User talk:Jocelyn K B

Welcome

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:

• Take the WeRelate tour to see what you can do
• Watch the "Getting Started" tutorial videos and learn how to make wiki pages for your ancestors
• Explore the Step by step Tutorials, if needed
• Create a User Profile page to tell other people about yourself and the families you are researching
• Read the etiquette page to learn expected behavior on a wiki
• Find other ways to get involved on the community portal
• Ask questions on our Support page

If you need any help, we will be glad to answer your questions. Just go to the Support page, click on the Add Topic link, type your message, then click the Save Page button. Thanks for participating and see you around! --Support 11:06, 17 September 2011 (EDT)

Census source pages [19 November 2011]

Hello Jocelyn K B, I am a volunteer admin here at WeRelate. I noticed that you have been adding source pages for U.S. census records, thank you for that! It would be helpful if you could also add our standard template and category to each page, along with a few additional items of information.

1. In the year range fields, add the year of the census to both boxes
2. In the subject field, check the census item
3. Add the following code to the large text box on the source page, substituting the year for the YYYY and the state for the SSSS.

{{YYYYCensus}}
== Usage Tips ==
[[Category:YYYY SSSS census]]

Here is a source page that has been filled in for you to follow: Source:New York, New York, United States. 1920 U.S. Census Population Schedule. If you have any questions at all, just let me know. Thank you, --Jennifer (JBS66) 10:06, 19 November 2011 (EST)

Will do, thanks for telling me how to do it--Jocelyn_K_B 17:02, 19 November 2011 (EST)

Template for Findagrave:

Resources

• Find A Grave: Riverside Cemetery

Change cemetery number, name.

Lee O. Carbaugh Family [13 February 2012]

Hi Jocelyn - I'm looking for information on Justin L Carbaugh. Through your help I was able to find my cousin - Sandra Range. If you have any information on the Lee O. Carbaugh family I would appreciate hearing from you. Thanks lululanna--Luluanna 09:27, 13 February 2012 (EST)

Location of church information [14 February 2012]

Hi Jocelyn, I noticed that you have been creating article pages for churches in England. The best place for this information would be the Place page where the churches are located. For example, you could add a separate heading on the Place page for Churches and include your links in a table. The information would be easier to locate for someone researching the area this way. --Jennifer (JBS66) 12:37, 14 February 2012 (EST)

I think you've got a good idea there, I'll give it a go but I'm not an html expert so hopefully I can get everything working ok.--Jocelyn_K_B 14:46, 14 February 2012 (EST)

Here is a sample wikitable where the columns are sortable. You can leave off the word sortable if you don't need the table to sort. If you need any help at all just let me know!

Rather than putting the tables on the category pages, you'll want to put them on the Place page (ie Place:Poplar, London, England). Category pages are reserved to only display the category structure. --Jennifer (JBS66) 15:17, 14 February 2012 (EST)

thanks again for that, I've now moved the table to the place page as I hadn't noticed I was on the category page--Jocelyn_K_B 15:22, 14 February 2012 (EST)

Rupert family [28 February 2012]

Hi Jocelyn - just wanted to let you know that because of all the research you have done and posted - I was able to locate a family member I didn't even knew existed. This is going to help me find out my biological father and his family. My cousin and I have already talked several times and we are planning to meet in the very near future. Thank you so much luluanna--Luluanna 08:24, 24 February 2012 (EST)

That's fantastic! I'm so pleased to hear it, and I wish you all the best for meeting and finding new family members :)--Jocelyn_K_B 05:03, 28 February 2012 (EST)

WeRelate Featured Page [1 April 2012]

HI Jocelyn, just wanted to let you know that your Article Page Anglican Parishes in London has been nominated and selected as this week's WeRelate Featured Page and can be seen on the main entry page for WeRelate. I'm sure other researchers will find this page useful in their research. Congratulations and keep up the good work!

