Hi all, I always seem to find myself in a rut when a family line I'm following takes me to Germany, and it's happened again. I was working on a family from Germany and was trying to find out where in Germany they were from but all the usual suspects (marriage recs from the children, death records of all, obits, etc.) were telling me was "Germany". This week, I was able to locate the two passenger lists, one for the husband and one for the wife (with family), stating they left Bremen and arrived in 1905 and 1906 respectively before settling in Cleveland, OH. Both lists name the last residence as Sandberg, Germany. When I entered a general Yahoo search for Sandberg, Germany, just to see what popped up, I found a Wikipedia entry for a Sandberg municipality within Bavaria. However, when I tried to get some additional information on Sandberg entries in Meyers Orts, I ran into half a page's worth of entries. I don't generally do German research and have probably only used Meyers Orts maybe 6 times in the past, but I've never come across so many entries for a place name. I'm lost. Where do I go from here to try and isolate the correct location for this family? It looks like entry 1 in Meyers Orts is the area in Bavaria that I've seen on Wikipedia, but there are so many more, I'm not sure what to do.   Thanks for any info! Nikki LaRue 

Connie -- Excellent hard-core questions. Since the folks you're working with are local it may be easier to discuss some of these matters up front. My tentative thoughts: (1) Yes, if it's OK with them. What's low-hanging fruit to you may be out of their vision. (2) May depend on the situation. Actually this is a great research question in general. I don't see anything wrong with collecting the readily available clues first, but in some cases I would worry that a very green client might see that you've filled in the bmd and say, "OK, great, we're done!" (3) Why not include an appendix to the report clearly labeled something like "potentially useful family information not currently relevant" so that both you and they could explore it if it ever does become relevant? Harold On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Connie Sheets <clsheets1@yahoo.com> wrote: > As I take on more projects for others, I'm discovering that there is much > to be found on the Internet specific to their family that they have not > found. I'm also discovering that most do not have a specific research goal. > My prior profession prepared me well for discussing what they know and > pinpointing what they want to find out, but I find I'm struggling a bit > with how best to approach the research. Most of my potential clients live > locally and are searching in areas far removed from where we live, which > may be the opposite situation from many of you. > > Answers to the following questions will depend upon the nature and > complexity of the research problem and the desires of the client, but in > general: > > (1) Is it appropriate to first exhaust the "low-hanging fruit" on the > Internet? What if that takes most, if not all, of the time for which we > have contracted? For a widely mobile family, is it common for the first > block (or two) of time to be spent primarily on review of prior work and > Internet research? > > (2) Assuming a complex problem and little prior research, am I in error to > think that filling in the blanks to obtain at least b, m, and d info for > the target couple and their children should be toward the top of the > research plan, even if that data is initially from derivative online > indexes? In other words, how narrowly or broadly do you plan the initial > research block? Do you concentrate on just one or two record types and > obtain the originals, or do you concentrate on creating a general outline > of the family (target couple and their children) from which research in > original records can proceed? > > (3) What do I do with information I happen across that is obviously about > the family, but not directly relevant to the research goal? > Example: The goal is to identify mother's maiden name, so my plan > includes obtaining obituaries for the children. I found the obituary for a > son at GenealogyBank, but in the same search results, I noticed a later > publication containing a legal description of property owned by the > deceased. My client is not descended from this son; the information might > become relevant later but is not relevant now. It would be time-consuming > (and potentially confusing to the client) to process and include this > newspaper clipping in the report, but I'd feel guilty if I ignored it. > > > Connie Sheets > Phoenix > > > > > > > > > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Harold Henderson midwestroots.net Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation and used under license by the Board’s associates.

Being in the Salt Lake City area, I've never had a local client, and all research locations are far away (I don't do Utah research). For your questions. 1. It depends on the extent of their research, and how many hours they gave you on how much of the first session is spent in review. Most of my clients have typically exhausted Ancestry.com, and I don't spend much time there. Many, though, are not aware of the digital scans on FamilySearch, (both those indexed and unindexed) although I expect that knowledge to go up. Most have also not examined digital scans on state archives, county websites, etc., and are also not aware of those. As Harold said, what I might think of as low-hanging fruit may be out of the vision of the client. That's why they hired me, for my knowledge of available records, whether on the Internet, published books, microfilm, or those available only locally, for which I might need to contact a local researcher to examine. 2. It all depends on the client goal(s). Doing mostly southern research, and mostly before 1850 (the point at which clients tend to get stuck) there are no civil birth or death (and depending on location) no marriage records. 3. In things that are not relevant to the *present* goal, I make a note in the research calendar. In your example I would list GenealogyBank under the source column, and the note column would mention there is a legal description of land for the deceased. Not everything in the research calendar is discussed in a report. A cover letter will mention that, and that they should review everything in the research calendar. Rick Saunders -----Original Message----- From: Connie Sheets Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 10:34 AM To: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com Subject: [TGF] Research Planning for Clients and the Internet <snip> (1) Is it appropriate to first exhaust the "low-hanging fruit" on the Internet?  What if that takes most, if not all, of the time for which we have contracted? For a widely mobile family, is it common for the first block (or two) of time to be spent primarily on review of prior work and Internet research?   (2) Assuming a complex problem and little prior research, am I in error to think that filling in the blanks to obtain at least b, m, and d info for the target couple and their children should be toward the top of the research plan, even if that data is initially from derivative online indexes? In other words, how narrowly or broadly do you plan the initial research block? Do you concentrate on just one or two record types and obtain the originals, or do you concentrate on creating a general outline of the family (target couple and their children) from which research in original records can proceed?   (3) What do I do with information I happen across that is obviously about the family, but not directly relevant to the research goal? Example:  The goal is to identify mother's maiden name, so my plan includes obtaining obituaries for the children.  I found the obituary for a son at GenealogyBank, but in the same search results, I noticed a later publication containing a legal description of property owned by the deceased.  My client is not descended from this son; the information might become relevant later but is not relevant now. It would be time-consuming (and potentially confusing to the client) to process and include this newspaper clipping in the report, but I'd feel guilty if I ignored it. Connie Sheets Phoenix

Sent from my iPad On Oct 21, 2012, at 9:06 AM, transitional-genealogists-forum-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 06:01:32 -0700 (PDT) > From: Nicole La Rue <nikkisbc@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? > > Eva, > > First off, I am the Waiting List Coordinator for ProGen and woke up this morning to find your application in my Inbox. Congrats on deciding to join!? > > Second, re the two institutes. While I've only taken the Advanced Methodology course at SLIG, I can tell you that from what I have heard, Paula Stuart Warren's Course 1 may be what you are searching for as it is not a basic course as, say the beginner's course at IGHR, but rather more of an intermediate-level track. I have not taken it however, so hopefully you will get a better idea of what is covered and whether it is right for you from others who have taken it here. ?As to IGHR, take Lloyd's Intermediate class!! This class is one of those that people talk about, a lot. Every time I go to Samford I hear people saying how much they loved it and that they would love to be able to take it again. So this one is a must! > > Finally, don't forget those message boards. They really can offer you some of that extra experience from time to time. You experience there can even give you that case study that would be perfect for your CG portfolio. I got this advice from a really wonderful member of this list and while it's not exactly panning out perfectly for me at the moment, you may find a hidden gem in your own locale/area of expertise. > > Hope this helps you, and that you get a bit more clarification on SLIG's Course 