and Jane Irving, the latter a sister of a Revolutionary War general.  I have never been able to find such a Jane Irving related to a general.  there were two Revolutionary War generals with similar surnames, Irving and Ervine; neither apparently had a sister named Jane who married a Means.
    Means family history, including the compilation by Foglesong and other sources, gives the parents of Eleanor Means wife of John Diven as Samuel Means and Elizabeth Clark.  These sources also show another Eleanor Means, a daughter of John Means and Elizabeth Clark, and married to James Montgomery.
    I have been investigating these Means families and individuals for about 30 years and have not found substantial evidence to support either parentage.  We need to do more work!
    Dick Ammann -- 13:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [13 May 2015]

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

Import duplicates [1 June 2015]

Gayel, I'm working on the cleanup from last week's gedcom import-there were a lot of problems. I'll take care of the duplicate list today. Thanks. --Judy (jlanoux) 12:57, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [3 July 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

GEDCOM Export Ready [16 July 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

[18 August 2015]

Take a look at Klaas Knot he is 1 of the most influencal men in the Netherlands ;-) a grandson of Family:Klaas Knot and Eke Stuursma (1)

regards --henk 19:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Henk. I would never have picked up on this. Gayel --GayelKnott 19:27, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Cleaning up my mess... [25 October 2015]

--Fpnewman3 08:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC) I'm new at this and really am not sure what I'm doing as yet. Looks like you cleaned up some duplicates I missed. I though maybe you were actively involved in that line, but I see, I think Imsee that you must be one of the administrators. Anyway, in Case it matters to you, I changed Jno. To James, correcting an error I found, and changed his fathers initials to James William, as well. "ef" is Emily, and she was a widow by 1880. I think I accomplished those changes. So many things to fix, so little time....😏

I can't find where to respond to your recent message about the marriage date of Sallie Flippin and Joseph E.Newman. Anyway, I hope you'll see this, and just wanted to say: Of course, you are right. When I went to my file to correct a possible error, though, I found exactly what you describe as correct, a marriage on 17 Dec 1857. Curious. I don't know how the error you pointed out occurred. Perhaps the big computer finds it difficult to keep all those Joseph Newman straight, as well.😋--Fpnewman3 21:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem. Computers these days seem to think they are smarter than we are -- or at least mine does. Gayel --GayelKnott 22:00, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, that was unexpectedly quick response. Now I suspect you of being a SIRI-like AI. When I first reviewed your changes on the website, I saw a "note" that didn't belong, going back to before I sorted out who everyone was. I was thinking that Sally Flippin might have been illegitimate , and that might well offend her descendant, as well as being wrong, somImsought to delete it. When I came back to it, I couldn't figure out a way to do it, and now, I can't even find it to try again. Hey SIri, did you read my mind and expunge the offending note for me?--Fpnewman3 22:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

No AI -- just sitting on the computer trying to clean up some of my pages. (Sigh). I suspect the "disappearing" note was probably a notice that changes had been made to some of your pages. If you go to Person:Joseph Newman (21) and click on "History" on the left side of the page, you will see a list of all the changes made, who made them, and when they were made. You can then use the buttons to see exactly what the changes were. One of the things I noticed is that on the 23rd of September there was a change to Family:Joseph Newman and Unknown (2). If you click on that link, it will take you to Family:Joseph Newman and Sallie Flippin (1), since the two pages were merged.
If, for some reason, you think the changes made to one of your pages is wrong, you can usually revert it back to what was there before. See: Help:FAQ, 9.3 How do I undo changes to a page or revert to an older version? Hope this helps. Gayel --GayelKnott 22:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

merging families [12 September 2015]

I am merging families from my Gedcom at the moment and see that you are merging the same families. I hope that the outcome will not be confusing?! Kind regards from--Beatrijs 10:59, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [15 September 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

GEDCOM Export Ready [15 September 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

GEDCOM Export Ready [15 September 2015]

The GEDCOM for tree Mayer Family is ready to download. Click here.

Duplicates [30 October 2015]

Hi, Gayle. I know you have been cleaning up some duplicates that I created. Lest you think I am being careless and creating duplicates when I should know better, I thought I would let you know why they are occurring. I am working on a multi-month project to clean up the largest old GEDCOM (Jonjay) (at Daniel Maxwell's request). In many cases, Jonjay did not know the maiden name of the wife (or he had it wrong) and I have been renaming both person and family pages as I have found the correct info. WeRelate does not warn of duplicates on a rename, and I've had so few hits when I manually checked for duplicates that I thought I would leave it to automation to find the duplicates. In general, you have been merging the duplicates before I have bothered to check the report. I hope you will continue to do so - but of course, I can check the report periodically as well.

