Thanks much, Anne. Thing is, that most of the time the search from my profile page is not being performed by me, but someone else. By showing the lower, as opposed to larger, numbers the size of my (and everyone else's) study appears somewhat smaller than in reality it is. Did you give consideration to using the larger numbers for a member of the public, ie, on the profile page? Regards Paul On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Anne Shankland <anne.shankland@gmail.com> wrote: > Paul, the numbers returned for HOWES in the GMI and the Worldwide Marriages > (439 and 190 respectively) are the numbers of entries in which Howes occurs > as the spouse name of someone else's study name. > > The 4,764 entries in the GMI and the 8,902 entries in the Worldwide > Marriages which have HOWES as the study name don't get returned because - > presumably - you know all about those already, having submitted them > yourself! The searches return entries which perhaps you don't yet know > about because they relate to someone else's studies. > > Hope this helps. > > Anne Shankland > Web Indexes Administrator > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Howes via" <goons@rootsweb.com> > To: <goons@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 7:38 PM > Subject: Re: [G] Kudos > > >> Right on, Julie, and well done to the webmaster and team. It does >> make the profile appear more interesting. >> >> The search at the bottom of my profile page shows 439 matches in the >> GMI and only 190 in the Worldwide index, whereas both contain many >> thousands of Howes entries, let alone other names in my study. Does >> anyone know what these numbers (439 and 190) are? Will the same ones >> be seen by others? >> >> Oh, and is there a way to stop "House" finding Stenhouse, Moorehouse, >> et al? (No disrespect intended!) >> Paul >> >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Julie Goucher via <goons@rootsweb.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 15 December 2014 at 16:22, Marie Byatt via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Number 1 - if you haven't used the Guild homepage search in the last 5 >>>> or >>>> 6 days - do so now. Nigel has done a fantastic job of arranging the >>>> search >>>> results to show what the Guild offers on any given surname. Actual >>>> details >>>> may be behind the paywall but the teasers are there. Much more >>>> interesting >>>> than just someone is or is not doing a study on the name. Scroll down >>>> to >>>> the bottom of any Profile page as well. It's a great improvement and I >>>> think makes the site friendlier. >>>> >>>> Number 2 - As you all know, I load material to the WWM (World Wide >>>> Marriages Index - now over 150 thousand names and growing) - one of the >>>> byproducts of this activity has meant that I have had a much wider peek >>>> into other peoples studies. ANd honestly, I am blown away by the sheer >>>> scope and magnitude of the work done. You members of the Guild have >>>> done >>>> fantastic work, a university should be so good. Maps, DNA, Etymology, >>>> Data >>>> crunching, Story telling, Immigration patterns, medieval manuscripts, >>>> farming methods, midwifery, military concerns - if it concerns your >>>> surname >>>> in anyway, you study it, you analyse it and then produce results others >>>> can >>>> use. Traditional historians could learn a lot from you. SO may I say >>>> congratulations and keep it up . And for those of you that haven't >>>> looked >>>> at other studies, use the new search and visit some of the members >>>> websites >>>> - there are less than 700 so at one a day - it's less than 2 years. I >>>> have gotten so many >>>> ideas I hope to include in my study, maybe I'll produce a movie. >>>> >>>> Finally I 'm still looking for more marriages - anywhere - anytime >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Marie, >>> >>> I absolutely second your post. Nigel has done a great job of getting the >>> website into a constant state of development. Each time I log in there >>> are >>> changes, tweaks and additions. I have not logged into the indexes page >>> today, but will do later and I promise I will send in some marriages for >>> the World wide index, but it won't be this side of Christmas! >>> >>> Everyone it seems is using the buzz word Collaboration. In some cases we >>> use buzz words and yet rarely deliver. We are routinely collaborating, >>> sharing information whether that is here, on a hangout or via the indexes >>> which are looked after and co-ordinated by a team of Guild volunteers. >>> That >>> is the real collaboration when we each bring our own contributions to the >>> table for the benefit of other members. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Julie Goucher >>> Guild Member 3925 >>> Orlando & Worship ONS >>> South Devon Regional Rep >>> _____________________________________________ >>> >>> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >>> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >>> the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Paul Howes >> www.howesfamilies.com >> Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> > -- Paul Howes www.howesfamilies.com Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide

Yes, I agree that these relatively low numbers don't give an accurate picture of the size or progress of your study. But both the GMI and the WWM allow searching ONLY on the spouse name, whether the search is being done by you or anyone else. So the thousands of entries you have put in with your name as the study name CANNOT be found by a search on your name (unless your name appears as the spouse name as well). This isn't a defect, it's a design point. The indexes were designed this way to guard against someone harvesting all your work. Even the counts I gave are not generally available - I was able to find them as I can look directly at the GMI and the WWM databases. Perhaps, as you say, the larger numbers should be quoted on the profile page? What do others think? Anne Shankland Web Indexes Administrator ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Howes via" <goons@rootsweb.com> To: "Anne Shankland" <shankland@one-name.org>; <goons@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 11:04 PM Subject: Re: [G] Kudos > Thanks much, Anne. Thing is, that most of the time the search from my > profile page is not being performed by me, but someone else. By > showing the lower, as opposed to larger, numbers the size of my (and > everyone else's) study appears somewhat smaller than in reality it is. > Did you give consideration to using the larger numbers for a member of > the