Best regards,

Jim:)

--Delijim 17:07, 28 March 2012 (EDT)

Hi Jim, thanks very much for this, it's been great getting suggestions from other users on how the page can be more useful! I love how WeRelate helps people collaborate on research and resources :)--Jocelyn_K_B 02:27, 1 April 2012 (EDT)

Feel free to name names. [24 February 2014]

"I would be very disappointed if a small number of disproportionately loud negaters stopped the process early. There's been much assumption of what policy changes might be "forced" on us but some of the negativity is hard to take seriously - e.g. as others have said clearly the idea of WeRelate having to conform to WP's notability policy wouldn't even be suggested because it's so incompatible, so there's no point bringing it up repeatedly." As basically the lone 'negater' I don't know who else this could be referring to. We were given no clear answers, and no promises were made. Just that it would be worked out; all very vague.--Daniel Maxwell 10:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

redundant sources [14 March 2014]

Your recent changes to Person:Mindwell Stone (4), Person:Isaac Stone (6), Person:Samuel Stone (30), Person:Esther Stone (9) all appear to have only added references to familysearch.org indexing recrods that essentially duplicated sources that were already cited on the page, namely, Source:Rutland, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records to the End of the Year 1849, and hence were redundant and unnecessary. It may be useful in the odd case where the familysearch indexing happens to give different information, as this might open up a valuable discussion on which was right. But there is no value when it gives the same information that was already cited, and should any discrepancy be apparent, the error would be more likely to lie with the familysearch version, being the result of work by volunteers of no necessary qualification and marginal training, as opposed to the more careful approach used by the published vital records. Further, the published vital records are just as easily available on line, namely here and here and probably others. There are certainly many places where familysearch provides invaluable free access to records not easily available, but Rutland VRs is probably not one of those. Thank you. --Jrich 03:50, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

If you'd followed the links I posted you would see that they lead to the image of the original historical record, not an index or later transcription of the record, so indexing doesn't come into it and there would be no error brought about by familysearch volunteers etc. I just thought it might be useful to link to the original record rather than a transcript. Adding the link to the Source:Rutland, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records to the End of the Year 1849 didn't seem appropriate since that source is a secondary book transcript source. Perhaps I should have deleted the link to the book and replaced it with the image link but I didn't think it would matter--Jocelyn_K_B 04:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Mea culpa. I did not follow the link.

Agree this is qualitatively better, especially in this case since the book appears to be the original record. (Many films, like Buxton Maine, for example, and others I have worked with, the original is so old a copy was commissioned around 1850 and became the working copy, and it was the copy that was filmed. And where both are available there are differences as the copier updated spelling according to his own ideas, etc.) Anyway, various considerations come to mind, perhaps others are worth discussing too.

Noting from image 1 that this is film 859332, if you link to the image, I think it should be cited as Source:Rutland, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records, 1719-1874 and could replace the citation of the published VRs.

I also note the published VRs are, I believe, still primary (assuming the book itself is). They are not original, rather derivative, but considered primary since the information was recorded at or near the time of the event. The filmed book is a copy of an original so better than derivative, but both are primary. I actually think people might quibble that each record needs to be considered separately as to its primariness, but everyday practicality says (to me, anyway) don't go there unless there appears to be reason to (i.e., evidence that the event was recorded wrong).

And I would further suggest that it would be useful to provide the transcribed text on the page, in case, it gets misread, others can discuss and correct the interpretation of the colonial writing it until it becomes a highly reliable transcription. Interpretation of colonial writing is an art in itself.

Those are just my thoughts. It is pretty nice that familysearch is making so much of their data available online. It will really help the quality of genealogy that people can actually see the ultimate sources of accepted knowledge so easily and not just have to take somebody's word for it. --Jrich 15:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

"I think it should be cited as Source:Rutland, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States. Vital Records, 1719-1874 and could replace the citation of the published VRs", fair enough, I'll change those pages ASAP and also start adding the transcriptions. I see your point about whether the record is "primary" - I noticed my genealogy program (Legacy) allows you to analyse source quality to the degree of whether it's primary or secondary but also original/derivative/authored (and direct vs. indirect vs. negative evidence). I suppose that's a little more complicated than WeRelate needs to get at this point, as it's only really necessary when sources disagree and the "best" source needs to be determined.

