User talk:Jillaine/Article Project

Purpose of this Project

I should have started with this; thanks Amelia for your comment:

Why are we doing this? I ask as a guide to how it should be done. I would assume it's to help researchers find these articles. Those researchers presumably start with a known genealogical fact about which they would like to know more: a surname, a place, perhaps a religion or ethnic group. From there, they want to know what information WeRelate has on it. I doubt most people start with the idea "what does WeRelate have on DNA studies?" or "what biographies does WeRelate have?" etc. The top levels of the hierarchy should reflect that. Don't make people choose a subcategory among topics that are all likely to be useful until they know that they are close to their goal. And actually, once you're at a particular surname, for example, you probably don't need subcats for one-name studies, DNA, etc. -- that would be redundant. So I would suggest that most articles be put into the existing surname and place categories, and that if needed we create some additional browse-friendly categories. Having a whole hierarchy based on generic ideas like "biographies" and "research guides" may help us figure out what the article universe looks like, but is there a reason we need to expend volunteer effort to figure that out?--Amelia 16:07, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

I believe (and know from experience) that people search for things in different ways. For some people, the search engine is sufficient. Some researchers, as Amelia points out, start with a fact they want to know more about. Others (like me) are "grazers" or explorers who browse to learn more, to get clues and ideas, to see what's out there. But WeRelate's ability to support "browsers" is currently limited. The recent portals are helpful. In the meantime, there is a lot of great (and not-so-great) information buried in the Article space.

I also believe I was a librarian in a previous life, and to me, WeRelate -- especially the Article namespace -- is like a huge library without "stacks". What I loved about the library (and still do) is that I might go searching for and find a particular book in the stacks, but I would also benefit by looking at the books in the same section. I might find things I hadn't even thought to look for. Yes, it's a very different approach to how a lot of genealogists work, but this has worked very well for me. I have discovered links and facts I never would have found otherwise. And I doubt I'm alone in this.

So the purpose of this project is to help users see what's available-- not only for ways to improve their research results, but also for ideas on how to use and contribute TO werelate.

I concur that many of the pages on the main page here could be categorized to their appropriate surname and/or place. But there are also pages that are not specific to either. Most of those might be Research Guides, but Research Guides seems awfully broad. Mmm... I'll think some more and let's see what others also have to add. Thanks. jillaine 09:05, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

How you can help [5 April 2009]

Inspired by a past comment by Dallan as well as the new Portals, I set out to see what it might take to Categorize the pages that are in the "ARTICLE" namespace. My idea for how to do this includes the following steps:

1. Review what's already in the Article namespace
2. Based on what's found there, identify some major categories. I've started this so far and gotten through about 430 pages (out of over 1700).
3. Create an index of Categories for these articles. This I've begun here.
4. Ask "power users" to review #3 and provide feedback. This is the purpose of THIS post. Please review what I've started so far and provide feedback on the category names through the Article Project Talk page.
5. As we approach consensus (or something close to it, if that's at all possible), convert the Article Project page to something that enables volunteers to take on particular sections and work their way through it.
6. Draft help language for Help:Article to help people apply categories as they're creating/editing them.
7. Establish a volunteer "maintenance" project that checks newly added Article pages and categorizes them.

Your help and feedback is appreciated. I look forward to reading your feedback.

-- jillaine 22:57, 4 April 2009 (EDT)

Outline of Article Categories

has this been done elsewhere?

1. Surname
   1. (Surname)-in-(Place)
2. Place
   1. Regional Research Projects
3. Research Aids
   1. (Various subcategories; see below for MKSMITH's ideas.)

Some comments and observations [7 April 2009]

Note: I'm a librarian, so I'm a classifier and categorizer by nature. And I tend to think about these things either prescriptively or descriptively (i.e., DDC vs. LOC). My comments undoubtedly reflect that dichotomy.

Under "Pages I have no idea what to do with":

• A Glossary of Mining Terms -- This belongs in a "Resources and Research Aids Category" (different from "sources"). Similar "useful contextual information" might be an article on the Old Style Calendar, for example, or on the Acadian Grande Derangement. Specialized information that's useful to genealogists but is not in itself related to a family.