1. (And if not, you could always ask Paula herself :) ) > > Nikki > > > > ________________________________ > From: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> > To: Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com> > Cc: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 1:50 AM > Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? > > Hi again, > > Thank you to those who have replied both on- and off-list with solidarity > and tips/suggestions! Things I am going to jump on: > > - the SLIG and IGHR institutes this coming year! > - looking into my local APG chapter (which is NorCal - anyone on here in > that chapter?) > - I applied to the ProGen study group > - try to become more active in my local society (which can be tricky in > terms of scheduling but should be possible) > > I already get the NGSQ and read all the articles and have practiced writing > such articles a bit on my own. I am enrolled in NIGS and should take a > closer look at their methodology courses. I am considering also doing the > NGS home study course which will probably have considerable overlap with > the NIGS material but repetition is not necessarily a bad thing! > > I do have a question about the SLIG and IGHR institutes. In looking at the > courses/tracks, it is hard to identify which ones are appropriate for me. > Can anyone speak to these? > > SLIG: > Advanced Methods is sold out, but I think I probably need a somewhat more > intermediate course before I would jump into that one anyway since I > haven't attended any other institutes and haven't actually finished the > NIGS course. But, I'm not sure which of the others is most appropriate for > me. I'm worried Course 1 might be too elementary? I'm not needing as much > focus on types of records as I am on problem-solving, research > planning/organizing, etc. I don't want to enroll in a course that is too > elementary for me when these only happen once a year, but I also don't want > to enroll in something that will be too much of a stretch. Any suggestions? > > IGHR: > Again, I won't be ready for the Advanced Methodology course with ESM. But > for problem-solving and research planning/organizing focus, which would be > most appropriate? Course 2? (Intermediate Genealogy and Historical Studies) > > Thank you all so much for input! Feeling excited and motivated today :) > > Eva > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> Eva -- >> >> I echo everything Nikki and Dave said but with a little different emphasis. >> >> Your situation sounds a good deal like mine about five years ago -- >> knowing what I wanted to do, being pretty sure I could do it (a little >> *too* sure as it turned out the first time), but not being quite sure how. >> Actually I think you have a better idea of what you need now than I did >> then. >> >> Where you live makes a difference. I wound up doing three things that >> helped a lot: (1) joining a ProGen group (actually, the first one); (2) >> attending SLIG and Samford institutes in spite of the cost and time and >> inconvenience; and (3) getting involved in my local society in a particular >> way -- transcribing and abstracting projects that confronted me weekly with >> original records that I could get acquainted with (outside a high-pressure >> course or client context). >> >> NGS and other conferences are great, but they can be a lonely experience >> for newbies. Everyone else seems to know each other, and the group around >> you changes every hour. >> >> Having a mentor or mentors helps show us ways of being a genealogist. What >> also made a major difference for me was finding friends in my "generation" >> of new genealogists (measured by when we got serious, not actual age). And >> that has happened for me almost entirely through institutes, where we spent >> several days together in the same class wrestling with the same problems, >> and learning from the best in the field and from each other. >> >> That's where you're most likely to find people who are as serious as you >> are. It didn't occur to me until it happened either (a) that that was what >> I needed or (b) that it would be as rewarding as the genealogy itself. >> >> APG can also be a place to find those people, again depending on where you >> are and the nature of your local chapter, if any. We (I'm on the board) are >> doing more discussion/mentoring sessions than before, so if you considered >> and rejected joining in the past, you may want to look again. >> >> Good luck and keep posting (especially if we have missed the point to any >> extent)! >> >> Harold >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use >>> some >>> suggestions to get me going! >>> >>> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, >>> so >>> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >>> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >>> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >>> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, >>> or >>> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >>> forward. >>> >>> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that >>> what >>> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >>> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >>> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing >>> cabinet! >>> >>> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >>> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >>> also immerse myself in method work >>> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >>> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >>> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >>> records centered >>> >>> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree >>> from >>> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I >>> know >>> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >>> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could >>> get >>> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >>> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >>> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >>> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >>> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >>> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >>> the next level of learning. >>> >>> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >>> >>> Eva >>> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >>> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >>> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> -- >> Harold Henderson? ? ? ? ? ? midwestroots.net >> Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana >> Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center >> >> Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 >> Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks >> of the Board for Certification of Genealogists? used by the >> Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation >> and used under license by the Board?s associates. > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:52:40 -0400 > From: Elizabeth Banas <fh_research@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Names > To: <rondina.muncy@gmail.com>, Transitional genealogists forum > <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <COL123-W3725F65BAA5DB72EC0A27C877B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas > From: rondina.muncy@gmail.com > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:15:55 -0500 > To: genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com > CC: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [TGF] Names > > Steve, > > When I run into that situation, I spell the name as it is normally spelled > by a family in the text body unless I am referring to a specific document > with another spelling. For that instance, I use the spelling the document > does. If the spelling is bizarre then I place the usual spelling after it > in brackets. You can also put the variations in quote marks. If it is for a > citation, you may want to consider bracketed spellings, but this also can > become cumbersome. > > I point out at the beginning of every work-product that spellings will be > kept as they are in documents and in document references. I state this > clearly in italics with space around it and sometimes discuss the fact that > spellings were fluid in earlier times. > > In a recent case, the normal spelling was Ryan. I found Rian, Rhine, > Rhines, Rine, and Renn (thank you German clerks) among others. 