User talk:JBS66/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Source page update [16 September 2008]

Hi,

In case you didn't see it on my talk page, I thought I'd let you know that the automated source page update is complete, so you can feel free to update Netherlands Place pages. Please let me know if you need anything. Thank you!--Dallan 17:33, 16 September 2008 (EDT)

Brien and Hemond.ged Imported Successfully [20 September 2008]

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

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

--WeRelate agent 14:35, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

Merged page [15 October 2008]

As you may have noticed, I screwed up. The family you were talking about in the Watercooler and wanting to merge, accidentally got merged by me ... in the wrong direction. I hit the cancel button but it apparently did not cancel and instead went ahead with the merge. I am so sorry JBS. I hope I haven't mangled things too badly for you. --Ronni 11:32, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

It's my fault, not Ronni's. I was so focused on the "Merge" button that I completely forgot about implementing the "Cancel" button, and when Ronni pressed Cancel the pages got merged anyway. Anyway, I unmerged the pages and I'm on my way to the watercooler to answer your question.--Dallan 15:56, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

Your duplicate page [19 October 2008]

Hi,

I found duplicates to your page, Charles Allaire and Catherine Fievre. --Beth 21:57, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

Revisions to Marie-Victore Tremblay and spouse [27 October 2008]

Thanks for the updates and revisions. I notice the birth date of Marie Jeanne Sylvestre doesn't look right. Based on 1672 birth, she would 19 years younger than her husband and live to 100.

Dale--Dale 21:18, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

Volunteer Hours [28 October 2008]

Hi, I am very grateful for your help with WeRelate. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind recording the time you spend helping out. WeRelate is a 501C3 nonprofit organization. In order to keep our tax deductible status, we need to show public support. Time is the same as money. So we ask people who work on projects, or work on things beyond their own stuff to record their time at Volunteer log. Thanks so much.--sq 11:15, 28 October 2008 (EDT)

How to do pictures [8 November 2008]

JBS

Thank you for your help in adding pictures to my pages. Not quite reaady to do that but wanted to know ahead of time how to do it. I printed the information so I"ll have it near by when I get ready to do it. Thanks again, Phyllis--GenLady5555 16:55, 8 November 2008 (EST)

Medieval Nobility, Etc [29 December 2008]

I'm definitely making this up as I go along, the conventions I generally follow are thus:

• If there's a wikipedia page for the person, use that name as the name of the werelate page
• Change the "preferred" name of the page to be the same as that used for the page name. Retain the unique set of other forms as alternates.
• If there is a wikipedia page for the person, always add a source reference for that page.
• Try to preserve any source citations that may exist in the old text body, even if I don't understand what they mean or how they work - just pull any sources from the body of the page into individual werelate source entries (don't try to reformat them or tidy them, unless you are familiar with the reference and know how to turn the existing format into something more werelate consistent).
• Unless the page has a body of text that was maintained/modified for werelate, junk it in favor of sourcing the wikipedia page
• If the person does not have a backing wikipedia page, but is named in a wikipedia reference, change the werelate page name to be consistent with the wikipedia usage (this is common for wives, who are often only noted by name in their husband's page and indicated as children of a particular father).
• Try to remember to change the name of family pages to be consistent with changed names of the husband and wife pages, with an "and" in the middle.
• If you don't have a wikipedia page, or a wikipedia page for an adjacent ancestor to go from, there does seem to be a wikipedia convention, but it's not universally followed and I've never gone that route. Instead, I choose among the duplicated page names for a person, keeping the name that seems most "helpful" (by no particular objective standard). In so far as there is a wikipedia convention for royalty and people living before the advent of modern given-surname conventions, it seems to be: <first name>[<numeric sequence>][of <originating community>][, <primary title>]. A fictional example - Frederick V of Shrimptom, 5th Beadle of Shrimpshire.--Jrm03063 13:09, 29 December 2008 (EST)

Hart family in Dauphin Co. Pa. & Bath County, KY [28 January 2009]

Dear JBS66:

My family of Henry Jackson Hart came from Daughin Co. Pa. near Harrisburg, Pa. & by 1820 was in Bath County, Ky with his wife and 8 children. Did I not make it clear. I don't have much time to work on these pages and when I do I seem to mess up.

I tried to make a list of each child on Henry Jacksn Hart Sr. page and when I check they were not in the Sequence of their birth. What happened? Will I need to redo that page?

