I want to take pictures at cemeteries and wondering what kind of resolution I should look for in a digicam, as well as any other features that would be good for genealogical purposes. I realize that more pixels gives better pictures, but it makes for larger pictures, more space taken up etc. Thanks, Zev Griner [email protected]

> I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that could deduced > from the information quoted. > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> What do you think can be deduced?

> Distinguishing between what we think, or wish, and what we know > is as important as the presentation - really, more so. > > Hugh <[email protected]> Hugh- We can only be responsible for information WE put in our GEDCOMs and place online--we can't solve the problems of the world. There are errors in books that have been there for hundreds of years and continue to be perpetuated, and there are errors on the Internet and there are good and bad researchers. Even good researchers make errors in their files. We can't worry about the incorrrect information that is out there--it has always been there and will continue to be in the future. We can only make our own submitted trees as accurate and complete as we can--the rest we can't really worry about. If our info is "out there" then anyone can find it along with the garbage files and make their own determination as to what to believe. Joan [email protected]

[snip] > no > maybe your mother copied from the 1863 book (mistakes and all too) > > what you have to do is look very critically at the 1863 book and try > and find the original source of the data in the nineteenth century > > a PRIMARY source is a document created at the same time by the > people involved in the event. > > a will > a probate > some church books > > but NOT many census records > which are mostly SECONDARY sources > because they are a fair copy from original census returns or an oral > statement on a door step pencilled into a note book > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> Census records are pretty good indicators of where a person lived at a particular time. And a copy of the original record is probably pretty accurate. But (1) don't trust the indexes - lots of errors there (2) there is no guarantee that every member of a household, even if the last name is the same, is the blood kin of the adults. It's tough enough to find an essential fact but in my mind real proof exists when we find a corroborating fact or perhaps a timely succession of facts. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> > It's not a matter of not wanting our information passed on. It's a > > matter of being madder than a wet hen at seeing someone else claim > > as THEIR work that which WE have labored to produce. I want to be > > able to put my information out there -- I just want to do it in such > > a way that someone else cannot steal it and claim that THEY did all > > the work that *I* actually did! > > > > "Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> > > You won't be able to... Even posting as a PDF collection > of bitmap images of the text can not prevent an OCR program from > recovering plain text. And if the plain text is in a highly > structured format (as most genealogy programs tend to produce), > someone could probably create a parser to scan the OCR-recovered > text and extract things like dates, names, places, events, to be > inserted into another database. > > Check the history of phonebook litigation. > > Dennis Lee Bieber <[email protected]> I'm not thinking of posting my genealogy, I'm thinking of posting a chrono listing of the facts uncovered by a number of Sullivan researchers that I have collected. The list is more than 50 pages, single-spaced for VA and NC. Since most harvesters look for trees I wonder what they would do with a site like that. If one page was text and the next PDF, would that affect harvesting? I could leave sources off and make people come to me for them since facts are almost useless without sources. Any thoughts - anyone? Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> > YES, YES!! IF WE CANNOT CONTACT THE PERSON WHO SENT THE > > INFORMATION I DO NOT THINK IT SHOULD BE ACCEPTED BY ANCESTRY.COM. > > MY TREE IS FULL OF ERRORS AND MY PRETEEN CHILDREN ARE > > IDENTIFIED!!!!! > > > > [email protected] > > Good grief! Have you given no thought to the many WorldConnect > submitters who later pass away but leave instructions with their > heirs that their family tree is to be left online as a help to > future researchers who may want to add to it or correct an error? > Errors can be corrected via Post-em Notes and additions can be > uploaded in your own trees. > > [email protected] wrote: The problem is not how to correct errors - that's just a Band-Aid. The problem is how to prevent the injury. Expert genealogists are created in one day - it might take several years to realize one is not an expert. One very capable researcher determined our GGG Grandfather because "no one else was around who could be". I've found at least 4 others "around". I've determined 5 generations earlier based on preponderance of evidence, I'm honor bound to note that POE is not proof - Let the Buyer Beware. That's the closest to a solution that I can come. Distinguishing between what we think, or wish, and what we know is as important as the presentation - really, more so. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> > I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in > > Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also > > born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. > > His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian > > (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are asking, > > Lisa Lepore I was hoping for an itemized list of the things that could deduced from the information quoted. singhals <[email protected]>

