m (Text replacement - "[fF]amily([\s_])[hH]istory[\s_]([lL])ibrary[\s_]([fF])ilm" to "FS$1Library$1$3ilm") |
m (Text replacement - "[fF]amily([\s_])[hH]istory[\s_]([lL])ibrary[\s_]([cC])atalog" to "FamilySearch$1$3atalog") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{talk header}} | {{talk header}} | ||
== Census articles - | == Census articles - FamilySearch Catalog entries == | ||
Firstly, I know this talk page is about the England articles, but I have a query that relates to across all English counties and I thought this might be the best place to raise it. If there is a better place, please feel free to move my question. | Firstly, I know this talk page is about the England articles, but I have a query that relates to across all English counties and I thought this might be the best place to raise it. If there is a better place, please feel free to move my question. | ||
I have noticed that many of the English county census articles, for example [[Devon Census]] list each parish within the county linked to the | I have noticed that many of the English county census articles, for example [[Devon Census]] list each parish within the county linked to the FamilySearch Catalog entry for that parish. My question is why these articles are named ''county'' '''Census'''? In my opinion they better fit the description of ''county'' '''Parish''', but I know that the county Parish pages are filled with redlinks for requested articles for each parish. | ||
Perhaps these articles should be named ''county'' ''' | Perhaps these articles should be named ''county'' '''FamilySearch Catalog'''? Whatever the decision, I think it would be helpful if the notes column of the task table had a brief outline of what content is expected to be put into each article. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] 20:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC) | ||
:You may wish to view Vona Williams response to the concerns about the deficiencies in both the catalogue of census films in English counties which a group of contributors raised for four parishes in [[Sussex Census]] but identified generally in English counties. With some unaffected contributions as an exception contributors have suspended contribution for various counties until FamilySearch has resolved it's issues with catalogue material for England and the available forms of the FS Library film collections. Despite our original response which did not appreciate the significance of the problem contributors had raised the matter was referred to Vona Williams and we are pleased that our local knowledge has assisted to begin to resolve a technical issue for presentation of census microfilm in England. If memory serves this has been raised in earlier years (prior to Family Search Wiki) by one or two of the group who had sought to contribute this year in at least 5 counties. We await engineering and catalogue resolution and suggest that wiki contribution is liely to be unproductive until this has been overcome. | :You may wish to view Vona Williams response to the concerns about the deficiencies in both the catalogue of census films in English counties which a group of contributors raised for four parishes in [[Sussex Census]] but identified generally in English counties. With some unaffected contributions as an exception contributors have suspended contribution for various counties until FamilySearch has resolved it's issues with catalogue material for England and the available forms of the FS Library film collections. Despite our original response which did not appreciate the significance of the problem contributors had raised the matter was referred to Vona Williams and we are pleased that our local knowledge has assisted to begin to resolve a technical issue for presentation of census microfilm in England. If memory serves this has been raised in earlier years (prior to Family Search Wiki) by one or two of the group who had sought to contribute this year in at least 5 counties. We await engineering and catalogue resolution and suggest that wiki contribution is liely to be unproductive until this has been overcome. | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
::Thanks for the suggestion Crescunt. Is Vona Williams the person behind the username [[User:Chichgirl|Chichgirl]]? I am no expert on the FHLC, but I agree that it does make sense that pages about English places and topics are written with local spellings. I recently changed many references in the wiki from "neighboring parishes" to "neighbouring parishes". | ::Thanks for the suggestion Crescunt. Is Vona Williams the person behind the username [[User:Chichgirl|Chichgirl]]? I am no expert on the FHLC, but I agree that it does make sense that pages about English places and topics are written with local spellings. I recently changed many references in the wiki from "neighboring parishes" to "neighbouring parishes". | ||
::One thing I would continue to spell the American way is references to the ''' | ::One thing I would continue to spell the American way is references to the '''FamilySearch Catalog''' itself, as this is a proper noun. | ||
::Aside from the FHLC I think the opportunity that the wiki provides for British based genealogists and family historians to write articles and create content in the "local language" is great. Plus it's not just the Brits - Canadians also use many British spellings as opposed to American ones. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 16:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC) | ::Aside from the FHLC I think the opportunity that the wiki provides for British based genealogists and family historians to write articles and create content in the "local language" is great. Plus it's not just the Brits - Canadians also use many British spellings as opposed to American ones. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 16:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC) | ||
edits