I agree it's great to be able to see original records online. FamilySearch also have images of MA land records available to browse which I think will help me flesh out the lives of my ancestors a little more than just vital stat dates. I hope that someday every source citation in WeRelate (or whatever it might become in the future) links to an image of the original source available for free online.--Jocelyn_K_B 21:18, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

deed [24 March 2014]

I saw you added the full text of the same deed to three pages. Some people have dozens of deeds, and as a general thought, I suspect, such a practice of including all the deeds they participate in, would make pages long, boring, and hard to digest. As deeds really have such a small content of genealogical information, I think it would be better to put a simple abstract on the page with enough information to allow a person to look up the full deed themselves. If you need to preserve the text of the full deed, I would suggest creating an article or Transcript:, and provide a link to it on the three pages. At a minimum, which is still really too much real estate given to a very minor piece of information given that the relationship between them is proven by other sources, at least embolden the names and dates. --Jrich 14:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I've moved the full transcription to its own transcription page as recommended as I see your point about making the person page too long. I'm interested in more than just proving the bare relationships between people and vital statistics, and I think we can glean some useful information from deeds that rounds out our knowledge about a person's life. The collective group of deeds can tell us things that a single deed can't, although this can take some analysis (which I haven't done yet for the people in question). The amount of land they owned can tell us how wealthy they might have been, changes of ownership of land can hint that there was a change in the family's circumstances, and a description of the land in question could lead future collaborators with maps to determine exactly where there land was, which I think is pretty interesting for a descendant who could visit the area. The deed I've transcribed is between parents and their son "in consideration of the love and affection that they have" (which is good "colour") and explains why there was no will or administration taken out on the estate, so I think many genealogists wouldn't mind it being referenced as a source.--Jocelyn_K_B 11:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Hannah (Stone) Dexter [24 March 2014]

Hi Jocelyn,

Through my research, Bartlett's Stone Genealogy has the wrong date of death for Hannah. Her will was dated 11 Jun 1832 but she died 03 Jun 1840. Her stone is in the Jones Cemetery in N. Orange, MA. This Dexter clan are all in the same plot: Hannah, son Benjamin w/ 3 of his wives. Benjamin's sons: Amasa, Elihu & others. This family is the line I was approved by the Daughters of the American Revolution. I have done all the documentation on this family line if you wish to have it. Happy Researching!--SandyS 20:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the information Sandy, I've removed the incorrect alt. death date that I added, since your headstone pic clearly shows the correct date. Hannah Stone's father Simeon was my 6th great-grandfather and I'm just starting to piece information together about the Stone family. I'll be adding information from Bartlett as a guide and then try to find his original sources, so I imagine I'll come across a few errors along the way, and I'm always happy to be corrected with better sources--Jocelyn_K_B 21:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

transcript [24 March 2014]

There is no need to create Transcript:Bartlett, J. Gardner. Gregory Stone Genealogy/p.109. This book is freely viewable on books.google.com as id=ZxsVAAAAYAAJ.

• You can link to their scanned page with http://books.google.com/books?id=ZxsVAAAAYAAJ.
• To get to a specific page such as 109, add &pg=PA109, as in this (usually, though some books have tricky numbering, in those cases use the link symbol near the top while viewing the desired page to get a link).
• If you want to draw their attention to a specific phrase, such as Abial Bigelow, add &dq=%22Abial+Bigelow%22 (the %22 is a double quote, the plus gets turned into a space, you can also use %20 for the space if you want), giving this.
• If you are having a hard time matching the text, use the scissors (cutting text) icon, highlight the text, and it will bring back what its OCR engine sees. Use that, it should highlight the right area then, i.e., to highlight Nathaniel³Stone, try this.

Beats typing it all in by hand and probably more useful in the case they want to see more or do further research. --Jrich 00:02, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

All the links you've put in get me to a page that just has a cover of the title and says "No eBook available", clicking on the picture of the book does nothing, do I have to have a subscription or something? or could it be geoblocked? I know it's freely available online elsewhere (think I downloaded my PDF from Archive.org) but not in an easily linkable way. One of the reasons I thought transcribing would be useful would be the ability to hyperlink the names of people who appear on each page, e.g. making it easier to find the Micah Stone who became the guardian of Simeon and his brothers. Micah's page in Bartlett makes no mention of him becoming guardian to 3 teenage boys but I think that's fairly interesting information about him.
I was following the example of the Savage transcript but I suppose since each page of Bartlett has less variety of people and families on it I could just put the transcription on the people pages. My only concern with that is that some of the biographies cover several pages (since they themselves include transcriptions of wills etc), and since you've already admonished me for taking up too much "real estate" on people pages with transcriptions I didn't think you'd object to me making transcription pages instead. In any case the PDF I have lets me copy and paste the text pretty quickly, I just have to tidy up the formatting.--Jocelyn_K_B 00:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