> It's not a matter of not wanting our information passed on. It's a > matter of being madder than a wet hen at seeing someone else claim > as THEIR work that which WE have labored to produce. I want to be > able to put my information out there -- I just want to do it in such > a way that someone else cannot steal it and claim that THEY did all > the work that *I* actually did! > > Karen Rhodes I can appreciate that you would not feel good if this happened, but I fear that the reality is that the only thing that you can change is your reaction. You know what you have done. How does it diminish your efforts if others copy it? Chris -- Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK [email protected] Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.

> I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in > Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also > born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. > His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian > (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> On the basis of the evidence you cite, one can deduce that the "specific man" to whom you refer was Jewish, and that his wife probably was too.

Correction - > Magyar means Hungarian - the language or > the ethic group that should read ethnic group. Magyar were the main inhabitants of the Kingdom of Hungary. After WWI, the Kingdom of Hungary was divided up. I guess the intent of the census was to find out what exactly was the ethnic origin of the people being enumerated. If the term Hungarian was used, that could have meant Austrian, or German or anyone else who was living in the area now [1920] called Hungary. Hope that's a little clearer than mud, Lisa [email protected]

[ All, the moderator made a mistake and some of you may see two copies of this and the following post. Sorry about that ... - Mod ] > I have a 1920 census record which says a specific man was born in > Russia/Poland and emigrated in 1905. His parents were both also > born in Russia/Poland, and the native language of both is Hebrew. > His wife was born in Pa, her father in Russia/Poland native language > Hebrew and her mother born in Hungary native language Hungarian > (struck-through and Magyar written above). > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> As usual for me, I'm not sure what exactly you are asking, but here goes - Magyar means Hungarian - the language or the ethic group. If you go to this page - http://usa.ipums.org/usa/voliii/inst1920.shtml you will find the enumerator instructions for the 1920 census. Scroll down to #146 and you will see a list of the official languages that should have been used by the enumerator. I would deduce from this strike through that the enumerator wrote Hungarian when he filled out the sheet and later, either he or someone in an office somewhere corrected it to Magyar, which is the official term listed in the above section. Hope this was what you were after, Lisa [email protected]