I've been working on the GEDCOM since the end of April and still have quite a way to go - lots and lots of incomplete information. Thanks for the help on the duplicates end. --DataAnalyst 02:10, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Gayel. Thank you for merging a couple of duplicates that I guess I had recently created. Something has been slowing down my WR interface to a snail's pace for about the last week or so, and I think that might be why the duplicates are happening. My guess is that I am getting impatient waiting for the server to return and hitting "Enter" more than once (because it looks like nothing is happening). The strange thing is that on my end, I am not seeing duplicates in the usual way, so I am not even aware that they are being created. I'm beginning to think my computer is haunted :) Anyway - thank you again, and hopefully I'll be able to figure out what in the world is going on and fix this issue soon. Best Spooky Wishes! --Cos1776 14:25, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Berend te Moller changed to Berend Hoenderboom op 't Moller [16 dec 2015]

Hi Gayel, I noticed you made a change please let me know why you think this is correct? See for example the father of Berend is Jan, not Hendrik. Yes it is possible that his real name was Jan Hendrik. And we know that the second name often was the vocational name. Still I would like to learn, and understand, why you think the two Berends are one and the same person. Thanks, Ron woepwoep 15:14, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Ron, my apologies if I incorrectly merged the wrong pages. The information that was available at the time did not include the name of the father of Berend -- only his birth date and place, and wife's name. Many people inadvertently enter the same ancestor more than once, and that is what this looked like. If you think they should be unmarked, please feel free to do so. The instructions, if you are not familiar with the process, are at Help:Merging pages, "What if I don't agree with a merge?" --GayelKnott 02:07, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
hi Gayel, apologies not needed, this is a collaboration site so we should find out together. i have a feeling that the two Berends are not one person. but until i can prove it, let's just leave it the way it is, shall we? thx, Ron woepwoep 03:55, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Fine by me. You are the expert here, not me. Gayel --GayelKnott 00:54, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Berendina Koolman and Berendina Stevens [16 dec 2015]

Hi Gayel, thanks much for pointing me to the fact that these ladies are one and the same person. Can you please reverse ? thx, Ron woepwoep 09:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Ron. Done. All that was needed was to add Bernardina as his wife. Gayel --GayelKnott 16:09, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

much appreciated. R--woepwoep 16:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Robert Patterson and Sarah Van Metre, There were two set's. [23 January 2016]

And I am a decendent of both sets. The two set's of Robert patterson's and Sarah Van Metre' are my 4th and 5th set of Great Grandparents. I've been researching the family for 5 years . I've hooked up with two living decendent cousin's from this line . five really but a couple arn't comunicating. Just wanted to say hello and wanted to know if you wanted to trade any information ? Regards, Robert C. patterson.--Robbob61 20:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Hiya, and Thank You. :) [6 February 2016]

Hi Gayel, I got an email saying various changes have been made to my tree. I can't really navigate this site well enough to understand what the merges mean, but as you are an Admin, thank you is in order, I am sure. Any help with my husband's family tree is always gratefully received. Cheers, Lori--LoriMacGregor 12:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

John Nail and Elizabeth .... - Are we related? [8 March 2016]

GayelKnott - I see you made numerous edits to the above family. There are very few people, that I have been able to locate over the years, that appear to be interested in this family. Are you a descendant of this family? If so I have much more in my personal data base and would love to compare and/or share with you. Robert Givens--regivens 15:06, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not related. There were two sets of pages for the family -- duplicates -- and mostly I just merged the two sets into one. I did had a Find A Grave source for John. I had checked the cemetery listing you had to be sure they were really the same family. I have a friend whose family name was Nail, but she thinks your's is a different family. Gayel --GayelKnott 16:04, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

No merge [30 March 2016]

Just out of curiosity, how many "No merge" do we need on John Banning and Mary 2 ? There are 3 now. --SkippyG 21:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Good question. The computer, which generates the list, seems to have ignored two of them and keeps showing them as possible duplicates. May three will do the trick? Gayel--GayelKnott 00:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Entering Marriage Event [4 April 2016]


Thank you the assist.

No problem. Just happy to see someone actually working on the pages. Gayel --GayelKnott 14:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Lee--Lee Ramsey 14:38, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [7 April 2016]

The GEDCOM for tree Jones Family is ready to download. Click here.