All the links work fine for me. Don't know if you have some google preferences set differently? Oddly, I don't find Gregory Stone in archive.org, though you can easily link to individual pages of that website too, so if you have a link there, so again, there is no need to do a redundant transcript. Give me a choice: a scanned image or a transcript, I'll choose the scanned image every time. The Savage transcript was different than the plain book images available on books.google.com in that they incorporated the corrections Savage published at the end of each volume (though not the ones published in other publications) and even there, I have found the transcript has transcription errors, so I always compare it to the image on books.google.com. --Jrich 02:49, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Website about London cemeteries [5 June 2017]

https://flickeringlamps.com/2017/05/28/cross-bones-a-modern-shrine-to-old-londons-outcast-dead/

Hi Jocelyn The above website was recommended on a Canadian blog I subscribe to. I thought you might like to have a look at it. So happens I've read a couple of mystery stories set in the 12th century about this part of London. By what it says on the website the author of the mysteries (found for cheap on kindle) has done some research.

I want to have a second read of the website before I put it on WR research tips.

Regards, Pat --Goldenoldie 06:25, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Pat, thanks for the link, what an interesting website! Having grown up in a very young country, it's fascinating to me how ancient cities like London and Rome have evolved over time. Cheers, Jocelyn--Jocelyn_K_B 04:54, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you [5 May 2020]

Thanks Jocelyn. Your good wishes are much appreciated. I am staying clear of coronavirus, but my age brings aches and pains and, with it, some downheartedness. The good part here is we are having beautiful spring weather. It's about 8am and there are plenty of birds singing outside--no longer being drowned out by cars passing. Trees have just about all come into leaf. You are in New Zealand aren't you? What's it like there?

I've stopped doing geography for a bit and am looking in depth at some contributions made by someone who dropped his or her clutter into WR in 2007 and "ran". Many of the families started here in Buckinghamshire and found their way into London in the early 19th century. Few found the streets there paved with gold. Some lines stayed "home" and their surnames are still found amongst local shopowners. In fact 40 years ago when we lived on the other side of this village, the house next door was owned in succession by two families who link to this one I am studying! I might have a small family, but I still love genealogy.

All the best, --Goldenoldie 07:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Glad to hear you're keeping safe from coronavirus. My mother-in-law is in England and I think the isolation of "lockdown" is finally starting to get to her. I do worry for my relatives in the UK and USA. Up until last week we've had beautiful weather which helped the little ones cope with being home most of the time. The weather has turned but hopefully we continue to keep the virus out and restrictions ease more soon.

We've just welcomed another addition to our family but in the few bits of quiet time I get I'm catching up on some genealogy. It certainly has been fascinating viewing history through the "bottom-up" lens of our ordinary ancestors lives. I guess we're living through some "history" too right now - I must find the time to write a little about my experiences for my (fingers crossed) genealogy-enthusiast future descendants!--jocelyn_K_B 08:30, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [21 May 2020]

You're not done yet!

Now that you have uploaded Ann Cooper Kirkham.ged into our review program, it is time for you to match your data to ours. Your next step is to review and resolve any potential warnings that your file might be showing and to match place names, source names and families to pages that may already exist in our database.

Notes:

• You must complete all the steps before your GEDCOM can be considered for import. - We will keep your file in the queue for two months to give you time to finish, and you do not have to finish all at once.
• If you did not follow the instructions for preparing your data before uploading your file or if your file does not contain at least one date and place for each person with sources, it is likely that your file will be rejected.
• Volunteers are here to help. Please read the instructions first, but if you get stuck or have any questions, you can leave a message on the page for the GEDCOM review team. One of our volunteers will respond shortly.
• Once you have completed the review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import on the last screen, one of our volunteer administrators will review the file again and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24-48 hours. Please allow a little extra time around the holidays. When the import is finalized, you will receive a follow up message here on your Talk page.

Click here to enter the review program
You will see more instructions once you are in.

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing here you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

--WeRelate agent 22:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Ann Cooper Kirkham.ged Imported Successfully [5 June 2020]

Congratulations! The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully.