<snip> > > I just wanted to thank all of you for the discussion in this thread. > > I think this is just the sort of stuff that a newbie like myself > > needs to read. (I've been dabbling for about 2 months now.) On top > > of that, the link in the 2nd post in the thread > > > > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi > > > > is marvelous despite any of the shortcomings that have been > > mentioned. I typed in just my great-grandfathers surname and place > > of death and was rewarded with just one match which is > > unquestionably him, along with ancestors going back farther than I > > had ever imagined I would find. Perhaps not "unquestionably" to > > some standards (which subject I have also been looking into - should > > I really go looking for a physical copy of a book published in 1863 > > to verify that what was copied to the internet is correct???) but > > absolutely matching a great many points that my Mom had recorded > > before her death in 1999. > > > > CSquared > > no > maybe your mother copied from the 1863 book (mistakes and all too) > > what you have to do is look very critically at the 1863 book and try > and find the original source of the data in the nineteenth century > > a PRIMARY source is a document created at the same time by the > people involved in the event. > > a will > a probate > some church books > > but NOT many census records > which are mostly SECONDARY sources > because they are a fair copy from original census returns or an oral > statement on a door step pencilled into a note book > > many of the older church books were written up later from scraps of > paper with notes jotted down on them - which makes them ALSO > secondary sources > > > most census images are TERTIARY sources > because they are copies of copies > > on line census indexes > are on the FOURTH level or worse > > COPIES OF COPIES OF COPIES with spelling mistakes because of > difficult to read handwritng, and mistakes made at the time by > census collectors and today poorly paid typists far from the > localities with no local knowledge. > > which demotes the family trees I put on line to the fifth level of > quality > > EXCEPT for the bits I got from my mother's birthday book and old > letters I own, and my visits to archives where I handled and read > original documents which makes that part of my tree a SECONDARY > SOURCE > > what your mother wrote about the people she knew is a primary source > but we all have family stories which turn out to be legends with an > element of truth, so when she wrote down what she was told . . . . -- > check it out > > beware !!!! > some of the nineteenth century and older genealogies are full of > lies and assumptions - there were con men then too > > my worst mistake I made when I started was not finding CONTROL + S > add source when I began with Family Tree Maker > > Hugh W > > -- > Beta blogger > http://nanowrimo3.blogspot.com/ visiting my past > http://hughw36-2.blogspot.com/ re-entry > http://snaps4.blogspot.com/" photographs and walks > > old blogger > http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG > > Hugh Watkins <[email protected]> Hi Hugh, Thanks for all those comments - exactly the sort of issues I've been wrestling with. Comments like those are what make this group worthwhile, I do believe. As far as the 1863 book is concerned, I am pretty sure my Mom was not aware of it. It is one of the few things I have discovered myself in my inept internet prowling so far. In case anyone is interested, it is just one paragraph in William G. Cutler's "History of the State of Kansas". The paragraph I found by laboriously searching (unncessarily so it turned out later) took me to "DOUGLAS COUNTY, Part 38 William G. Cutler's History of the State of Kansas first published in 1883 by A. T. Andreas, Chicago, IL." It says that two kind souls "BARBARA RENTENBACH and ROSANA J. WHITENIGHT produced this selection." I gather that means that they typed the whole book into a web site. Wow! I do appreciate their effort if that is the case. When my browsing through each section of the book finally came to http://www.kancoll.org/books/cutler/douglas/douglas-co-p38.html and I searched for "Snyder" lo and behold there was my great grandfather. BTW he is listed there as E. M. His first name is Emmanuel and I have no record of a middle initial including Mom's work. There are several things in that paragraph I was not aware of, but the things I think I do know all match. Well, OK, I thought they came over in 1853 vs. 1851. Some day when I find the ship's passenger list (a Secondary source since the passengers did not write their own names in the register, and rather subject to errors also, right?) perhaps I'll have a better clue on that as well. The reference that WorldConnect turned up lists him as Emmanuel N. Snyder and I think the "N." is incorrect as well. Any advice on emailing the lady to share what I think I "know" about the family? So I am learning to be suspicious - I hope sufficiently so. I've enjoyed your blogs - especially the photo ones. I've only visited your beautiful country once - in 1976 I think - briefly in London and then about 3 weeks staying in Southport doing some business with the UK Post-Giro. I shall never forget a delightful Saturday in Chester during my stay. Thanks and Regards, Charlie -- To email me, eradicate obfuscate, remove dot invalid and replace dot and at with the obvious. obfuscatecsquared3 at comcast dot net dot invalid If this seems paranoid I'm sorry but you should see the spam I've gotten! "CSquared" <[email protected]>

> It's not a matter of not wanting our information passed on. It's a > matter of being madder than a wet hen at seeing someone else claim > as THEIR work that which WE have labored to produce. I want to be > able to put my information out there -- I just want to do it in such > a way that someone else cannot steal it and claim that THEY did all > the work that *I* actually did! > > "Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> You won't be able to... Even posting as a PDF collection of bitmap images of the text can not prevent an OCR program from recovering plain text. And if the plain text is in a highly structured format (as most genealogy programs tend to produce), someone could probably create a parser to scan the OCR-recovered text and extract things like dates, names, places, events, to be inserted into another database. Check the history of phonebook litigation. -- bieber.genealogy Dennis Lee Bieber HTTP://home.earthlink.net/~bieber.genealogy/ Dennis Lee Bieber <[email protected]>

