Approver, Reviewer, editor, pagecreator
46,825
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:WikiProject Utah Experimental County: Difference between revisions
FamilySearch Wiki talk:WikiProject Utah Experimental County (view source)
Revision as of 19:31, 16 May 2012
, 16 May 2012summary of minutes 5/16
(adding minute summaries, etc.) |
(summary of minutes 5/16) |
||
| Line 276: | Line 276: | ||
**1905 statewide system began. Counties vary. in compliance for each county. At county level is most valuable. | **1905 statewide system began. Counties vary. in compliance for each county. At county level is most valuable. | ||
====== 5/16/12 ====== | ====== 5/16/12 ====== | ||
'''Summary of minutes (and of thoughts by Jana)''' | |||
*Universally liked the timeline breakdown. One person said privately that Jana should be so pleased. She has presented this in a way that people will understand immediately. | |||
*Chart can be uniquely adapted to each county. | |||
*Most of chart should be specific to the county, then refer to state/alternative sources | |||
**Birth info could be in any type of record -- and a very long list | |||
**Which alternative record is most effective at getting me the birth date? | |||
*Don't make the table too long | |||
**What do we do when there are several "gap" dates? That in itself makes the table longer. But also more valuable to the user. | |||
**Don't overwhelm with too many resources listed | |||
**Point to a state page that can give a long list of alternatives | |||
**Where do we draw the line on alternative sources? On the state page, on the county page? | |||
**And when do we link to that page with sources that offer hope and supplemental info? | |||
*"When [birth] records don't exist" area -- at the top or bottom of the chart | |||
**Preferrably linkable from within the chart | |||
*Pat is cleaning up the state VR page. Please don't work on it until she has finished. | |||
Comments from Jana's email, 5/15 | Comments from Jana's email, 5/15 | ||
| Line 301: | Line 319: | ||
I thought about combining years---not showing ALL the non extant years; but realized idea was not acceptable---showing the non extant years is what made the table priceless in terms of efficiency. For example often Ancestry and Historical Records will entitle their collection "1800-1900", when really there is no coverage for year 1880, 1891, etc and so you are flat out WASTING your time searching those collections for 1880 birth---especially considering all the name variations/transcription errors one has to adjust for and search for in attempting to find an individual. | I thought about combining years---not showing ALL the non extant years; but realized idea was not acceptable---showing the non extant years is what made the table priceless in terms of efficiency. For example often Ancestry and Historical Records will entitle their collection "1800-1900", when really there is no coverage for year 1880, 1891, etc and so you are flat out WASTING your time searching those collections for 1880 birth---especially considering all the name variations/transcription errors one has to adjust for and search for in attempting to find an individual. | ||
So, in the end, I ended up a baffled, confused, zapped soul---in great need of some chocolate ;) .....leaning towards the table belonging on a separate birth records county page because of it's length and having no decent ideas on what to put regarding births on the county page. | So, in the end, I ended up a baffled, confused, zapped soul---in great need of some chocolate ;) .....leaning towards the table belonging on a separate birth records county page because of it's length and having no decent ideas on what to put regarding births on the county page. | ||
====== Minutes summary 5/16 ====== | ====== Minutes summary 5/16 ====== | ||