'Roan' had > to be investigated, but alas, he was a Rine. > > Rondina > _______________________ > Rondina P. Muncy > Ancestral Analysis > 4008 Linden Avenue > Fort Worth, Texas 76107 > 682.224.6584 > rondina.muncy@gmail.com > www.ancestralanalysis.com > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Steve Dahlstrom < > genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com> wrote: > > > I am working on a client report. The family surname is found with various > spellings: Wait/Waitt/Waite/etc. in the report I have tried to use the > spelling that appears in the record I am describing, but this tends to be > confusing when referring to the same person. Should I do this, or adopt a > consistent spelling and make a comment that the actual records may vary? > > How have you handled similar situations? > > Steve Dahlstrom > > Sent from my iPhone > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:54:56 -0400 > From: Elizabeth Banas <fh_research@hotmail.com> > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > To: Transitional genealogists forum > <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <COL123-W36F8EC64450F2716DCD091877B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:04:17 -0400 (EDT) > From: JFonkert@aol.com > Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants > To: fh_research@hotmail.com, > transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <7f94.70de8e21.3db55ae1@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > Do you mean between the name variants? Such as Fawkner/Faulkner? That > can work with only two variants, but when the name frequently appears in four > or more forms, it is not very satisfying to the reader -- in my opinion. I > am not aware that there is any single, widely accepted standard for how to > handle name variants. > > J. H. ("Jay") Fonkert, CG > > View my speaking calendar at: > _http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php_ (http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php) > _http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com_ > (http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com/) > _http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/_ > (http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/) > Saint Paul, MN > > Director, Association of Professional Genealogists > professional profile at _www.apgen.org_ (http://www.apgen.org)/) > > *"CG" & "Certified Genealogist" are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, and are used by authorized associates following > periodic, peer-reviewed competency evaluations. Certificate No. 965, issued 11 > May 2012, expires 11 May 2017. > > > > In a message dated 10/21/2012 8:55:02 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > fh_research@hotmail.com writes: > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study > Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out > by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:04:43 -0400 > From: "Michael Hait" <michael.hait@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants > To: "Elizabeth Banas" <fh_research@hotmail.com>, "Transitional > genealogists forum" <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <BAY145-ds4601E61950D5ED3D22797927B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when > referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will > use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on > the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use > that. > > For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was > "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before > say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I > used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and > for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then > put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific > actions directly from specific records. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > michael.hait@hotmail.com > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Banas > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Transitional genealogists forum > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course > in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by > the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM Digest, Vol 6, Issue 568 > *************************************************************** > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:52:40 -0400 > From: Elizabeth Banas <fh_research@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Names > To: <rondina.muncy@gmail.com>, Transitional genealogists forum > <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <COL123-W3725F65BAA5DB72EC0A27C877B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas >> From: rondina.muncy@gmail.com >> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:15:55 -0500 >> To: genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com >> CC: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [TGF] Names >> >> Steve, >> >> When I run into that situation, I spell the name as it is normally spelled >> by a family in the text body unless I am referring to a specific document >> with another spelling. For that instance, I use the spelling the document >> does. If the spelling is bizarre then I place the usual spelling after it >> in brackets. You can also put the variations in quote marks. If it is for a >> citation, you may want to consider bracketed spellings, but this also can >> become cumbersome. >> >> I point out at the beginning of every work-product that spellings will be >> kept as they are in documents and in document references. I state this >> clearly in italics with space around it and sometimes discuss the fact that >> spellings were fluid in earlier times. >> >> In a recent case, the normal spelling was Ryan. I found Rian, Rhine, >> Rhines, Rine, and Renn (thank you German clerks) among others. 'Roan' had >> to be investigated, but alas, he was a Rine. >> >> Rondina >> _______________________ >> Rondina P. Muncy >> Ancestral Analysis >> 4008 Linden Avenue >> Fort Worth, Texas 76107 >> 682.224.6584 >> rondina.muncy@gmail.com >> www.ancestralanalysis.com >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Steve Dahlstrom < >> genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> I am working on a client report. The family surname is found with various >>> spellings: Wait/Waitt/Waite/etc. in the report I have tried to use the >>> spelling that appears in the record I am describing, but this tends to be >>> confusing when referring to the same person. Should I do this, or adopt a >>> consistent spelling and make a comment that the actual records may vary? >>> >>> How have you handled similar situations? >>> >>> Steve Dahlstrom >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >>> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >>> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:54:56 -0400 > From: Elizabeth Banas <fh_research@hotmail.com> > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > To: Transitional genealogists forum > <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <COL123-W36F8EC64450F2716DCD091877B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:04:17 -0400 (EDT) > From: JFonkert@aol.com > Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants > To: fh_research@hotmail.com, > transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <7f94.70de8e21.3db55ae1@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > Do you mean between the name variants? Such as Fawkner/Faulkner? That > can work with only two variants, but when the name frequently appears in four > or more forms, it is not very satisfying to the reader -- in my opinion. I > am not aware that there is any single, widely accepted standard for how to > handle name variants. > > J. H. ("Jay") Fonkert, CG > > View my speaking calendar at: > _http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php_ (http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php) > _http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com_ > (http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com/) > _http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/_ > (http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/) > Saint Paul, MN > > Director, Association of Professional Genealogists > professional profile at _www.apgen.org_ (http://www.apgen.org)/) > > *"CG" & "Certified Genealogist" are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, and are used by authorized associates following > periodic, peer-reviewed competency evaluations. Certificate No. 965, issued 11 > May 2012, expires 11 May 2017. > > > > In a message dated 10/21/2012 8:55:02 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > fh_research@hotmail.com writes: > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study > Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out > by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:04:43 -0400 > From: "Michael Hait" <michael.hait@hotmail.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants > To: "Elizabeth Banas" <fh_research@hotmail.com>, "Transitional > genealogists forum" <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: <BAY145-ds4601E61950D5ED3D22797927B0@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when > referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will > use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on > the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use > that. > > For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was > "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before > say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I > used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and > for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then > put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific > actions directly from specific records. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > michael.hait@hotmail.com > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Banas > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Transitional genealogists forum > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course > in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by > the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM Digest, Vol 6, Issue 568 > ***************************************************************