> In 1784 Samuel WEST was taxed on 450A of land in Sampson Co., NC, > that new county's first tax list. No record has been found that > Samuel bought this land so it is possible he inherited it. Land > records to include state grants have been unsuccessfully searched in > both Sampson and Duplin (parent county) Counties. > > No record has been found showing sale of these lands although it is > known two of his sons and at least one grandson moved to Sampson > from Duplin County. > > How do I proceed with attempts to determine Samuel's ownership of > these lands? When and where did he obtain these lands? > > Fred Frederick Check the probate records in Duplin County. Samuel West may have inherited the land and the trasfer is in the probate records. bob gillis bob gillis <[email protected]>

> > > > In the hope that some continued discussion will benefit newbies... > > > > > > > > None of my "proven" data is on any web site for several > > > > reasons. > > > > > > > > J. Hugh Sullivan > > > > > > I looked myself up on the web and found that I had died in Scituate, > > > Rhode Island a number of years ago. Reports of my death have been > > > greatly exaggerated. > > > > > > Barbara Combs obie '70 > > > Eugene, Oregon > > > > > > "Barbara J. Combs" <[email protected]> > > > > Either W. C. Fields or Mark Twain experienced the same thing and > > remarked that the report was premature. > > > > BTW, where are you writing from? > > > > [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan) > > I am in Eugene, Oregon. I have never been to Rhode Island - one of > the few states I have not visited. > > "Barbara J. Combs" <[email protected]> I guess my attempt at humor was a bit subtle. Since you were reported dead, but posting, I wondered where from! It doesn't take long to visit RI. I figured the NE was like the south -- it takes a while to go from state to state. I drove from Boston through ME, VT, NH, CT and RI in half a day. The drive down from Seattle to OR and along the Columbia River and across ID to MT is spectacular. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

Our research note for December reviews the public land survey plat maps of Minnesota, available on-line. Minnesota was the 6th state developed from the Old Northwest Territory*, and the plats on this site include those drawn by the original surveyors from 1848-1907, as the land was opened for settlement. The images can be downloaded, but be warned that the files are large as the maps include many details. There are two versions for each of the 3,500 maps in the collection. One is high resolution and the other is a sampled, lower resolution image. The note itself can be found at http://www.parkbooks.com/Html/res_gis.html Others in our monthly series can be found at http://www.parkbooks.com/Html/research.html Enjoy! Mary *The others were Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin! Mary Bakeman [email protected] Park Genealogical Books http://www.parkbooks.com/