• Horatio Gates Trout Nov 16 1829, Northumberland , PA -- This is an excerpt from a book, so there's a copyright issue here, unless the uploader was the author. But this is short enough to be easily incorporated in the text box on Horatio's Person page.

• Wife of Person:Thomas Scudder (6) -- I agree, this needs to stay an article, but perhaps for a different reason. Should there be a "Case Studies" category? This particular page is a good example of methodology and analysis, the kind of thing you might build a lecture around at a conference. The page on The Problem of William H. Smith which I recently uploaded is another example.

• Quolla6/A_collection_of_observations_on_"Sources" -- I would put this under "Methodology" or "How To." It's a broadly educational article of interest to any researcher. I edit a quarterly state journal, and this is the kind of thing experienced researchers often write for the edification of the less experienced. I've done articles (elsewhere) on "How to Transcribe a Cemetery" and similar topics which I'll have to consider adding to this category.

Under "Surname Articles":

• Surname in place articles might be a good idea when WeRelate is ten times its current size. But, as Dallan implies, it's probably overkill at this point. General articles on large families would be good, especially in sorting out the various family groups with the same surname.

Example: There are Hatfield families clustered in Massachusetts, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, and they're pretty much mutually exclusive, each having begun with the immigration of a person named "Hatfield." Experienced Hatfield researchers are awre of all this; beginners aren't, and often try to link to one of the better-researched (or more auspiciously married) families. A general "Hatfield" article would be useful here. Separate articles on the various family groups by geographical locus can be spun out later, when the scale of the site requires it.

Under "Family or Surname Projects" and "Move to Surname Category":

• I would include nearly all of these (except for the empty ones) under "Surname Articles," since they accomplish pretty much the same thing -- even though some on the list are apparently focused on a particular locality. MizLiv's several family group articles are a good example. Or is there a distinct meaning here for "project" that I'm not aware of?

Under "Move to (Surname)-in-Place Category":

• Repeat what I said above. I think the locality specification could be ignored for awhile because of the size of WeRelate. Where an individual has already written a significant amount in separate articles on the various localities where a family is found (Coker, Rumgay, etc), I would suggest a general article with the specific localities as subpages. That would be easier to add to, as well.

• Incidentally, "Surname/Locality" might be a better term than "Surname in place," since there's already a Place namespace to add confusion. . . .

Under "Move elsewhere:"

• Flint in Caldwell County Kentucky -- From the comment, that this is a disambiguation page for several individuals of the same name, I would say this could be in both the Surname category and the "Case Studies" category I suggested above. However, the page itself is presently empty.

Under "Categories that are coming to mind":

• I understand that Allen County is a sponsor of the site, . . . but I'm not sure they need to have their very own category. I would suggest a category called something like "Libraries, Archives, and Other Repositories," which could include articles on any library, etc. I spent 30 years on the staff at Dallas Public Library (and shared an office with Lloyd Bockstruck for many of those years), so I could write a useful article about the genealogical resources there. An article on the LDS "Mountain of Names" would be useful. Also articles on various state libraries and state archives, written by people closely familiar with their collections (and policies). If Allen County has a bunch of articles all to itself, that can be a sub-category.

• Articles on the "Biography" list, if short, should indeed be included on the relevant Person page. If they become very long, though (again, the article I've posted on William H. Smith), they will have to become articles by default, since the site does not (presently) allow subpages on Person pages. Which suggests another category: "Person Page Subpages," though that's a pretty clunky title for it.

• "List of Founders of Windsor, Connecticut" -- This is a descriptive (rather than prescriptive) category, but it ought to be a sub-category under "Resources and Research Aids," as described above.

• "Colonial Records of Pennsylvania" -- ditto.

• "Disambiguation Pages" -- I don't think these are even "articles," are they? But they can't be Person pages, so maybe they have will to be Articles by default. I dunno about this one.

• "DNA Projects" -- This certainly could be a category, although articles about how DNA testing works in relation to family research might (again) go better under Resources and Research Aids. But another question arises: Is WeRelate meant to become a home for the online publication of newsletters and periodicals generally? The actual text, that is, as opposed to articles about the publications?