Now you can:

• Launch the Family Tree Explorer to navigate your tree
• View a searchable list of the wiki pages generated from your tree -- available about an hour after your file has been imported
• View your network to see which other WeRelate users are watching pages you have in common. This works if you matched families during your review. You might find a relative here!
• View related pages which are not currently attached to your tree -- may take some time to display for large files. If you matched families in your GEDCOM to existing families in our database, this will show you pages which are also connected, but not currently in your GEDCOM. You can add these pages to your tree.

For questions or problems, leave a message for the volunteers on our GEDCOM review team.

--WeRelate agent 06:11, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [6 June 2020]

You're not done yet!

Now that you have uploaded Thomas Cooper, William Worsfold.ged into our review program, it is time for you to match your data to ours. Your next step is to review and resolve any potential warnings that your file might be showing and to match place names, source names and families to pages that may already exist in our database.

Notes:

• You must complete all the steps before your GEDCOM can be considered for import. - We will keep your file in the queue for two months to give you time to finish, and you do not have to finish all at once.
• If you did not follow the instructions for preparing your data before uploading your file or if your file does not contain at least one date and place for each person with sources, it is likely that your file will be rejected.
• Volunteers are here to help. Please read the instructions first, but if you get stuck or have any questions, you can leave a message on the page for the GEDCOM review team. One of our volunteers will respond shortly.
• Once you have completed the review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import on the last screen, one of our volunteer administrators will review the file again and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24-48 hours. Please allow a little extra time around the holidays. When the import is finalized, you will receive a follow up message here on your Talk page.

Click here to enter the review program
You will see more instructions once you are in.

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing here you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

--WeRelate agent 01:16, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [6 June 2020]

You're not done yet!

Now that you have uploaded Thomas Cooper, William Worsfold.ged into our review program, it is time for you to match your data to ours. Your next step is to review and resolve any potential warnings that your file might be showing and to match place names, source names and families to pages that may already exist in our database.

Notes:

• You must complete all the steps before your GEDCOM can be considered for import. - We will keep your file in the queue for two months to give you time to finish, and you do not have to finish all at once.
• If you did not follow the instructions for preparing your data before uploading your file or if your file does not contain at least one date and place for each person with sources, it is likely that your file will be rejected.
• Volunteers are here to help. Please read the instructions first, but if you get stuck or have any questions, you can leave a message on the page for the GEDCOM review team. One of our volunteers will respond shortly.
• Once you have completed the review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import on the last screen, one of our volunteer administrators will review the file again and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24-48 hours. Please allow a little extra time around the holidays. When the import is finalized, you will receive a follow up message here on your Talk page.

Click here to enter the review program
You will see more instructions once you are in.

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing here you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

--WeRelate agent 02:25, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Thomas Cooper, William Worsfold.ged Imported Successfully [7 June 2020]

Congratulations! The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully.

Now you can:

• Launch the Family Tree Explorer to navigate your tree
• View a searchable list of the wiki pages generated from your tree -- available about an hour after your file has been imported
• View your network to see which other WeRelate users are watching pages you have in common. This works if you matched families during your review. You might find a relative here!
• View related pages which are not currently attached to your tree -- may take some time to display for large files. If you matched families in your GEDCOM to existing families in our database, this will show you pages which are also connected, but not currently in your GEDCOM. You can add these pages to your tree.

For questions or problems, leave a message for the volunteers on our GEDCOM review team.

--WeRelate agent 01:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [21 July 2021]

You're not done yet!

Now that you have uploaded Descendants of Hugh Hill.ged into our review program, it is time for you to match your data to ours. Your next step is to review and resolve any potential warnings that your file might be showing and to match place names, source names and families to pages that may already exist in our database.

Notes:

• You must complete all the steps before your GEDCOM can be considered for import. - We will keep your file in the queue for three months to give you time to finish, and you do not have to finish all at once.
• If you did not follow the instructions for preparing your data before uploading your file or if your file does not contain at least one date and place for each person with sources, it is likely that your file will be rejected.
• Volunteers are here to help. Please read the instructions first, but if you get stuck or have any questions, you can leave a message on the page for the GEDCOM review team. One of our volunteers will respond shortly.
• Once you have completed the review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import on the last screen, one of our volunteer administrators will review the file again and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24-48 hours. Please allow a little extra time around the holidays. When the import is finalized, you will receive a follow up message here on your Talk page.