GEDCOM Export Ready [7 April 2016]

The GEDCOM for tree Scott Family is ready to download. Click here.

GEDCOM Export Ready [8 April 2016]

The GEDCOM for tree Knott Family is ready to download. Click here.

Heads up [15 April 2016]

I noticed you were one person affected 2 years ago when User:Ccbreland deleted a gedcom that linked to some other families, they are trying to upload another gedcom, 3600 people and dozens of matched pages. It will not be uploaded due the number of errors and I am trying to suggest they upload a smaller gedcom but thought I would give a warning to watch what happens.--Rhian 14:55, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Rhian. --GayelKnott 16:05, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Tillett edits [12 June 2016]

Thanks Gayel for fixing the Tillett entries. I'm not sure how I missed matching them or if I had just not got back to 'tweak' them; I had moved on to something else and probably wouldn't have got them done. So now I've tweaked them just a bit more, so as good as I can make them now. Thanks again!--janiejac 22:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Not a problem. I won't mention how many times I've gone to check something and discovered -- oops! I thought I had fixed that, and hadn't.--GayelKnott 05:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Adding Templates [3 July 2016]

Hi Gayel - just a little heads up about the syntax to use when adding Templates. I stumbled across a bunch of pages to which it looks like you had wanted to add Template:Sources needed 1. The way this is usually done is to simply put
{{Sources needed 1}}
somewhere onto the page, instead of the actual text from the Template page.

Doing so tells the page to do what Template:Sources needed 1 tells it to do - in this case to put a banner box on the page and to put the page into Category:Sources Needed.

If you copy and paste the actual text from the Template page, you are instead telling the page to do what you want the Template page to do to itself - in this case, add a banner box and put the page into Category:Sources Needed and put the page into Category:Communications templates. You can see that this is occurring by viewing Category:Communications templates where these Person and Family pages are now listed.

This is an easy mixup to fix, so no big worries :) I have fixed some of the pages affected. Would you like to fix the others? Feel free to let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, --cos1776 21:59, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Dup and such... [29 July 2016]

Thanks for noticing the dup - which it certainly appears to have been. I resolved it.

Perhaps you know, or don't, that I've been working somewhat systematically through Savage - trying to associate as many "Sketches" with WR Person pages as I can. I had expected WR to already contain most of what's in Savage - but was surprised to find a lot that was not. So I've wound up adding more to the tree than I really meant to. Superficially, at least, a lot of what I add may seem sloppy - since sources often aren't obviously in evidence. However - if you check such pages for "what links here" - you'll almost always find specific pages of the Savage transcript that refer to such people.

At some point soon - I'm hoping to do something that will systematically push the relevant information from Savage out to the appropriate Person pages - but I'm not there yet. Knowing this - if you have the [mis]fortune to cross paths with some of my work - perhaps the back links will make what I was doing a little more apparent. At least I hope so!  :)... --jrm03063 16:51, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I'll try to remember to look for links to Savage, but won't promise. These days my memory has more holes than it used to. Gayel --GayelKnott 17:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Mary Leonore BILLINGS [24 August 2016]

Hi, Gayel, Thank you for adding information to Mary Leonore BILLINGS. If you are related to this BILLINGS family (descended from James of Clarkson, Monroe County NY) I would like to communicate with you regarding a family reunion of BILLINGS-BARRAGER-TOWNSEND families. Thanks for all your work on Kathryn Hall Allahyari (ggrandaughter of John Darius BILLINGS 1838-1932)--Katsus98040 18:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Kathryn. I'm not actually related to Mary Leonore, just added information to her page because I couldn't find an actual marriage record for her. I was hoping to get rid of the "Sources Needed" template, but suspect the marriage is too recent to be found on-line. In the meantime, enjoy your family reunion (I'm sure you will). Gayel --GayelKnott 21:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

DNA [31 August 2016]

Gayel, I just want to thank you separately for the thoughtful and knowledgeable reply to my post on Watercooler--HLJ411 15:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! --GayelKnott 16:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

George Tribble [31 August 2016]

Hello Gayel, I was looking through an abandoned GEDCOM and noticed George's parents listed with both parents having the same surname, no sources, and no parents for either one. If you feel they should be kept I will reverse the delete.--Susan Irish 17:38, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Thomas Bryant [5 September 2016]

Gayel, I saw your changes for Thomas Bryant. What is your documentation for Mabel Melton having a 2nd child by Thomas Bryant? According to John Perry Alderman she only had one child- Thomas Jr. I also have her will some place and there is no mention of this other Bryant child.--Thomb 15:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

John Row 1607, Gloucester, Massachusetts [29 September 2016]

Hello, I am Denise Penta the youngest child of the last daughter of John Wyatt Rowe, Minnie (DeMarque) Rowe - Josephine Agnes (Rowe) Leavitt. I saw you are watching the Row Line and wonder if you have relatives in the line? Hope the following helps.