So far I've not found any cousins reading my comments.

Phylis.--GenLady5555 10:09, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Places?? [31 January 2009]

Jennifer:

I don't understand the list of places on the page of Margaret Hart & Thomas Spencer. They were from Bath Co. Ky.

The only ones that should have been from Harrisburg, Dauphin Co. Pa. is Henry Jackson Hart Sr. & wife Elizabeth Granger and their two sons George Hart & Samuel Hart.

All these people migrated to Bath Coounty, Ky.

Phyllis--GenLady5555 21:41, 30 January 2009 (EST)

Mahala Hart [3 February 2009]

Jennifer:

Thanks for helping me with my Henry Hart family. I really appreciate it very much.

I noticed that Mahala Hart b. 1823 should be between David Hart & William Hart.

I'm afraid if I try to get her in the right order I"ll mess up. So, could you make this correction for me?

Now, I"d like to start listing the children of my great grandfather Henry Jackson Hart Sr. Can I go ahead and start that process?

Thanks,

Phyllis--GenLady5555 18:36, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Sources [11 February 2009]

Jennifer, another example similar to the problem encountered with "Charles Kilgore of King's Mountain", is the work Brown, 1854. The Captives of Abb's Valley. This work was later reprinted (1942) with a substantial addition, under the authorship of Brown, and Robert Bell Woodworth. The two works are quite distinct, though there is substantial overlap. Unlike the Robertson problem, it is very difficult to tell what information came from Brown, and what from Woodworth. So again, its important to make the distinction between the 1854 and 1942 versions. I've started a revision of the source entry for this work at: Source:Brown, James Moore, and Robert Bell Woodsworth. The captives of Abb's Valley : a legend of frontier life. Concluded that clarity was best served by including both authors in the article title. This is what I would also recommend for the Charles Kilgore of King's Mountain problem. I will add another source card for "Brown, James Moore. Captives...." tomorrow. Q 22:19, 10 February 2009 (EST)

I, personally, think this is an appropriate way to distinguish the rare sources for which this occurs.

This is not all that rare, particularly for older works. Some authors just can't ever let go, and revise and reprint a work many times over the course of their life. Even when there's no fundamental change in the work proper a new index or forward will be added. That's why it is routine to cite the publication date of the specific version of a work being used. It makes a difference when there are more than one editions.

This version: Source:The captives of Abb's Valley, a legend of frontier life, is this the Brown and Woodsworth version? If so, is it possible for you to redirect it to the sources you created? You will probably need to move over the FHLC repository link first though. I do like your format for books, it puts all the necessary details front and center.

Yes. My intent is to fix this with redirects, and transfer any information unique to the original. Q 08:44, 11 February 2009 (EST)

I have a question. Have you heard any conversations about categorizing books around here? I've looked into the Dewey system because I thought that if we were to enter the Dewey code for books, they could automatically be categorized (like WikiBooks is doing). Then, I discovered that Dewey is copyrighted! There is always the Library of Congress call number, it's just not as easily organized. I think it would be nice to be able to browse books by categories, rather than just conduct a search. Any thoughts?

Not something I would normally pay much attention too. I've often thought that for completeness, Library of Congress numbers might be included. Not sure about Dewey. Don't think the copyright point is really an issue, as the system has no power unless used, and I doubt that libraries actually pay to use the system. However, I don't know that Dewey Decimal would be the way to go, as I'm under the impression that its being supplanted by other numbering systems. Q 08:44, 11 February 2009 (EST)

I just saw your link to Open Library - I didn't realize they had begun featuring full-text books! Where have I been? Do you want me to make a repository page for it?--Jennifer (JBS66) 08:15, 11 February 2009 (EST)

I've created a card for it at Repository:Open Library. I wasn't aware of it either until I found a link to "Captives". Q 08:44, 11 February 2009 (EST)

___________________________________________________________

Jennifer, for additional discussion of some of these problems see: WeRelate_talk:Watercooler/Archive_2008#Different_Problem_with_Website_Sourcing_.5B3_June_2008.5D
Discussion of interest is toward bottom of this topic. Q 10:27, 11 February 2009 (EST)

If I were writing a book, there are in-text citations in the general form of (Author, Date). Then, there is the Works Cited section. That is more detailed, listing the entire bibliographic info, Author, Title, Publisher, Date...