Click here to enter the review program
You will see more instructions once you are in.

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing here you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

--WeRelate agent 09:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Next step: Review your GEDCOM [21 July 2021]

You're not done yet!

Now that you have uploaded Descendants of Hugh Hill.ged into our review program, it is time for you to match your data to ours. Your next step is to review and resolve any potential warnings that your file might be showing and to match place names, source names and families to pages that may already exist in our database.

Notes:

• You must complete all the steps before your GEDCOM can be considered for import. - We will keep your file in the queue for three months to give you time to finish, and you do not have to finish all at once.
• If you did not follow the instructions for preparing your data before uploading your file or if your file does not contain at least one date and place for each person with sources, it is likely that your file will be rejected.
• Volunteers are here to help. Please read the instructions first, but if you get stuck or have any questions, you can leave a message on the page for the GEDCOM review team. One of our volunteers will respond shortly.
• Once you have completed the review and marked your GEDCOM Ready to import on the last screen, one of our volunteer administrators will review the file again and finalize the import. This usually happens within 24-48 hours. Please allow a little extra time around the holidays. When the import is finalized, you will receive a follow up message here on your Talk page.

Click here to enter the review program
You will see more instructions once you are in.

WeRelate is different from most family tree websites. By contributing here you are helping to create Pando for genealogy, a free, unified family tree that combines the best information from all contributors.

--WeRelate agent 09:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Descendants of Hugh Hill.ged Imported Successfully [22 July 2021]

Congratulations! The pages from your GEDCOM have been generated successfully.

Now you can:

• Explore your tree -- available about an hour after your file has been imported
• View a searchable list of the wiki pages generated from your tree -- available about an hour after your file has been imported
• View your network to see which other WeRelate users are watching pages you have in common. This works if you matched families during your review. You might find a relative here!
• View related pages which are not currently attached to your tree -- may take some time to display for large files. If you matched families in your GEDCOM to existing families in our database, this will show you pages which are also connected, but not currently in your GEDCOM. You can add these pages to your tree.

For questions or problems, leave a message for the volunteers on our GEDCOM review team.

--WeRelate agent 18:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Pages without dates [2 October 2021]

Hi, Jocelyn

You created a few pages (see below) with no connections and no dates. Because it isn't possible to tell when these people lived, the pages are of little value on WeRelate, and aren't allowed because they might be living. Please check these out and either add information or delete them (more > delete on the left-hand menu). I'll circle around and delete them in about a month if they haven't been updated or deleted by then. Let me know if you need more time. Thanks.--DataAnalyst 22:39, 1 October 2021 (UTC) (volunteer admin)

Person:Douglas Schlieder (2)
Person:George White (104)
Person:Jean Gordon (17)
Person:John Colvin (23)

Thanks very much for bringing these to my attention! I'll have a look through over the next week or so to see what's happened there--jocelyn_K_B 02:31, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Uncle Brian Dickson [28 July 2023]

Any chance you could tell me whether my uncle Brian is still alive? Parents Lawrenz Edward Dickson and Matilda Kitty Irene Dawson/Clutterham. Brian Lawrenz(might be different spelling) born around 1937 Port Adelaide. Father passed 1952. When mother was going to be remarried they had a big blue and around 1955 he moved to Melbourne and became a conductor on trams. Never married no kids. May I ask what relation you have to the Dicksons if any? Thanks so much Mary Mc Donald nee Dunn daughter of Glenda Dickson and Kenneth Dunn.--cavylove 11:47, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mary, apologies for the slow reply. It looks like you're a distant relation (5th cousin) to my husband George. I was researching descendants of George's 4th great-grandfather John Dickson b. about 1791 in Poplar, London, out of interest to see where his descendants migrated to. John Dickson would also be your 4th great-grandfather. I'm sorry I don't have any more information on Brian - I found a school record on FamilySearch that gave his date of birth as 27 Jul 1935, and electoral roll entries up to 1980 on Ancestry but nothing else. If your family is still in Australia, you might be able to find electoral rolls at a city library and trace him from 1980 to more recent times. Best of luck in your search, Jocelyn--jocelyn_K_B 04:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)