The Wives of the Rowe’s

John Row (1607) Husband of : Bridget Jeggles (B: Southwold, England 1619 – 1680) (2nd marriage William Coleman) Mother’s maiden name: unknown

Hugh Row (1647) Husband of : Mary Prince (B: Gloucester 1658 – 1723) (2nd marriage Capt Isaac Elwell) Accused Witch ( her mother Margaret Skillings also an accused Witch)

Joseph Row (1687) Husband of : Abigail Smith (B: Chebaco Parish, Ipswich 1687 - ?) Mother’s maiden name: unknown

Joseph Row (1712) Husband of : Sara Patee (B: Gloucester 1726 – 1756) Mother’s maiden name: Collins

Joseph Row ~ Rowe (1743) Husband of : Anna Hodgkins (B: Gloucester 1750 - ?) (1st marriage William Carter) Mothers maiden name: Low

William Rowe (1786) Husband of : Betsey DeCamp (B: Manchester. NH 1796 – 1818) (1st marriage Henry Wotton) Mother’s maiden name: Joynt

Capt William Henry Rowe (1815) Husband of : Charlotte Webb (B: Liverpool, NS 1817 – 1913) Mother’s maiden name: unknown

Capt John W Rowe (1842) Husband of : Frances A Harty (B: Gloucester 1844 – after 1900) Mother’s maiden name: Parsons John Wyatt Rowe (1876) Husband of : Minnie J DeMarque (B: Chicopee Falls, Springfield 1981 – 1937) Mother’s maiden name: Powers--Beauport01930 16:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

GEDCOM Export Ready [4 October 2016]

The GEDCOM for tree Horsfall snippet is ready to download. Click here.

Detwiler/Alter [11 October 2016]

I really do not understand the message I received this morning. Paul and Karen were married Dec. 28, 1967 in a Baptist Church in the city of Fairfax, VA. The proposed place of marriage was Alexandria, VA and I guess changed to Fairfax, VA at the last minute. They lived in Alexandria, VA.

They did not have any children together. She had a child in 1957, me, my father was not Paul and all records point to there not being any other children born to Karen. She worked at the Pentagon until she retired and she and Paul moved to Arizona. She died January 28, 2016 in Arizona. Paul died August 4, 1998.

Karen was adopted through an orphanage in Sioux City, Iowa. Her adoptive parents moved to Alexandra, VA. Her adoptive parents divorced when she was 2 years old , she was raised by her adoptive mother with help from her maternal grand-mother. She attended Catholic girls boarding school, although the family was not catholic. During highschool she lived at home with her mother and attended the local public school.

So that things might make sense in the future could you contact me directly at ? I would love any and all information regarding my birth mothers life and family.

Laura--LadyBear 15:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

vaguely possible match [14 October 2016]

A person named Martha H. Pulsi-F-er was married in Ipswich, MA to Asa Wade on Nov 20, 1832 see 01:14, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Ben. I assume you are talking about Person:Martha Pulcipher (1)? She was born in 1772, so would have been about 60 in 1832. Do you have any further information on the woman who married in 1832? Unfortunately, the URL you provided goes to an error message page, so I can't see the information you have. In any event, please feel free to add information you have found to Person:Martha Pulcipher (1) (or her talk page for speculative information). Thanks, Gayel --GayelKnott 14:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
The URL was okay but a space was needed to separate it from the signature. The dashes were being picked up. Try this Asa Wade and Martha H. Pulsipher
See here, No. 40. Meanwhile, various Internet trees say the lady of Gloucester married Joseph Haycock and d. in Gloucester in 1838. There doesn't seem to be any coverage of that family, but the marriage in 1791 and the death in 1838 appears in the vital records of Gloucester, so it seems probable. --Jrich 18:26, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Jrich. I'll copy this to the Talk page for Martha. I'm in a deadline crunch at the moment and don't have time to explore it, but again, if someone wants to add information to Martha's page, they are welcome to do so. Gayel--GayelKnott 13:43, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

John Warner and Mary Unknown [14 October 2016]