> > > > In the hope that some continued discussion will benefit newbies... > > > > > > > > None of my "proven" data is on any web site for several > > > > reasons. > > > > > > > > J. Hugh Sullivan > > > > > > I looked myself up on the web and found that I had died in Scituate, > > > Rhode Island a number of years ago. Reports of my death have been > > > greatly exaggerated. > > > > > > Barbara Combs obie '70 > > > > All of my data proven and unproven are on the Internet, without any > > names of the living and without sources, I have benefited so much > > from online postings that I feel the drive to share mine. When I am > > contacted I can send whatever sources I choose and we can converse > > on any points that come up. It makes me feel so good when someone > > writes me that they really appreciated the information and I have > > had some great breakthroughs from the ones that I write to and what > > a fantastic tool is the post it notes on many of the places that I > > research. > > Any questions are welcome newby or not > > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?op=GET&db=purplevw1&id=I65255 > > > > Sandra Tyler Duncan <[email protected]> > > Kindly folks, > > I just wanted to thank all of you for the discussion in this thread. > I think this is just the sort of stuff that a newbie like myself > needs to read. (I've been dabbling for about 2 months now.) On top > of that, the link in the 2nd post in the thread > > http://worldconnect.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi > > is marvelous despite any of the shortcomings that have been > mentioned. I typed in just my great-grandfathers surname and place > of death and was rewarded with just one match which is > unquestionably him, along with ancestors going back farther than I > had ever imagined I would find. Perhaps not "unquestionably" to > some standards (which subject I have also been looking into - should > I really go looking for a physical copy of a book published in 1863 > to verify that what was copied to the internet is correct???) but > absolutely matching a great many points that my Mom had recorded > before her death in 1999. > > CSquared no maybe your mother copied from the 1863 book (mistakes and all too) what you have to do is look very critically at the 1863 book and try and find the original source of the data in the nineteenth century a PRIMARY source is a document created at the same time by the people involved in the event. a will a probate some church books but NOT many census records which are mostly SECONDARY sources because they are a fair copy from original census returns or an oral statement on a door step pencilled into a note book many of the older church books were written up later from scraps of paper with notes jotted down on them - which makes them ALSO secondary sources most census images are TERTIARY sources because they are copies of copies on line census indexes are on the FOURTH level or worse COPIES OF COPIES OF COPIES with spelling mistakes because of difficult to read handwritng, and mistakes made at the time by census collectors and today poorly paid typists far from the localities with no local knowledge. which demotes the family trees I put on line to the fifth level of quality EXCEPT for the bits I got from my mother's birthday book and old letters I own, and my visits to archives where I handled and read original documents which makes that part of my tree a SECONDARY SOURCE what your mother wrote about the people she knew is a primary source but we all have family stories which turn out to be legends with an element of truth, so when she wrote down what she was told . . . . -- check it out beware !!!! some of the nineteenth century and older genealogies are full of lies and assumptions - there were con men then too my worst mistake I made when I started was not finding CONTROL + S add source when I began with Family Tree Maker Hugh W -- Beta blogger http://nanowrimo3.blogspot.com/ visiting my past http://hughw36-2.blogspot.com/ re-entry http://snaps4.blogspot.com/" photographs and walks old blogger http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG Hugh Watkins <[email protected]>

"Karen Rhodes" <[email protected]> wrote: > > read some of the old Bastardy Bonds. Some ladies > > said "Oops" several times. > > > > J. Hugh Sullivan > > Purity is in the imagination of the beholder. I suppose that could be said about murder also when you can't figure where to draw the line. > Karen Rhodes > Whose bigamous great-great grandfather got her into the IBSSG Bigamy is when you have two wives too many. Hugh [email protected] (J. Hugh Sullivan)

> YES, YES!! IF WE CANNOT CONTACT THE PERSON WHO SENT THE > INFORMATION I DO NOT THINK IT SHOULD BE ACCEPTED BY ANCESTRY.COM. > MY TREE IS FULL OF ERRORS AND MY PRETEEN CHILDREN ARE > IDENTIFIED!!!!! > > [email protected] Good grief! Have you given no thought to the many WorldConnect submitters who later pass away but leave instructions with their heirs that their family tree is to be left online as a help to future researchers who may want to add to it or correct an error? Errors can be corrected via Post-em Notes and additions can be uploaded in your own trees. I personally helped some submitters who knew they had a terminal illness or who were about to go into a nursing home and lose Internet access (and the ability to keep their tree updated) forever. But they didn't want their life's work to be lost or not be available to provide others with a starting point for the future. When a friend of mine learned she had only a month to live with terminal brain cancer she worked for those last few weeks (as long as she was able) to get her most recent GEDCOM uploaded to WorldConnect and it was her last wish that no one ever remove it. Joan [email protected]

> during those times. I know of these marriages because they were in > my lifetime so I have written them in my notes for use at a later > date but how does a person make others in the family understand that > this is a family history to share with our descendants so they can > know where they came from and who we are, They enjoy researching > with me and love to find new stories about our ancestors but still > are adamant about not sharing a small piece of their past. How can > we make people understand so they will share? > > Robin Percy There's always the possibility that the persons involved consider it to be irrelevant to anyone not involved. It may be your "history" but it is their "life". Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>