I don't have a one size-fits-all answer -- maybe someone else does. I agree with Michael's and Harold's advice. However, I think we have been dealing with two different questions: - how to handle name variants in our genealogy narratives? My best answer is to state clearly up front which of several variants you are using to generically refer to the person or family, and explain why. - In a situation where you need to use two or more variants together, how to handle this typographically? The forward dash is one suggestion. Thus, Carrie/Clara or Fawkner/Falkner. However, this can be unwieldy for the reader when three or more variants are involved: Karen/Carrie/Clara or Fawkner/Falkner/Faulkner/Faulconer (I have a deed in which all four spellings are used in less than two pages). - just my opinion. Jay Fonkert -----Original Message----- From: Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com> To: Michael Hait <michael.hait@hotmail.com> Cc: Transitional genealogists forum <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sun, Oct 21, 2012 9:53 am Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants What Michael said. I believe that is how top genealogy magazines handle these situations, which of course happen all the time. Elizabeth raises by implication an interesting point: how to deal with judges or instructors whose opinions do not seem altogether reasonable. If ProGen doesn't help (and in this case EE, 1st ed., 2.16 on p. 50 helps some), then see what NGSQ, NEHGR, and NYGBR do. Harold On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Michael Hait <michael.hait@hotmail.com>wrote: > I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when > referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will > use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on > the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use > that. > > For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was > "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before > say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I > used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and > for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then > put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific > actions directly from specific records. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > michael.hait@hotmail.com > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Banas > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Transitional genealogists forum > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course > in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by > the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Harold Henderson midwestroots.net Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation and used under license by the Board’s associates. The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I do the same as Michael stated. The only slight addition I would make is that if I have copies of an original signature (and they are consistent) I would use that as the "standard spelling" for **that** individual when referring to them, even if there are "more" records under a different spelling as written by clerks. Of course there are exceptions to everything. One that comes to mind is a German immigrant who signed his name with one spelling, but appeared in all American records under a different spelling. An example is an ancestor Henrich Weidemann (as signed) who was Henry Wideman in all American records. I would start the discussion of him with that while he appeared in all American records as Henry Wideman, he consistently signed his name as Henrich Weidemann, and then use Henry Wideman as the "standard" spelling. Rick Saunders -----Original Message----- From: Michael Hait Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 8:05 AM To: Elizabeth Banas; Transitional genealogists forum Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use that. <snip>

As a variation on this theme, what about changes to the spelling of town names? In one town, they began to spell the name differently in the 1840's. Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone ----- Reply message ----- From: "Harold Henderson" <librarytraveler@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Oct 21, 2012 10:50 am Subject: [TGF] Name variants To: "Michael Hait" <michael.hait@hotmail.com> Cc: "Transitional genealogists forum" <transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com> What Michael said. I believe that is how top genealogy magazines handle these situations, which of course happen all the time. Elizabeth raises by implication an interesting point: how to deal with judges or instructors whose opinions do not seem altogether reasonable. If ProGen doesn't help (and in this case EE, 1st ed., 2.16 on p. 50 helps some), then see what NGSQ, NEHGR, and NYGBR do. Harold On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Michael Hait <michael.hait@hotmail.com>wrote: > I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when > referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will > use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on > the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use > that. > > For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was > "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before > say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I > used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and > for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then > put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific > actions directly from specific records. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > michael.hait@hotmail.com > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Banas > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Transitional genealogists forum > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course > in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by > the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to

If a name has only 2 or 3 variants mentioned in the discussed documents then that might be ok, but if there are more I would likely not list them all with the forward slash every time they were mentioned in the report. If all discovered variants are mentioned once in the report that should be sufficient. Each situation can be different. If there are no standard methods for handling a situation I typically let common sense have the final say. Phyllis Not yet a CG but working on it -----Original Message----- From: transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Elizabeth Banas Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 6:55 AM To: Transitional genealogists forum Subject: [TGF] Name variants Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document.

Must be something in the desert air, but I have a similar "issue." And, maybe this isn't a good idea. Last week, at a function that included a "silent auction," I noticed that some people were offering up "services" for bid. It occurred to me (as an inveterate genealogist recruiter) that I could offer up some "genealogy related" service, that does not involve travel. As I thought, issues such as Connie mentioned came to me. How would the auction item read? In time elements? What is "an hour's worth of basic research" (or two hours, whatever) -- spending the time scouring the usual suspect websites (Ancestry.com, GenealogyBank, etc.) for "low hanging fruit", or, spending significant time interviewing the winner, and then doing the research? How about "product" -- It's hard to specify a specific, say "three generations" report, without knowing the back story of the bidder. Even though, as the donor, I'm not receiving anything (other than the experience, invaluable) for this, the winner, having expended "much" money on the donation, expects "much" in return. Maybe more than "much." I know I can specify the services -- "using available internet resources and the basic information provided by the winner, I will provide a report, including cited sources, of information on the family . . . " -- and there I stop. What parameters are appropriate here? Without putting in two pages of "where-as"s. I want to do something here, to support the charity, but I really don't want hard feelings if someone, say my friend Mary Anne, who immigrated from Germany about forty years ago, wins the auction, and I have no particular expertise in, or access to, German records. I don't want someone to request a connection to Charlemagne, or "prove" a family myth. Has anyone ever done this? If so, how? Pat Dunford Tucson -----Original Message----- From: transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Connie Sheets Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:34 AM To: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com Subject: [TGF] Research Planning for Clients and the Internet As I take on more projects for others, I'm discovering that there is much to be found on the Internet specific to their family that they have not found. I'm also discovering that most do not have a specific research goal. My prior profession prepared me well for discussing what they know and pinpointing what they want to find out, but I find I'm struggling a bit with how best to approach the research. Most of my potential clients live locally and are searching in areas far removed from where we live, which may be the opposite situation from many of you.. . . . Connie Sheets Phoenix  