Hi, Gayle. Thanks for asking about John Warner and Mary Unknown (6). I don't recall the details, but I must have created this while cleaning up one of the old GEDCOMs and then decided it didn't fit and lost track of the need to delete it. I will delete the page promptly. Thanks for pointing this out. --DataAnalyst 16:09, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for taking care of it. I figured it was something you were working on. Gayel --GayelKnott 18:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Re "Source:England. England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" [18 October 2016]

Hi Gayel I must say I admire the discussion you have added to this source item. Does the equivalent source for English Marriages now hold the same proviso for use? So many of our source items need a bit of explanation--that, hopefully, new family historians would read. Regards, --Goldenoldie 18:06, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Almost anything that can be searched by name, date, etc. is inherently an index and unless it provides a link to the original document that you can use to verify what is in that index, it has the same limitations. For example, searching censuses is actually searching an index and reading the actual census page often discovers spellings that differ from what is returned by the search results, etc. --Jrich 20:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Goldenoldie. All I did was bold the "This is an index", all of the rest was already there. I don't know if the same kind of in-depth discussion occurs on other pages. I doubt, however, that many people bother to read them. It seems to be hard enough to get people to even add sources, let along to understand the difference between an original source and a derivative source such as an index. That indication should be in the source citation/title itself, but Ancestry doesn't care, and FamilySearch seems to be dumbing down everything in the rush to regain "market share". So I just get more cranky. Gayel --GayelKnott 14:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Most family search indices list the film number which offers everybody (even non-Mormons like me) the chance to order the microfilm and go into a Family History Center and view the filmed document. FamilySearch is also making tons of scanned images available online, which is a good thing, and hopefully will continue. There is a joint project or two with where familysearch images are made available there. But even with filmed or online images, it is hard to know the complete provenance of the source - is it the original town record, or a copy made one hundred years later. There are many cases of town clerk adding assumed information decades later, etc. Many users are too hurried to turn back a few pages and find out that the section is for intentions, not marriages, etc. Plus reading handwriting can be tricky, more so the further you go back. Plus access to the actual original document may be nearly impossible if it is crumbling or located far away, etc. So using indices may be the most practical, and you may have to rely on the proxy of somebody else reading the source, unless you have a reason to doubt the index. To me the biggest drop-off in quality is going from a source that tells you how it knows (i.e., these are the children listed in the will) versus sources that just dictate facts with no explanation. At least if the source of information is identified, it should exist and you should be able to track it down if you are determined enough. You may, with skill, be able to find better sources, but people that identify their sources are usually making a good faith effort. --Jrich 20:35, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Removing DNM [20 November 2016]

Thanks for removing the Do Not Merge ! Neal--SkippyG 20:59, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

marriages Bartholdus Meilink [3 January 2017]

Hi Gayel, Bartholdus Meilink married twice: 1 with Femia and 1 with Anna Margaretha Meilink. Jan Willem Meilink was a son of Anna, so I had to change your correction. Kind regards--Beatrijs 22:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Beatris -- I made no changes to Jan, so whatever problem there was, was already there. Maybe the problem was that the pages for both Anna and Femia were named Anna?, as were their Family pages. That's what I changed, giving pages names that corresponded with information on the page. If that helped catch the problem, then glad you caught it. --GayelKnott 22:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Gayel and Beatrijs, perhaps it was me. I enjoy working with Beatrijs for the last couple days working on the Meilink and Karman family. Looking at the history of the Femia Meilink page, i was the one to create the original page and was maybe confused by the fact that one person with surname Meilink married twice each to one other person with surname Meilink. I think what Gayel did was right: renaming the page to what is actually there. I am not so good at reading the history of a page, so let me know if it is possible that both of you are right and i made a mistake which has been repaired by the two of you. Thanks, Ron woepwoep 23:38, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Ron. The important thing is that the problem has been caught and corrected. That is why we all work together. --GayelKnott 23:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Johanna Gerdina Meilink [3 January 2017]

Hi Gayel, you moved the birth of Johanna Gerdina Meilink, born 1885 to Femia Meilink who died already in 1879. The correct mother is Anna Margaretha Meilink, so I had to reverse your correction. Kind regards--Beatrijs 22:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Beatris -- I moved no one. Please, I simply renamed the pages to correspond to the information already on them.--GayelKnott 22:37, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Kansas Census Redirect [5 March 2017]

Concerning the redirect placed on Source:Shawnee, Kansas, United States. 1885 Kansas State Census... Please see: Source Page Title Examples under Census. According to that Help page, this page is correct and should not be redirected. Is there a new rule concerning State Census records to which I am unaware? --khaentlahn 22:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Answered on khaentlahn talk page; to the effect that the changes made to the source citations for Source:Kansas, United States. State Census of 1885 were not only invalid, but contrary to the fundamental principles of reputable research, irrespective of local categorization concerns. Principles of reputable research need to have priority over local categorization concerns, or there is really no point in claiming that WeRelate has any real standards except eccentricity. --GayelKnott 22:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

While the commentary on resources has validity, it doesn't respond to the technical issue which was originally presented. WeRelate provides for more specific sourcing of census records to the county level, therefore, the original pages are valid and shouldn't be redirected to the more general source, unless another standard has since superseded this.