I see our source pages as being akin to the Works Cited, a place to list all of the bibliographic details. I do think it could use some updating though! Perhaps it could contain a section for each reprint of the book, with the specific repository info within each of those sections. Right now, there is this push to merge duplicate sources, and understandably so. However, I don't think the current Source page structure is entirely conducive to this.

All that being said, you could reference the source in the style of an in-text citation. Say you have a source, Source:Addington, Hugh. Charles Kilgore of King's Mountain, but you utilized the 2007 reprint. You can use the following reference: (Addington, 2007). Then, you are linking to the source page, while identifying which edition you used.

I see similar issues with conversations about the Place pages. Places changed over time, how do you reference a particular place that changed jurisdiction... This is an inherent challenge with a wiki format. I think the benefits of having one page per source/place/person... outweigh the bugs.--Jennifer (JBS66) 10:53, 11 February 2009 (EST)

There are a number of ways you can handle "in-line" citations.

First, as this site does, you can use the title of the source page within the text---which in our case is "Author, title". This creates a very long in line citation, and so is not practical. I've found no other location, web or otherwise, that uses this approach. I'm pretty sure no one uses it because it is fundamentally unwieldly.

For inline citations, most (all) use something short and simple: "Author, Date" is common, as are reference numbers.

In that regard, WeRelate does use reference numbers to associate specific data elements with a source. Then those reference numbers can be cited within the narriative if any is added. This works only if there's something that the information corresponds to in the pages edit boxes.

• • An alternative is to use numbered references (useing the <ref =...> construction. That would build a list of references where ever you put the references tag. Works, but then you can't use the ref tag for any sidebar footnotes, explaining whatever. (Well you can, but it looks ugly. Doesn't give you a nice clean bibliography at all.

• • Citing the source page for the item could be a niceway to go, if the title isn't too long. But since it is always too long, and clutters up the article page something fierce) its not a good solution for inline citation.

• • Hence what I use is an alias as you suggest, in author, date format. Or rather, what I usually do just insert author, date into the text, create a correponding author date card, which then redirects to the proper card. Cumbersome, but solves the problem.

Q 11:26, 11 February 2009 (EST)

thanks for the kind words [13 February 2009]

Jennifer,

Thanks for the message on my talk page. Glad I'm saying something helpful. Yeah, I figured you all had your own timetable and if/when it made sense to respond you would.

Like you, my time here is volunteer and hours are limited especially during the week. Also like you, I need multiple projects going on simultaneously. Gotta take a break from mad merging!  

If there are specific tasks you want to assign me, I'm happy to help that way. I think you're doing a tremendous job.

Have people been assigned to various portals yet? I have a growing interest in the Article space but could fulfill that interest in a variety of ways including working on dallans suggestion to better categorize pages in the main space.

Anyway let me know how I can help with this great effort to make werelate more user-friendly.

-- jillaine 08:34, 13 February 2009 (EST)

Kenz GEDCOMs [14 February 2009]

I see that you and I are spending our Valentines Day merging dupes-- and in this case, running into the Dupes of KENZ. I seem to be "right behind you". (I've been working on W's)

I'm going to avoid his/her files from here on out. -- jillaine 21:05, 14 February 2009 (EST)

merge [19 February 2009]

I see you have hard at work. I am still trying to learn werelate. If you find anything in error or you wish to merge something feel free. That would help me and many others clear up wrong data.

Thanks Ray Houle--Ray Houle 05:18, 19 February 2009 (EST)

You Go Girl! [1 March 2009]

(Couldn't help myself.)

You're up early. Where are you? I'm right outside of DC/Bethesda. jillaine 07:29, 1 March 2009 (EST)

LOL! I'm in sleepy Northeast Connecticut - where we're preparing for another foot of snow! Where is spring?? Any glimpses down your way yet? --Jennifer (JBS66) 07:35, 1 March 2009 (EST)

When I stepped outside this morning (to take out some trash), I started laughing hysterically. The last couple of days have approached the 60s. This morning there's an inch of snow; we might have another few inches. I'm a California girl who continues to be amazed at these weather fluctuations (and I've been here 15 years!).

Been spending my early morning with laptop in bed (while hubby sleeps in) working on my Article Categorization project. What a mess. What did I get myself into? ;-)

Now off to Quaker meeting and the activities of the rest of the day. Probably won't be back online til tonight.