Eva, First a disclaimer; I am the director of the Salt Lake Institute of Genealogy. That said, I would highly recommend Paula Stuart-Warren's American Research and Records course. Note that this course is offered in two parts alternated each year. To get the full experience you would take Paula's for two years and then Tom's Advanced Methods. One of the best pieces of Paula's course are one-on-one consultations at the Family History Library. I've heard many self-taught students describe their experience in Paula's course as cementing their education foundation. It's so much easier to build on a sure foundation. Feel free to send me any questions you may have. Christy Fillerup On Oct 21, 2012, at 12:50 AM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi again, > > Thank you to those who have replied both on- and off-list with solidarity > and tips/suggestions! Things I am going to jump on: > > - the SLIG and IGHR institutes this coming year! > - looking into my local APG chapter (which is NorCal - anyone on here in > that chapter?) > - I applied to the ProGen study group > - try to become more active in my local society (which can be tricky in > terms of scheduling but should be possible) > > I already get the NGSQ and read all the articles and have practiced writing > such articles a bit on my own. I am enrolled in NIGS and should take a > closer look at their methodology courses. I am considering also doing the > NGS home study course which will probably have considerable overlap with > the NIGS material but repetition is not necessarily a bad thing! > > I do have a question about the SLIG and IGHR institutes. In looking at the > courses/tracks, it is hard to identify which ones are appropriate for me. > Can anyone speak to these? > > SLIG: > Advanced Methods is sold out, but I think I probably need a somewhat more > intermediate course before I would jump into that one anyway since I > haven't attended any other institutes and haven't actually finished the > NIGS course. But, I'm not sure which of the others is most appropriate for > me. I'm worried Course 1 might be too elementary? I'm not needing as much > focus on types of records as I am on problem-solving, research > planning/organizing, etc. I don't want to enroll in a course that is too > elementary for me when these only happen once a year, but I also don't want > to enroll in something that will be too much of a stretch. Any suggestions? > > IGHR: > Again, I won't be ready for the Advanced Methodology course with ESM. But > for problem-solving and research planning/organizing focus, which would be > most appropriate? Course 2? (Intermediate Genealogy and Historical Studies) > > Thank you all so much for input! Feeling excited and motivated today :) > > Eva > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com >> wrote: > >> Eva -- >> >> I echo everything Nikki and Dave said but with a little different emphasis. >> >> Your situation sounds a good deal like mine about five years ago -- >> knowing what I wanted to do, being pretty sure I could do it (a little >> *too* sure as it turned out the first time), but not being quite sure how. >> Actually I think you have a better idea of what you need now than I did >> then. >> >> Where you live makes a difference. I wound up doing three things that >> helped a lot: (1) joining a ProGen group (actually, the first one); (2) >> attending SLIG and Samford institutes in spite of the cost and time and >> inconvenience; and (3) getting involved in my local society in a particular >> way -- transcribing and abstracting projects that confronted me weekly with >> original records that I could get acquainted with (outside a high-pressure >> course or client context). >> >> NGS and other conferences are great, but they can be a lonely experience >> for newbies. Everyone else seems to know each other, and the group around >> you changes every hour. >> >> Having a mentor or mentors helps show us ways of being a genealogist. What >> also made a major difference for me was finding friends in my "generation" >> of new genealogists (measured by when we got serious, not actual age). And >> that has happened for me almost entirely through institutes, where we spent >> several days together in the same class wrestling with the same problems, >> and learning from the best in the field and from each other. >> >> That's where you're most likely to find people who are as serious as you >> are. It didn't occur to me until it happened either (a) that that was what >> I needed or (b) that it would be as rewarding as the genealogy itself. >> >> APG can also be a place to find those people, again depending on where you >> are and the nature of your local chapter, if any. We (I'm on the board) are >> doing more discussion/mentoring sessions than before, so if you considered >> and rejected joining in the past, you may want to look again. >> >> Good luck and keep posting (especially if we have missed the point to any >> extent)! >> >> Harold >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use >>> some >>> suggestions to get me going! >>> >>> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, >>> so >>> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >>> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >>> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >>> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, >>> or >>> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >>> forward. >>> >>> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that >>> what >>> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >>> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >>> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing >>> cabinet! >>> >>> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >>> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >>> also immerse myself in method work >>> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >>> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >>> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >>> records centered >>> >>> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree >>> from >>> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I >>> know >>> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >>> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could >>> get >>> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >>> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >>> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >>> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >>> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >>> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >>> the next level of learning. >>> >>> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >>> >>> Eva >>> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >>> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >>> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >>> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >> >> >> -- >> Harold Henderson midwestroots.net >> Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana >> Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center >> >> Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 >> Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks >> of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the >> Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation >> and used under license by the Board’s associates. > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use that. For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific actions directly from specific records. Michael Hait, CG(sm) michael.hait@hotmail.com http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Banas Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM To: Transitional genealogists forum Subject: [TGF] Name variants Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Do you mean between the name variants? Such as Fawkner/Faulkner? That can work with only two variants, but when the name frequently appears in four or more forms, it is not very satisfying to the reader -- in my opinion. I am not aware that there is any single, widely accepted standard for how to handle name variants. J. H. ("Jay") Fonkert, CG View my speaking calendar at: _http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php_ (http://www.genealogicalspeakersguild.org/calendar_view.php) _http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com_ (http://www.fourgenerationsgenealogy.wordpress.com/) _http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/_ (http://fourgenerationsgenealogy.blogspot.com/) Saint Paul, MN Director, Association of Professional Genealogists professional profile at _www.apgen.org_ (http://www.apgen.org)/) *"CG" & "Certified Genealogist" are service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, and are used by authorized associates following periodic, peer-reviewed competency evaluations. Certificate No. 965, issued 11 May 2012, expires 11 May 2017. In a message dated 10/21/2012 8:55:02 A.M. Central Daylight Time, fh_research@hotmail.com writes: Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas

Good morning! When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the document. There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. Elizabeth Banas > From: rondina.muncy@gmail.com > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 20:15:55 -0500 > To: genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com > CC: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [TGF] Names > > Steve, > > When I run into that situation, I spell the name as it is normally spelled > by a family in the text body unless I am referring to a specific document > with another spelling. For that instance, I use the spelling the document > does. If the spelling is bizarre then I place the usual spelling after it > in brackets. You can also put the variations in quote marks. If it is for a > citation, you may want to consider bracketed spellings, but this also can > become cumbersome. > > I point out at the beginning of every work-product that spellings will be > kept as they are in documents and in document references. I state this > clearly in italics with space around it and sometimes discuss the fact that > spellings were fluid in earlier times. > > In a recent case, the normal spelling was Ryan. I found Rian, Rhine, > Rhines, Rine, and Renn (thank you German clerks) among others. 'Roan' had > to be investigated, but alas, he was a Rine. > > Rondina > _______________________ > Rondina P. Muncy > Ancestral Analysis > 4008 Linden Avenue > Fort Worth, Texas 76107 > 682.224.6584 > rondina.muncy@gmail.com > www.ancestralanalysis.com > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Steve Dahlstrom < > genealogy@stevedahlstrom.com> wrote: > > > > > I am working on a client report. The family surname is found with various > > spellings: Wait/Waitt/Waite/etc. in the report I have tried to use the > > spelling that appears in the record I am describing, but this tends to be > > confusing when referring to the same person. Should I do this, or adopt a > > consistent spelling and make a comment that the actual records may vary? > > > > How have you handled similar situations? > > > > Steve Dahlstrom > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