I will repeat, the source listed should provide clear and easy directions for other researchers to locate and verify the source being cited. This is an issue that goes well beyond any WeRelate policy, and is founded in general research principles that go well beyond genealogy. The new source that you created not only obscured the origins of the source being cited, but left no directions for where to find the source.

The general source is also valid, even if this particular name is based on FamilySearch's idea of how the census records should be referenced and not necessarily on how the census rolls are named at the Kansas State Archives. Simply put, census records are census records. It seems pointless to argue over the naming of census records when there is already a standard in place.

One, the name used by Family Search is the name used by the creator of the records, not one they made up. Two, which standard is more important, the one created by WeRelate, or the one generally accepted by a much broader research community, one that is based on a concern for the verification and evaluation of the results of research?
The actual name of the microfilm is the "Decennial census, Kansas 1885" as published by the Kansas State Board of Agriculture. If we want to use proper research technique, then the source is “Decennial census, Kansas 1885” regardless of which repository is used to garner the information since all of the repositories refer to the same microfilm. None of the repositories (Kansas State Historical Society, FamilySearch, or Ancestry) refer to the original source in this manner, but use their own naming convention which, even between them, is not similar, but completely different. An actual cited source should ultimately refer to the original title of the item in question.
WeRelate is a Wiki. The page title standards are used for expedience of finding the pages and for ease of sourcing information for the general public. The titles of the pages will not always reflect what the actual original source title is, but the information on the pages themselves is used to create how the source actually appears. Using Allen, Kansas, United States. 1885 Kansas State Census, which is the convention at WeRelate for referencing county/state level census records, makes it easier to link to census information than trying to remember all the various other names that may have been chosen for the same original record. On the WeRelate pages themselves is where the original title and information may be placed. All of the original source data had simply not been included on the pages as yet, because it was of greater concern to get the pages created in the first place. If you will view the Allen county page, that is how the end result will appear for the rest of the 1885 Kansas county level sources. The final citation, as it would appear on individual person pages, follows most genealogy website's recommended ways for citing a census record, other than the inclusion of "Kansas State Board of Agriculture" at the beginning. Unfortunately, not all genealogy websites agree on how census records should be cited either, but this provides enough information for finding the original record.
I believe the main confusion lies in the use of "Source" to refer to these pages on WeRelate, because there appears to be a mistaken idea that the title of the "Source" page has to be the same exact title of whatever source it may be referring. This isn't the case.--khaentlahn 17:00, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Looks like you are now adding sufficient information to the source pages you created so that it is possible for other researchers to locate the source being cited. That is what is needed. --GayelKnott 05:05, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Totally off topic and simply out of curiosities... Is not the point of research as whole to get more specific and away from general?

Depends on what you are trying to do.
I agree that WR policy prefers that citations point to county-based census source pages. (So those source pages consequently should not be redirects.) (Statewide source pages also may and should exist, and for US censuses, national pages.) If there are statewide repositories for that state census, the county page may either clone that data or provide a link to the statewide page for that census. (Or both.) As for genealogy in general, there is no universal rule about how much info goes in the source versus how much info goes in the citation. The preference to cite the source at the county level for US and US state census pages is itself a longstanding WR community consensus.
P.S. The last change I see on Source:Kansas, United States. State Census of 1885 was in 2012 where the page was rightly categorized as "GovernmentChurch records". Were there newer changes which have been subsequently deleted? --pkeegstra 11:44, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

[16 March 2017]