-- jillaine 08:42, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Cemeteries as Place but with Different naming convention? [7 March 2009]

Warning: Begin RANT.

I'm fine with the idea of cemeteries being considered a Place.

I'm actually fine with the current naming convention of Cemetery Name, City, County, State. Makes it much easier to find.

However, isn't the naming convention for places from greater to more specific? If cemeteries followed the naming convention of other Places, wouldn't they be:

United States, New York, Erie, Buffalo, Concordia Cemetery

???

Not that I want that... I'm just going f'in' bonkers about naming conventions here.

Posting here vs. elsewhere because I just want to rant, and well, I'm taking advantage of your past humor and patience with me.

okay.

i'm done

for now.

sorry for yelling.

-- jillaine 13:51, 4 March 2009 (EST)

Ok - deeeeep breath - Ahh... Place names are from smallest to greatest - like Place:Hoboken, Hudson, New Jersey, United States (insert Little Sisters of Hoboken joke here if you want). If, however, you were referencing a Geographical Source - well, that's a different story! If you had a source (say vitals records from said Hoboken), that would be titled reversely, in the form United States, New Jersey, Hudson, Hoboken. Vital Records.
Another example - We have a source Source:United States, Texas, Collin, Weston. Mugg Cemetery but the Place is Place:Weston, Collin, Texas, United States and the cemetery would be Place:Mugg Cemetery ,Weston, Collin, Texas, United States.

Confusing? Yeah. I believe Geographical Sources are titled in reverse order so that it is easier to find in a drop-down list. Same reason you yelled about titling Book Sources as Author.Title - that darn drop down box :~))--Jennifer (JBS66) 14:59, 4 March 2009 (EST)

okay. um. sitting here trying to manage my heart rate. i have no hair left to pull out because i pulled it all out earlier. So PLACE (as in namespace Place) is specific to general. And SOURCE (as in namespace Source) when the source is geographic in nature is general to specific.

And I (and any other end-user who wasn't involved in the decision-making) am/is supposed to make sense of this HOW?????

(oops, just broke the question mark key on my keyboard...)

and don't get me started on drop down menus. the current convention does NOT make use of drop-downs easier (unless it's a cemetery). Not for this girl.

sigh. time to go home and open a bottle of wine. or better: get me to that yoga class.

You're a doll; thanks for your ongoing patience with me. -- jillaine 15:29, 4 March 2009 (EST)

Yeah, I have to agree that the Place and Source conventions being opposite makes little sense to me. I just discussed that in the Source page titles Talk page. However, I also see the need for standard naming for the Source titles. I now know I named a couple new census source pages against convention on that Help page. I had looked at a whole long list of census titles using a very general search, and they were all over the place. A number of them, however, followed a fairly logical order such as 1900 Federal Census, Greene County, Indiana. So I used that order as well. I wouldn't have a problem adding United States to the end of that. - ★Parsa 17:34, 7 March 2009 (EST)

I don't really know the history that goes into why sources are titled the way they are. The sources that you are likely referring to, like Source:1810 Federal census of Rowan County, North Carolina were created as part of an automatic gathering of sources from FHLC. Yes, the titles are currently all over the place. Dallan is planning on renaming sources to conform to the conventions, I believe some time this year. --Jennifer (JBS66) 17:52, 7 March 2009 (EST)

[5 mrt 2009]

Coffey Merges - Thank You [7 March 2009]

Hello Jennifer,

I wanted to say Thank You.

It looks like you are merging some of the Coffey pages. I have been thinking of doing this on my duplicates. More than once I have sent messages to various other users asking if they would like to merge. I usually do not receive a message back to know one way or the other. I have been thinking of making a rule for myself if the other User has not contributed within the last 6 months, and did not respond to my message to just go ahead and merge the page?

Is that reasonable?

Gratefully, Debbie Freeman --DFree 22:14, 6 March 2009 (EST)

Debbie, I have to say that I don't really know what pages I was merging :>) I choose a couple of users that have not been very active and started merging their duplicates.

I think your suggestions are more than reasonable. Merging your duplicates is something that is very responsible. I, personally, would focus on your list of duplicates, and not worry too much about the other users you'd be merging into. There may be many who are inactive users.