What Michael said. I believe that is how top genealogy magazines handle these situations, which of course happen all the time. Elizabeth raises by implication an interesting point: how to deal with judges or instructors whose opinions do not seem altogether reasonable. If ProGen doesn't help (and in this case EE, 1st ed., 2.16 on p. 50 helps some), then see what NGSQ, NEHGR, and NYGBR do. Harold On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Michael Hait <michael.hait@hotmail.com>wrote: > I generally will use the most-frequent or most-common spelling when > referring to the person in general, but when referring to a record, I will > use that spelling, in quotation marks. Citations always use the spelling on > the record. Alternatively if there is a standardized spelling I will use > that. > > For example, in a recent case, my client's grandmother's maiden name was > "Pinder." The records actually use the spelling "Penders" most often before > say 1935. After then, the "Pinder" spelling is used almost exclusively. I > used the standardized spelling "Pinder" for the genealogical summaries and > for the narrative, but put "(alt. Penders)" after the first use, and then > put the actual spelling used in quotation marks when discussing specific > actions directly from specific records. > > > > Michael Hait, CG(sm) > michael.hait@hotmail.com > http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com > "Planting the Seeds" Blog: http://michaelhait.wordpress.com > > CG and Certified Genealogist are service marks of the Board for > Certification of Genealogists, used under license by board certificants > after periodic competency evaluation, and the board name is registered in > the US Patent & Trademark Office. > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Banas > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 9:54 AM > To: Transitional genealogists forum > Subject: [TGF] Name variants > > > > > > Good morning! > > When I submitted a report for the NGS American Genealogy: Home Study Course > in which I referred to a surname as you have suggested, I was called out by > the person who graded the report. I was told to refer to the name in all > variant forms, separated by a forward slash (solidus) throughout the > document. > > There are so many differing opinions on these issues, it is confusing. I > referred to Professional Genealogy. Name variants are not covered. > > Elizabeth Banas > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive > environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to > professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Harold Henderson midwestroots.net Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation and used under license by the Board’s associates.

As I take on more projects for others, I'm discovering that there is much to be found on the Internet specific to their family that they have not found. I'm also discovering that most do not have a specific research goal. My prior profession prepared me well for discussing what they know and pinpointing what they want to find out, but I find I'm struggling a bit with how best to approach the research. Most of my potential clients live locally and are searching in areas far removed from where we live, which may be the opposite situation from many of you. Answers to the following questions will depend upon the nature and complexity of the research problem and the desires of the client, but in general: (1) Is it appropriate to first exhaust the "low-hanging fruit" on the Internet?  What if that takes most, if not all, of the time for which we have contracted? For a widely mobile family, is it common for the first block (or two) of time to be spent primarily on review of prior work and Internet research?   (2) Assuming a complex problem and little prior research, am I in error to think that filling in the blanks to obtain at least b, m, and d info for the target couple and their children should be toward the top of the research plan, even if that data is initially from derivative online indexes? In other words, how narrowly or broadly do you plan the initial research block? Do you concentrate on just one or two record types and obtain the originals, or do you concentrate on creating a general outline of the family (target couple and their children) from which research in original records can proceed?   (3) What do I do with information I happen across that is obviously about the family, but not directly relevant to the research goal? Example:  The goal is to identify mother's maiden name, so my plan includes obtaining obituaries for the children.  I found the obituary for a son at GenealogyBank, but in the same search results, I noticed a later publication containing a legal description of property owned by the deceased.  My client is not descended from this son; the information might become relevant later but is not relevant now. It would be time-consuming (and potentially confusing to the client) to process and include this newspaper clipping in the report, but I'd feel guilty if I ignored it. Connie Sheets Phoenix  

I do it exactly the way Michael does. It just seems to make the most amount of sense to me and retains the integrity of the source spelling without being confusing or cumbersome for the reader. Phyllis -----Original Message----- From: transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:transitional-genealogists-forum-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of jfonkert@aol.com Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 8:19 AM To: librarytraveler@gmail.com; michael.hait@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [TGF] Name variants I don't have a one size-fits-all answer -- maybe someone else does. I agree with Michael's and Harold's advice. However, I think we have been dealing with two different questions:

Eva, First off, I am the Waiting List Coordinator for ProGen and woke up this morning to find your application in my Inbox. Congrats on deciding to join!  Second, re the two institutes. While I've only taken the Advanced Methodology course at SLIG, I can tell you that from what I have heard, Paula Stuart Warren's Course 1 may be what you are searching for as it is not a basic course as, say the beginner's course at IGHR, but rather more of an intermediate-level track. I have not taken it however, so hopefully you will get a better idea of what is covered and whether it is right for you from others who have taken it here.  As to IGHR, take Lloyd's Intermediate class!! This class is one of those that people talk about, a lot. Every time I go to Samford I hear people saying how much they loved it and that they would love to be able to take it again. So this one is a must! Finally, don't forget those message boards. They really can offer you some of that extra experience from time to time. You experience there can even give you that case study that would be perfect for your CG portfolio. I got this advice from a really wonderful member of this list and while it's not exactly panning out perfectly for me at the moment, you may find a hidden gem in your own locale/area of expertise. Hope this helps you, and that you get a bit more clarification on SLIG's Course 1. (And if not, you could always ask Paula herself :) ) Nikki ________________________________ From: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> To: Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com> Cc: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 1:50 AM Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? Hi again, Thank you to those who have replied both on- and off-list with solidarity and tips/suggestions! Things I am going to jump on: - the SLIG and IGHR institutes this coming year! - looking into my local APG chapter (which is NorCal - anyone on here in that chapter?) - I applied to the ProGen study group - try to become more active in my local society (which can be tricky in terms of scheduling but should be possible) I already get the NGSQ and read all the articles and have practiced writing such articles a bit on my own. I am enrolled in NIGS and should take a closer look at their methodology courses. I am considering also doing the NGS home study course which will probably have considerable overlap with the NIGS material but repetition is not necessarily a bad thing! I do have a question about the SLIG and IGHR institutes. In looking at the courses/tracks, it is hard to identify which ones are appropriate for me. Can anyone speak to these? SLIG: Advanced Methods is sold out, but I think I probably need a somewhat more intermediate course before I would jump into that one anyway since I haven't attended any other institutes and haven't actually finished the NIGS course. But, I'm not sure which of the others is most appropriate for me. I'm worried Course 1 might be too elementary? I'm not needing as much focus on types of records as I am on problem-solving, research planning/organizing, etc. I don't want to enroll in a course that is too elementary for me when these only happen once a year, but I also don't want to enroll in something that will be too much of a stretch. Any suggestions? IGHR: Again, I won't be ready for the Advanced Methodology course with ESM. But for problem-solving and research planning/organizing focus, which would be most appropriate? Course 2? (Intermediate Genealogy and Historical Studies) Thank you all so much for input! Feeling excited and motivated today :) Eva On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com > wrote: > Eva -- > > I echo everything Nikki and Dave said but with a little different emphasis. > > Your situation sounds a good deal like mine about five years ago -- > knowing what I wanted to do, being pretty sure I could do it (a little > *too* sure as it turned out the first time), but not being quite sure how. > Actually I think you have a better idea of what you need now than I did > then. > > Where you live makes a difference. I wound up doing three things that > helped a lot: (1) joining a ProGen