More and more society publications are moving from paper to PDF or website publication for reasons of cost in printing and distribution, so WeRelate may wish to consider advertising itself at some point as a potential archive for such publications. (Again, I've been the editor of a large-ish quarterly state publication for ten years, so the cost issue is near and dear.)

• "Emigration / Immigration / Naturalization" -- Another candidate for sub-category-dom under Resources and Research Aids. These are all articles of general interest.

• "Genealogy How-To" -- Ditto.

• "Genealogy Technology" -- Ditto, another subcategory. And someone needs to write a strong article on the care and feeding of the GEDCOM.

• "Historical Interest Stories" -- Some of these seem to belong on the relevant Person pages (Sausage King Murderer, Suicide of Arnold Luegert). Others are more general (List of Victims of the Wood Pit Explosion, SW Virginia) and might best be put in a category called "General History." (There probably would be some overlap with Resources and Research Aids.)

• "Military" -- Okay, the items presently in this category look like they should be divided among Resources and Research Aids (Veterans Administration Pension Payment Cards, Confederate Pension Application Sources, 1890 Special Enumeration), General History (French and Indian War, Dunmore's War -- maybe in a sub-category called "Military"), and Libraries & Archives.

• "Newsletters (Genealogical)" -- See question above about publications.

• "One-Name Studies" -- Article is empty so it's not clear what this is meant to be.

• "Allen County Probate Records" -- Put this in the Allen County Library sub-category under the Libraries & Archives category.

• "Projects" -- I know what Projects are at Wikipedia, but they're generally collaborative efforts; the SW Virginia thing appears to be entirely the work of Quolla, so far. And I'm not clear on what "Portals" are meant to be at WeRelate. To me, a "portal" is a gateway to other sites of similar intent or purpose, entirely separate operations not housed at (in this case) WeRelate. Which obviously is not the intent here.

• "Religion" -- Some of these (Baptists in Southwest Virginia) should be probably in a "Religion" sub-category under General History. Others (Catholic Church Histories) might be better in Resources and Research Aids. Or both, right?

• "Puritan Great Migration" -- Also in both categories, one perhaps being a General History sub-category called "Immigration & Migration," the other being part of an article (to be written) on Bob Anderson's Great Migration Project in the Resources and Research Aids category.

• "Regional Genealogy Projects" -- These also could be spread among at least a couple of categories: Projects (whatever that ends up meaning), General History (some of them in a sub-category maybe called "Regions" or "Localities"). "Highland Clans in Scotland," though, is not really regional, being of interest to anyone with Scot-Irish ancestors.

• WeRelate Resources -- Agree with Dallan here. Some of these probably are also Help pages in the making.

• "Research Guides" -- Divide these among at least a couple of sub-categories under Resources and Research Aids. Some are better in a Regions sub-category, others (Nonpopulation Census Schedules) are general and non-regional. The group under "Research Guides (Topical)" also has a mix; "Georgia Land Lottery Indexes" "Pennsylvania Negro and Mulatto Records" are regional.

I know I'm pretty new to WeRelate and not in any way a "power user" here, but these are all issues that have come up at Wikipedia in recent years. And one of the most frequent responses there to proposals involving reorganization is "It's too late, we're too big!" If these decisions can be made early on -- as you obviously are attempting to do -- and if you build in "expansion points" that can be triggered or implemented when the increasing scale of the site makes it advisable or necessary, life will be much easier down the road.

Also, I'm an information specialist by profession, not a techie, so my observations and suggestions are made in a programming vacuum. If anything I might suggest or question here or in another discussion seems naive to someone who works behind the scenes, please keep that comparative ignorance in mind! :-)
--mksmith 12:37, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

I'm THRILLED to have a librarian interested in this project. Thanks for your ideas and interest. jillaine 09:30, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

It's more a matter of no librarian would be able to keep his fingers out of something like this! :) --mksmith 15:23, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

that's what makes me think i was a librarian in a previous life: i am regularly drawn to categorizing and organizing. jillaine 15:28, 7 April 2009 (EDT)