If you have any questions about merging or you want me to help you with the first few - just let me know.--Jennifer (JBS66) 07:52, 7 March 2009 (EST)

Correcting a place page title. [8 March 2009]

I need help with a title for a place page. I edited the page but the title on the person's page did not change. I am starting with one peron and I started with my grandfather [1]under his death it reads Maplewood Cemetery I need it to read North Arkansas Medical Center. When you click the link the page has the correct title. How do I fix it.--I not use to working with html so this is all new to me.

Merge Source [8 March 2009]

I started working on my grandfathers page and noticed that not only his page but several of my pages have duplicate sources. How do you decied which one to keep and which to remove if you have are the same record (1920 U.S. Census Records) but have different "updated" dates?--Tami 04:14, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Terschelling [17 March 2009]

Hello Jennifer,

Fred Bergman told me some of your ancestors did come from the island Terschelling. My father is from a Terschellinger family, and almost 50% of my ancestors are from the island. So if you want to know something about Terschelling just ask. I have a database with 50.000 people from Terschelling and Vlieland.

Rinse Spits--RinseSpits 15:03, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

Hello, Rinse,

I don't know how We Relate works (yet), but just in case you can help me: I've got in my ancestors a Martjen Johannes Cupido who, I think, married Jan van der Veen...

Someone else stated that he married her sister, Aaltje....(that would still give the same ancestors, so not really important, probably he married first aaltje, then martje). Do you know anything about them?

Thanks, Nicolette

(no idea where your answer will arrive on this confusing site, but never mind, i'll manage...)--Nicolette 10:21, 17 March 2009 (EDT)

Source naming [9 March 2009]

Okay, no problem, I was unaware of the recommendation. I think the real issue here is ease of discovery. If the source is called "Source:AUTHOR. TITLE" and I don't know the name of the author, but just the title, then to find the correct source I have to go through the add/find dialog and the several steps involved searching for it there, whereas if the source or a redirect to it is named something intuitive then it just pops up while I'm typing the name and away I go. In cases where there don't seem to be two sources with identical titles but written by different people, it makes sense to me to have "Source:TITLE" redirect to the source named "Source:AUTHOR. TITLE". This would have the advantage of bringing more source citations to point to the correct source without having to be changed manually. --JoshHansen 15:52, 9 March 2009 (EDT) --- By the way, I cross-posted this to Help_talk:Source_page_titles#Why_author_in_title.3F_.5B9_March_2009.5D, which seems like a good spot for any further discussion. Thanks! --JoshHansen 16:01, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

Narrative on source pages [9 March 2009]

I have a question for you, Jennifer. (Mmm.. .should this be over at Source Review? feel free to move if so.)

As I'm redirecting MySources and cleaning up Sources as I can, I notice that the Source pages we're keeping (FHL derived, I assume) have "Usage tips" that are all about the FHL. But in pretty much 100% of the Sources I'm editing, the source is available elsewhere. This shows up in the Repository information, but that info is WAY down the page, a few screens down, while the Usage Tips, overly highlighting the FHL availability is right there, first screen, front and center.

I'm tempted (and have given into such temptation a few times already tonight) to delete those usage tips (less the FHL film #s which I keep in there). When I'm in a more generous frame of mind, I add the other repository information into the usage tips section, but this last is feeling duplicative to me. Seems like the Usage tips should NOT be repeating what's in the Repository fields in the lower left corner/nav bar, way down there.

Suggestions? Advice?

-- Jillaine jillaine 20:33, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I had made the suggestion here that the Repository section be moved up. It gets totally lost down there - especially as you add additional surnames covered. One thought has been to move it to where the usage tips are. There is also talk of moving author, title etc to that usage tips area to have it look more like a bibliographic citation (see this link).

Yeah, I agree, it is duplicating work - especially when this can be done automatically by Dallan. My thought is to focus on having the correct title, author, publisher, and repositories in their fields. If that is in place, they can be moved around by Dallan at a later date.

Regarding publisher... Even though it doesn't really specify, I enter the original publisher/date/place. Suggestions have been made to Dallan that additional reprints (that do not significantly change the text) need to be added separately (kind of like we do when we add additional sources on a person page.) Hope this helps!--Jennifer (JBS66) 21:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

friesland lost its way [10 March 2009]

Jennifer, this one does not exist:http://www.werelate.org/wiki/Place:Friesland%2C_Zuid-Holland%2C_Netherlands yours leo--Leo Bijl 03:13, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Thank you for letting me know. I deleted this page. It looks like the FHLC information was duplicated on the Hekelingen page.--Jennifer (JBS66) 07:10, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Why do I keep messing up REDIRECTS? [11 March 2009]

This is the second time I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong. I'm sure it's as plain as the nose on my face, and I CANNOT see it.