public, ie, on the profile page? > Regards > Paul > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Anne Shankland > <anne.shankland@gmail.com> wrote: >> Paul, the numbers returned for HOWES in the GMI and the Worldwide >> Marriages >> (439 and 190 respectively) are the numbers of entries in which Howes >> occurs >> as the spouse name of someone else's study name. >> >> The 4,764 entries in the GMI and the 8,902 entries in the Worldwide >> Marriages which have HOWES as the study name don't get returned because - >> presumably - you know all about those already, having submitted them >> yourself! The searches return entries which perhaps you don't yet know >> about because they relate to someone else's studies. >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Anne Shankland >> Web Indexes Administrator >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Howes via" <goons@rootsweb.com> >> To: <goons@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 7:38 PM >> Subject: Re: [G] Kudos >> >> >>> Right on, Julie, and well done to the webmaster and team. It does >>> make the profile appear more interesting. >>> >>> The search at the bottom of my profile page shows 439 matches in the >>> GMI and only 190 in the Worldwide index, whereas both contain many >>> thousands of Howes entries, let alone other names in my study. Does >>> anyone know what these numbers (439 and 190) are? Will the same ones >>> be seen by others? >>> >>> Oh, and is there a way to stop "House" finding Stenhouse, Moorehouse, >>> et al? (No disrespect intended!) >>> Paul >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Julie Goucher via <goons@rootsweb.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 15 December 2014 at 16:22, Marie Byatt via <goons@rootsweb.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Number 1 - if you haven't used the Guild homepage search in the last 5 >>>>> or >>>>> 6 days - do so now. Nigel has done a fantastic job of arranging the >>>>> search >>>>> results to show what the Guild offers on any given surname. Actual >>>>> details >>>>> may be behind the paywall but the teasers are there. Much more >>>>> interesting >>>>> than just someone is or is not doing a study on the name. Scroll down >>>>> to >>>>> the bottom of any Profile page as well. It's a great improvement and >>>>> I >>>>> think makes the site friendlier. >>>>> >>>>> Number 2 - As you all know, I load material to the WWM (World Wide >>>>> Marriages Index - now over 150 thousand names and growing) - one of >>>>> the >>>>> byproducts of this activity has meant that I have had a much wider >>>>> peek >>>>> into other peoples studies. ANd honestly, I am blown away by the >>>>> sheer >>>>> scope and magnitude of the work done. You members of the Guild have >>>>> done >>>>> fantastic work, a university should be so good. Maps, DNA, Etymology, >>>>> Data >>>>> crunching, Story telling, Immigration patterns, medieval manuscripts, >>>>> farming methods, midwifery, military concerns - if it concerns your >>>>> surname >>>>> in anyway, you study it, you analyse it and then produce results >>>>> others >>>>> can >>>>> use. Traditional historians could learn a lot from you. SO may I say >>>>> congratulations and keep it up . And for those of you that haven't >>>>> looked >>>>> at other studies, use the new search and visit some of the members >>>>> websites >>>>> - there are less than 700 so at one a day - it's less than 2 years. >>>>> I >>>>> have gotten so many >>>>> ideas I hope to include in my study, maybe I'll produce a movie. >>>>> >>>>> Finally I 'm still looking for more marriages - anywhere - anytime >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Marie, >>>> >>>> I absolutely second your post. Nigel has done a great job of getting >>>> the >>>> website into a constant state of development. Each time I log in there >>>> are >>>> changes, tweaks and additions. I have not logged into the indexes page >>>> today, but will do later and I promise I will send in some marriages >>>> for >>>> the World wide index, but it won't be this side of Christmas! >>>> >>>> Everyone it seems is using the buzz word Collaboration. In some cases >>>> we >>>> use buzz words and yet rarely deliver. We are routinely collaborating, >>>> sharing information whether that is here, on a hangout or via the >>>> indexes >>>> which are looked after and co-ordinated by a team of Guild volunteers. >>>> That >>>> is the real collaboration when we each bring our own contributions to >>>> the >>>> table for the benefit of other members. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Julie Goucher >>>> Guild Member 3925 >>>> Orlando & Worship ONS >>>> South Devon Regional Rep >>>> _____________________________________________ >>>> >>>> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >>>> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >>>> >>>> ------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>>> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>>> quotes in >>>> the subject and the body of the message >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Paul Howes >>> www.howesfamilies.com >>> Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide >>> _____________________________________________ >>> >>> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >>> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>> quotes in >>> the subject and the body of the message >>> >> > > > > -- > Paul Howes > www.howesfamilies.com > Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

Anne I agree with Paul and Corinne Our profile pages are for members of the public and should reflect the total number of occurrences of our surname in the indexes. Ideally the number should be a combination of the number of entries that we've submitted ourselves and the number of references submitted by other members. I don't understand the concern about stealing data. Why would anyone else other than me want to have access to a list of all Cruse/Cruwys/Cruise marriages in the GMI and the Worldwide Marriage Index? I would actually find it helpful to see all the marriages I've entered, and find it frustrating that I can't generate a list of marriages from the material that I've personally contributed. Even if someone were to extract all the marriages for my surname I don't see why this should be a problem. I've done the research so that it *can* be used. That's how our knowledge is advanced. In most cases people would in any case be much better off contacting me because these are after all only indexes and I generally have much more information (eg, full marriage certificate and accompanying family tree). Best wishes Debbie