group (actually, the first one); (2) > attending SLIG and Samford institutes in spite of the cost and time and > inconvenience; and (3) getting involved in my local society in a particular > way -- transcribing and abstracting projects that confronted me weekly with > original records that I could get acquainted with (outside a high-pressure > course or client context). > > NGS and other conferences are great, but they can be a lonely experience > for newbies. Everyone else seems to know each other, and the group around > you changes every hour. > > Having a mentor or mentors helps show us ways of being a genealogist. What > also made a major difference for me was finding friends in my "generation" > of new genealogists (measured by when we got serious, not actual age). And > that has happened for me almost entirely through institutes, where we spent > several days together in the same class wrestling with the same problems, > and learning from the best in the field and from each other. > > That's where you're most likely to find people who are as serious as you > are. It didn't occur to me until it happened either (a) that that was what > I needed or (b) that it would be as rewarding as the genealogy itself. > > APG can also be a place to find those people, again depending on where you > are and the nature of your local chapter, if any. We (I'm on the board) are > doing more discussion/mentoring sessions than before, so if you considered > and rejected joining in the past, you may want to look again. > > Good luck and keep posting (especially if we have missed the point to any > extent)! > > Harold > > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use >> some >> suggestions to get me going! >> >> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, >> so >> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, >> or >> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >> forward. >> >> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that >> what >> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing >> cabinet! >> >> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >> also immerse myself in method work >> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >> records centered >> >> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree >> from >> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I >> know >> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could >> get >> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >> the next level of learning. >> >> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >> >> Eva >> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > -- > Harold Henderson            midwestroots.net > Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana > Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center > > Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 > Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks > of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the > Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation > and used under license by the Board’s associates. > > > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi again, Thank you to those who have replied both on- and off-list with solidarity and tips/suggestions! Things I am going to jump on: - the SLIG and IGHR institutes this coming year! - looking into my local APG chapter (which is NorCal - anyone on here in that chapter?) - I applied to the ProGen study group - try to become more active in my local society (which can be tricky in terms of scheduling but should be possible) I already get the NGSQ and read all the articles and have practiced writing such articles a bit on my own. I am enrolled in NIGS and should take a closer look at their methodology courses. I am considering also doing the NGS home study course which will probably have considerable overlap with the NIGS material but repetition is not necessarily a bad thing! I do have a question about the SLIG and IGHR institutes. In looking at the courses/tracks, it is hard to identify which ones are appropriate for me. Can anyone speak to these? SLIG: Advanced Methods is sold out, but I think I probably need a somewhat more intermediate course before I would jump into that one anyway since I haven't attended any other institutes and haven't actually finished the NIGS course. But, I'm not sure which of the others is most appropriate for me. I'm worried Course 1 might be too elementary? I'm not needing as much focus on types of records as I am on problem-solving, research planning/organizing, etc. I don't want to enroll in a course that is too elementary for me when these only happen once a year, but I also don't want to enroll in something that will be too much of a stretch. Any suggestions? IGHR: Again, I won't be ready for the Advanced Methodology course with ESM. But for problem-solving and research planning/organizing focus, which would be most appropriate? Course 2? (Intermediate Genealogy and Historical Studies) Thank you all so much for input! Feeling excited and motivated today :) Eva On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com > wrote: > Eva -- > > I echo everything Nikki and Dave said but with a little different emphasis. > > Your situation sounds a good deal like mine about five years ago -- > knowing what I wanted to do, being pretty sure I could do it (a little > *too* sure as it turned out the first time), but not being quite sure how. > Actually I think you have a better idea of what you need now than I did > then. > > Where you live makes a difference. I wound up doing three things that > helped a lot: (1) joining a ProGen group (actually, the first one); (2) > attending SLIG and Samford institutes in spite of the cost and time and > inconvenience; and (3) getting involved in my local society in a particular > way -- transcribing and abstracting projects that confronted me weekly with > original records that I could get acquainted with (outside a high-pressure > course or client context). > > NGS and other conferences are great, but they can be a lonely experience > for newbies. Everyone else seems to know each other, and the group around > you changes every hour. > > Having a mentor or mentors helps show us ways of being a genealogist. What > also made a major difference for me was finding friends in my "generation" > of new genealogists (measured by when we got serious, not actual age). And > that has happened for me almost entirely through institutes, where we spent > several days together in the same class wrestling with the same problems, > and learning from the best in the field and from each other. > > That's where you're most likely to find people who are as serious as you > are. It didn't occur to me until it happened either (a) that that was what > I needed or (b) that it would be as rewarding as the genealogy itself. > > APG can also be a place to find those people, again depending on where you > are and the nature of your local chapter, if any. We (I'm on the board) are > doing more discussion/mentoring sessions than before, so if you considered > and rejected joining in the past, you may want to look again. > > Good luck and keep posting (especially if we have missed the point to any > extent)! > > Harold > > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use >> some >> suggestions to get me going! >> >> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, >> so >> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, >> or >> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >> forward. >> >> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that >> what >> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing >> cabinet! >> >> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >> also immerse myself in method work >> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >> records centered >> >> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree >> from >> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I >> know >> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could >> get >> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >> the next level of learning. >> >> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >> >> Eva >> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > -- > Harold Henderson midwestroots.net > Research, Writing, and Brickwall Dismantling from Northwest Indiana > Regularly Researching at the Allen County Public Library Genealogy Center > > Certified Genealogist (SM) No. 1029 > Certified Genealogist and CG are proprietary service marks > of the Board for Certification of Genealogists® used by the > Board to identify its program of genealogical competencyevaluation > and used under license by the Board’s associates. > > > >