Hi Gayel, You've done some work on Maria Louisa Davis and added 'citation needed'. Did you notice Maria's talk page? Oh what a mix up this is! I had noticed a duplication of this Maria by a new user and hoped she would respond. But so far, nothing. There is NO source at all that she is dau of Hannah Hughes and William Lloyd Davis OR of Hannah Hughes and Adam Ash. This user also posted Maria Louisa ASH as Maria Louisa Davis d/o Hannah Hughes and Adam Ash! (Surname on page does not agree with title of page.) Possibly she was a Davis; but if her mother was a Hannah Hughes, she is NOT the same Hannah Hughes who married Adam Ash. Adam was still living when this user has Hannah married to William Davis. I have not tried a direct email to this user; just used the talk page hoping she would respond. But was just few days ago. I don't know how much time is proper to give someone opportunity to respond. My tendency is to want to delete Maria Davis (24) titled Ash and perhaps add a different Hannah Hughes as mother for Marie Louisa Davis. That would keep Maria Louisa Davis with parents and then I'd remove her from the Ash family. But the user is new so your 'citation needed' is the best option for right now. Do you need to also put it also on [[Person:Maria Ash (24)|Maria Ash, titled Davis] and also note somehow the name differs from the title? As I said, quite a mix-up. --janiejac 19:34, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Janie. The problems with Maria Louisa Davis are just the tip of the iceberg with this family. The person posting the information insists that Maria's husband is an illegitimate son of John Scott Harrison, son of Pres. William Henry Harrison and father of Pres. Benjamin Harrison. [S]he created duplicate pages for several generations of Harrisons so as not to "interfer" with the history of the Presidents, etc. Those duplicate family pages promptly showed up on the Duplicates page generated by the computer. I merged as many as I could, left a message on the Person talk:George Harrison page to the effect that there was a problem and suggested sources that might help clean it up. I also added a {{questionable|explain problem}} template on the supposed parent's Family page. Normally, I would have waited a week or two to do so, but this is a more than usually sensitive page.
At that point, I gather a bit of chaos broke out, as the poster ignored both your message and my message and tried to recreate the duplicate pages while also erasing all suggestion of any problems, then other people apparently got into the act. My focus was on George Harrison, and I'm willing to do some "light" research (checking easily accessible on-line sources) to help resolve a problem, which is why I added some of the appropriate census records. (Jrich added a couple more). As long as I had them for George, it was easy enough to copy them over to Maria. From what I could see on other sites, it's going to take some serious research to resolve these problems, starting with searching for information on the additional persons in the 1850 census, looking for potential families in the 1840 census, as well as getting into land records. That's a bit beyond what I'm willing to undertake for someone who apparently knows that a family story has precedence over written records and is unwilling (or perhaps unable) to do the necessary research themselves. (This is an obvious case for DNA research, but that's a different story.)
As for Maria Louisa Davis, to be honest, this looks like a bad case of "creative" genealogy -- not only are there no records, the claim for her parentage makes no sense, especially when the census records say she was born in Ohio, not West Virginia, and there are at least hints that her family may have been from New York or New Jersey.
I understand your concern for dealing with the poster sensitively, but there have to be limits. You have offered to help and been ignored. I work on two other wiki sites besides WeRelate, one of which has serious problems with a large number of contributors who believe that "truth" comes from places much better than sources or records. I've learned that after the initial effort to "play nice", you have to stop these people, or they take over and ruin any validity in the research that you have done. In this case, if you want to make a second offer to help, or do a bit of research of your own, that would be up to you. But when you've done what you are willing to do, you need to put out front, where other people can see it, some sort of warning that there are problems. One way, less drastic than the {{questionable|explain problem}} template would be a small [[Image:Red Flag.jpg|20px]] in the text box, followed by text about the problem. (You can adjust the size of the flag by changing the number of the px in the template.) Or you can simply delete her from the incorrect parents (and definitely merge the two Marias!).
This may seem harsh, but I try to think of it in terms of would I, as a serious researcher, seeing the page for the first time and looking for information, want to know that there were problems here?
I'm sure that if several people pointed out to you that there was a problem with some of your information, you would make some effort to resolve the problem, not just insist that you were right and ignore what others were telling you. I think one of the upsides of a wiki is that you can get help, even if it means going back and making changes in what you thought you knew. One of the downsides is that you do have to deal with those people who will fight the need to make changes. I think, if we are putting our information out to the public on a site like this, then we do have a responsibility to those other researchers who will be looking at the site for their own research to provide the best information we can.
Sorry to prose on, I wish you luck, and don't be too hard on yourself if you have to make changes that are consistent with the need to be true to the sources available. Gayel --GayelKnott 00:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! [25 May 2017]

A quick word of appreciation for your helpful correction of the Amelia Lee Jackson error. I got a funny looking screen on the gedcom match families page, and must have hit "update," or something along those lines. (My personal database has the correct relationship.) At any rate, much obliged. All best,--W4h2t7c6 21:09, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem. These things happen to all of us. I probably have more than my share. :-) --GayelKnott 21:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Uplees [30 June 2017]