MySource:Jillaine/Ancient_Historical_Records_of_Norwalk,_CT

Sleepless in Bethesda,

-- jillaine 06:34, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

Goodness, I'm up - but I must not be fully awake! Did you see my grammar on that redirect????

Your only mistake was using the URL (with the %2C...), just use the actual title Source:Ancient Historical Records of Norwalk, Conn.

Hope all went well yesterday!!--Jennifer (JBS66) 06:40, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

How to add and ancestor? [11 March 2009]

OK, I put my great grandfather's name on my page. Thanks, Sylvia--Sharrow 08:24, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

My ancestor, James Anderson (118) now seems to be magically related to "Anderson in Ukraine" and I can't see how to unlink him from there. [13 March 2009]

--Sharrow 14:18, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Source title mistake. [2 April 2009]

Oops. Yes, you could go ahead and correct that (United States, New York, Chautauqua. 1920 U.S. Census Population Schedule). It must have slipped by me. Thx.--M2Mr9KIzpS 17:29, 2 April 2009 (EDT)

Editing census pages [11 April 2009]

Hi Jennifer,

Thanks for editing my census pages; but you don't have to fix the link. The old source name will redirect to the new page automatically. I do usually rename the source just because it bothers me somehow but it is not necessary for you to do this every time you rename a source page. --Beth 20:49, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

Book Sources [20 April 2009]

Note: conversation moved to WeRelate talk:Source Committee--Jennifer (JBS66) 11:45, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Prince of Wales and family [17 April 2009]

Hi Jennifer,

I belive that you made some corrections to pages that I merged regarding the Royal family. Thanks, I did not even realize they were members of the Royal family. Anyway I am on a mission to complete the merge list for the letter A this week. I don't wish to mess up anymore of the Wales family pages; would you do the merges for the remaining patronymic pages? They seem to all involve the Prince of Wales and his family members; two of the pages have a major problem, mother died before marriage, not sure what to do with that one. --Beth 19:50, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry Beth, this wasn't me! Royal family pages wouldn't be my forté... Have you been back through the page's history?--Volunteer Admin - Jennifer (JBS66) 21:38, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry about that Jennifer; this was about 3 days ago. Will have to look back and see who it was. My memory failed me.--Beth 21:45, 17 April 2009 (EDT)

Pardon my spaciness [19 April 2009]

So apparently I should not do census cleanup while watching TV. I was rather sloppy yesterday; thanks for doing the cleanup!--Amelia 13:09, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Alternate Spelling [20 April 2009]

Jennifer, If the handling of alternate spellings of names has been discussed somewhere, I haven't been able to find it. What is the policy? All versions have to be on every person? (ick!) or is there a master surname page keyed to all the variations to drive the searches? --Judy (jlanoux) 18:56, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

What a great question! An example of what you mean would be Boudrot and Boudreau right? We have a Surname namespace that does help to define searches. There is a Surname:Boudreau page which includes the surnames Boudreau and Boudreaux. When I search for Boudreaux, without Exact Search mind you, I get pages for both of those surnames. Surname:Boudrot is a separate page, not really sure that it should be though. I'll be honest, I think this is a good discussion for the Watercooler or Dallan. He will know the history and programing behind this a bit more than me. It would also be good to know how to handle such things as: can we put Boudrot both on its own page and as an alternate on another one. Would you like to post this question, or should I?--Jennifer (JBS66) 19:22, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

I can post on watercooler if that is the appropriate spot. It's hard to believe it hasn't come up before. Some names have 15 or more spellings. Yes, Boudreaux is a good example. --Judy (jlanoux) 21:16, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Judy, I found this help page Help:Name pages that offers some answers, but it looks really out of date! I would suggest a post on the Watercooler, and I would also note this outdated help page. --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:03, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Deletion requested [20 April 2009]

Jennifer, I somehow got a MySource saved as a Source -- both with and without the unwanted "(1)" at the end. The culprits are Source:Mksmith/Shelby County, Kentucky Marriage Records and Source:Mksmith/Shelby County, Kentucky Marriage Records (1). Could you wave your deletion wand over those two, please? Thanks! --Mike (mksmith) 22:40, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