From Wikipedia (just in case you didn't find it there):

"Uplees is a hamlet north of Faversham in southeast England. It was a key part of the Faversham explosives industry during World War I, with the Cotton Powder Company importing raw materials via the deepwater channel of the Swale, and the associated Explosives Loading Company exporting completed bombs and shells. Employees came to work from Faversham on the Davington Light Railway of which Uplees was the northern terminus. It is in the civil parish of Oare.
"At 2.20pm on Sunday 2 April 1916, a huge explosion ripped through the gunpowder mill at Uplees, when 200 tons of TNT ignited. The blast killed 105 people and many were buried in a mass grave at Faversham Cemetery.[1]"

I will redirect Uplees to [[Place:Oare, Kent, England|Oare]]. It was transferred from one parish to another in the 20th century, but Oare is the closest place of any size, i.e., it is in bold on my uptodate road atlas. I will add a section on Uplees under Oare and insert the Wikipedia quotation in it. Britain has had its fair share of disasters like the one described above recently.

Regards, Pat --Goldenoldie 14:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Pat. Wikipedia is the source I used to locate Uplees, but I knew you had a much better grasp of places in England. --GayelKnott 14:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

A favour for me? [30 June 2017]

I seem to recall that you have Canadian links. Could you find for me an online source for linking the old counties of Quebec to the new RCMs? I've tried WP so far but I'm not too happy. Perhaps there's a good provincial website in easy French?

I lost a whole lot of today when Microsoft decided to give me the Creators Update and then refused to let me open it up and get online again. Eventually I am back in the picture.

/cheers, Pat --Goldenoldie 19:19, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I live in Canada -- for most of my life, these days -- but all my ancestry is US, European or very early English. But I have a friend with early Quebecois ancestry, so will check with her. --GayelKnott 20:01, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Editing Walker family & including Ada L. Walker [9 August 2017]

Hi Gayel. I appreciate your assistance in proper completion of Walker family. Ada Walker was my grand-mother and was omitted from the family tree on WeRelate. There exist only one Fed Census that shows her as a daughter to Marcellus Walker & Mary Eva Wright,together with other known siblings of Ada L. Walker, at age 10, and that is the 1892 Federal Census for New Bremen, Lewis County, New York.--Normiejac 16:12, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem. Ada, for some reason, had been entered three times on WeRelate, so I just merged all three pages into one. You could add the census record for her, if you want, as that would help to identify her. --GayelKnott 17:50, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Gayel. Posted 1892 census for Ada Walker as you suggested. Thank you. Normiejac--Normiejac 15:05, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Good to hear. Every bit of documentation helps.--GayelKnott 21:14, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Dauphin County PA [16 July 2017]


Thanks for helping with the Hershberger tree. I noticed that you changed the place of birth for Mary Blough (1784 - 1855)to Douphia Co. (Should be Dauphin Co.) PA. Dauphin Co. wasn't formed until 1785 from Lancaster Co. so it could't have been Dauphin/Douphia Co. in 1784. I do have one source that lists her as being born in 1785 in Lancaster Co. Henry Hershberger and Mary Blough were my 2xGr-grandparents

Robert Harshberger--Retcop17 14:00, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Robert. All I did was merge two pages, both of which had the marriage of Henry Hershberger and Mary Blough. You can check the history for what changes have been made by a page by clicking "History" in the menu on the upper right corner of the page, under "Edit". As for the "Douphia" county entry, that was apparently made in the initial GedCom upload in 2007.
These pages are places where you can make some really useful contributions. It would be quite easy, for instance, for you to change the place name of "Douphia" for Mary Blough, and add your source. These pages, for both Mary and her husband, are in desperate need of sources. If you are uncertain about how to add sources, there is a page under "Help" called Help:Person pages tutorial, and on that page is a section called "Lesson_Four:_Entering_references", which you may find useful. Don't be too worried about making mistakes, they can always be changed. --GayelKnott 18:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

[8 August 2017]

It's really weird and unpleasant to think you can't do something you've come to appreciate Thank you for getting us back in the drivers seat gayelknott--Babo 16:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, I got a bit of a jolt when I was told I couldn't post anything. But don't thank me -- thank the people who have been doing all the work. (It's a topic of discussion on the Watercooler, you might want to check there for more information. --GayelKnott 16:57, 8 August 2017 (UTC)