I could wave my wand... but you still have a page pointing to one of them, Family:John McAllister and Thirza Hedden (1). I believe since you're the only contributor, you can go to More, Delete to delete these sources. Also, for pages that have been contributed to by others, but you feel should be deleted, there is always Category:Speedy Delete.--Jennifer (JBS66) 07:20, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, I thought I had caught all those -- but I just changed it, in any case. Even if I'm the only contributor -- and, in this case, the one who actually created them -- it won't allow me to delete "real" Sources. Only MySources. And I hadn't put them on Speedy Delete because I was trying to hide the evidence of my having screwed it up late at night. . . . --Mike (mksmith) 08:58, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Ok, I deleted both of these.--Jennifer (JBS66) 11:51, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Footnote template [20 April 2009]

Jennifer, I think my response was lost in the longer topic. I could not get this to work correctly either. How does it work on the featured page? Should I remove this from the Help section? I tried every possbile method I could think of and the portion of the sentence after the inline citation is always forced to a new line. --Beth 08:18, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Sorry Beth, I read it and then forgot to follow through! I think I will post a quick note to Dallan, because I can't figure it out! Regarding the source conversation above - any ideas where this could be moved to?--Jennifer (JBS66) 08:30, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Jennifer, you could move the conversation to WeRelate Talk:Source Committee. --Beth 09:33, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Thomas Edward Scott I, II, & III [22 April 2009]

This is my direct line. What is your relationship to them? I got an email saying you were making changes to my family. What did you change? You can email me at pawsonlady@yahoo.com Thank You, Claudia--Lilfox 17:03, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

User Leo Bilj [5 May 2009]

Hi Jennifer,

Leo has deleted his entire talk page or someone else has. Why would that be? Just checking to make sure he did and not a spammer. --Beth 23:49, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

Hello Beth,

No problem at all. He commented with the Dutch word archief which means that he's just archiving conversations that are no longer active (by way of deleting). Would it be preferable to create an archive page (like the Watercooler) instead of deleting?--Jennifer (JBS66) 05:55, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

Well good, I should have thought to look up the word archief. Ronni use to archive her pages; I guess it is up to the user.--Beth 06:26, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

Thanks Jennifer! [18 May 2009]

Thank you for fixing my 'Jackson in Clark, Indiana' page!! I was afraid it was a lost cause. I have a whole lot of this kind of info I hope to link to later; so it is good to see how it is done. --Janiejac 08:46, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

Thanks so much [21 July 2009]

Hi,

We're back. Thanks so much for filling in. Would you mind recording your time on the volunteer log and letting me know the last time you patrolled? Are you interested in taking responsibility for patrolling sources as a regular thing?

Thanks again, --sq 21:38, 21 July 2009 (EDT)

Naming Source Pages [23 July 2009]

Hi,

I am new to this game and just learning the ropes (and the details of WeRelate). I added a note to your comment on-line, but I am not sure you will be notified of that, so here's a repeat:

ScotlandsPeople is an on-line database of images of local records. In this case, the documents are the actual city records of births and marriages. Based on your guidance, it seems that the title should be:

Scotland.Edinburgh.SaintGiles.Statutory Births Scotland.Edinburgh.Newington.Statutory Marriages

What this does not capture is the mechanism by which I found these records, i.e. ScotlandsPeople. Is that OK? Can I annotate the reference to indicate that this is one way of accessin these records?--Pbrown12303 11:11, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for your help!--Pbrown12303 11:13, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

Naming Source Pages [23 July 2009]

Hi,

I am new to this game and just learning the ropes (and the details of WeRelate). I added a note to your comment on-line, but I am not sure you will be notified of that, so here's a repeat:

ScotlandsPeople is an on-line database of images of local records. In this case, the documents are the actual city records of births and marriages. Based on your guidance, it seems that the title should be:

Scotland.Edinburgh.SaintGiles.Statutory Births Scotland.Edinburgh.Newington.Statutory Marriages

What this does not capture is the mechanism by which I found these records, i.e. ScotlandsPeople. Is that OK? Can I annotate the reference to indicate that this is one way of accessin these records?--Pbrown12303 11:11, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for your help!--Pbrown12303 11:13, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

Source:Canada, Quebec. La Société des Filles du roi et soldats du Carignan [22 August 2009]

Jennifer,

I see that you are watching pages some of which link to Source:Canada, Quebec. La Société des Filles du roi et soldats du Carignan. I'm volunteering on the Source renaming project and when I look at this source (and its web page-- what an INTERESTING part of Canada's history!), this seems more like a Repository than a source. I don't see any original or even derivative records there.

But I'm sure you know more. Could you please advise me? Thanks!

-- jillaine 08:37, 22 August 2009 (EDT)

Hi Jillaine! I would tend to say this is a source. The Add Repository page states that repositories are "for physical locations of genealogical material such as archives and libraries, and for significant virtual locations such as major genealogy websites". I wouldn't say this is a major genealogy website (like Ancestry and such). I don't believe sources need to have original records, it's just a website location where information can be obtained. I hope this helps. --Jennifer (JBS66) 08:55, 22 August 2009 (EDT)

Okay. Great. I'll leave it as is. Thanks! jillaine 09:00, 22 August 2009 (EDT)

Alexis Dugas and Marie Bourg [31 August 2009]

Hi Jennifer, The family pages for Family:Alexis Dugas and Marie Bourg (3) and Family:Alexis Dugas and Marie Bourg (1) are on the duplicate lists. You are watching one of the pages. Should they be marked not a match or merged? --Beth 09:40, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

Beth,

With this line, I'm only watching these pages because I adopted Karen Theriot Reader's tree. Her work has been well documented and is more reliable than the other page you'd be merging into! Since this isn't my line, I'm not entirely sure, but.... I believe the Family:Alexis Dugas and Marie Bourg (3) is inaccurate. I marked them do not merge.--Jennifer (JBS66) 10:26, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

Thanks Jennifer. --Beth 10:40, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

forgotten topic [8 September 2009]

Dear Jennifer, I added a little comment on the spelling of some Dutch place names, but omitted introducing it as a separate topic. So now it appears strangely almost on top of the page. Could you remedy this? Thanks!--Willem6 12:11, 8 September 2009 (EDT)

de' Medici [3 November 2009]

Thank you. I've reached out to the project to find out the preferred way(s) to point cite particular person pages in their archive. I was able to figure out how they do things presently, but I would like to be able to be somewhat sure that source citations, pointing at person pages on their site, will find their way to the right page over time.

My interest honestly isn't in the Medici in particular, but rather in general improvements to WR medieval content and practice. So my plan, assuming they respond, will be to use that information to nicely source a few of the more notable/notorious members of the family, and to create a source page entry that provides good guidance on how to create hooks into the archive. Then, perahaps folks with a more passionate subject interest in the Medici, and the archive content, will be able to use that information effectively.

Thanks again...

--Jrm03063 13:38, 3 November 2009 (EST)

Ancestry magazine [16 November 2009]

Jennifer, I am a writer for Ancestry. I am planning an article on WeRelate. Dallan Quass, the founder of WeRelate, this summer sent me note on researching your husband's dutch line. I was hoping to quote the e-mail and also to find out a bit more about you. Can you tell me: --Your name and your husband's name. --What sort of work do you do? --Where do you live? --Have you handled all the research on your husband's family tree? --How did you find WeRelate? --You sound like a techy. What do you like about Wikis in general and why does it work for family history? What are the downsides? --Part of the benefit seems to be the social interaction. Right? --Do you enjoy being able to post the history online so others can find it and share and collaborate? --AM I understanding correctly that Leo and you created a guide to translating Dutch records? BTW, my regular e-mail is howard.wolinsky@gmail.com If need be, can I reach you on the phone? Howard Wolinsky--Hwolinsky 11:10, 16 November 2009 (EST)

Dutch names [20 November 2009]

Hi Jennifer. I got an answer from Dallan about the gedcom that you asked about. see Family:Ypes Poortinga and Saakje Jansma (1) and Family:Gerben Poortinga and Saakje DeJong (1). It appeared that the uploader excluded the parents which is why they didn't show up. But a bug in the import left the gedcom page ref in there. He thanks you for pointing that out.

I also am grateful for the info on how to outline that you gave Jillaine. This is what I needed for my descendancy project pages. You are a gold mine! --Judy (jlanoux) 10:21, 20 November 2009 (EST)

GEDCOM Export Ready [6 December 2009]

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

GEDCOM Export Ready [6 December 2009]

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