Have you thought about taking the NIGS methodology courses? I thought they were great. The mentoring and analysis classes will give you camaraderie in the chat sessions and one on one with your instructors. Also, how about ProGen? There is a waiting list but get on it. Have you gone to NGS or other conferences? Just a few suggestions. Diane On 10/20/2012 5:52 PM, transitional-genealogists-forum-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > > Today's Topics: > > 1. next steps? (Eva Goodwin) > 2. Re: next steps? (Nicole La Rue) > 3. Re: next steps? (Dave Liesse) > 4. Re: next steps? (Harold Henderson) > 5. Names (Steve Dahlstrom) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 13:48:00 -0700 > From: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> > Subject: [TGF] next steps? > To: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <CAAMR3zcTJgjgAe-dOO3jRxg262kjCiRfPPmP4TFsGXU8RLHpAQ@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi all, > > I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use some > suggestions to get me going! > > I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, so > I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program > itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me > familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records > available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, or > working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving > forward. > > My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that what > I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social > support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can > help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing cabinet! > > Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: > - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and > also immerse myself in method work > - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online > - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) > - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than > records centered > > I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree from > a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I know > I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught > my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could get > my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I > went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste > of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm > seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to > connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning > opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for > the next level of learning. > > Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) > > Eva > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 14:30:31 -0700 (PDT) > From: Nicole La Rue <nikkisbc@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? > To: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com>, TGF > <TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM@rootsweb.com> > Message-ID: > <1350768631.60570.YahooMailNeo@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Eva, > > I was very attracted to your post, partially because I know the feeling. I've been feeling like I've hit a wall in my career path for some time now and I just haven't been able to figure out what to do about it. So it was nice to know that misery has company, lol. > > Also, I can pass along what advice others have given me, which did serve me well along the way. First, I can suggest the ProGen program. If you've not heard of it yet, check out their website and ask around a bit. If you're looking for other like-minded individuals with the motivation and dedication to continue towards their goals, you'll find it in spades within a ProGen group. ?The website is?http://progenstudy.org. ?Another great opportunity for in-person methodological experience is to take the one week summer classes offered at IGHR. I can't recommend that one enough. There are other one week intensive classes around that are equally wonderful (like SLIG and the one offered at the National Archives) so look into those as well. ?A final recommendation that has been made to me in the past was to join rootsweb message board lists in the areas of your expertise and offer to take on work there. ?You get the experience and others get help with their > research. Of course, this only works when the participants are willing to order the records necessary to progress, etc. and therein lies much of my troubles. But you may have better luck in your locale.? > > I hope this has helped you a bit. Let's both hope we can succeed and "eventually" achieve our goal of obtaining that CG! Please drop me a message if you ever need a soundboard or anything along the way. I'd love to commiserate with someone in the same boat! > > Nikki LaRue > > > ________________________________ > From: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> > To: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 3:48 PM > Subject: [TGF] next steps? > > Hi all, > > I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use some > suggestions to get me going! > > I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, so > I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program > itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me > familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records > available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, or > working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving > forward. > > My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that what > I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social > support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can > help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing cabinet! > > Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: > - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and > also immerse myself in method work > - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online > - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) > - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than > records centered > > I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree from > a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I know > I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught > my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could get > my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I > went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste > of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm > seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to > connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning > opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for > the next level of learning. > > Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) > > Eva > The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 15:46:58 -0700 > From: Dave Liesse <Dave@skingcoservicesllc.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? > To: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <508329E2.1050105@skingcoservicesllc.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Eva, > > I don't remember from earlier posts where you are, but for the > one-on-one fellowship/mentorship/mutual support I suggest the following: > > 1. Join APG, if you're not already a member (again, I don't remember). > Then... > > 2. Attend local chapter meetings, if convenient (times and locations > may not work for you). > > 3. If not convenient, attend the virtual chapter meetings in Second > Life (the online world). > > 4. Get involved with a local genealogical society, if there is one and > it meets at a time that fits your schedule. The key words, though, > are "get involved." I've found that when one takes an active role > in an organization, the benefits multiply -- in this case, you'd get > to know other members that much better and once again get the mutual > support you're looking for. > > I'll leave the specific course recommendations to others who are better > familiar with them. > > Dave Liesse > > On 10/20/2012 13:48, Eva Goodwin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use some >> suggestions to get me going! >> >> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, so >> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, or >> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >> forward. >> >> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that what >> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing cabinet! >> >> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >> also immerse myself in method work >> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >> records centered >> >> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree from >> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I know >> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could get >> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >> the next level of learning. >> >> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >> >> Eva >> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:29:43 -0500 > From: Harold Henderson <librarytraveler@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [TGF] next steps? > To: Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> > Cc: transitional-genealogists-forum@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: > <CABPpKTiBcfczzQAs=ebkhJ+rhe2e9Qqt0cD=rwVFysQNgf0zWQ@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > Eva -- > > I echo everything Nikki and Dave said but with a little different emphasis. > > Your situation sounds a good deal like mine about five years ago -- knowing > what I wanted to do, being pretty sure I could do it (a little *too* sure > as it turned out the first time), but not being quite sure how. Actually I > think you have a better idea of what you need now than I did then. > > Where you live makes a difference. I wound up doing three things that > helped a lot: (1) joining a ProGen group (actually, the first one); (2) > attending SLIG and Samford institutes in spite of the cost and time and > inconvenience; and (3) getting involved in my local society in a particular > way -- transcribing and abstracting projects that confronted me weekly with > original records that I could get acquainted with (outside a high-pressure > course or client context). > > NGS and other conferences are great, but they can be a lonely experience > for newbies. Everyone else seems to know each other, and the group around > you changes every hour. > > Having a mentor or mentors helps show us ways of being a genealogist. What > also made a major difference for me was finding friends in my "generation" > of new genealogists (measured by when we got serious, not actual age). And > that has happened for me almost entirely through institutes, where we spent > several days together in the same class wrestling with the same problems, > and learning from the best in the field and from each other. > > That's where you're most likely to find people who are as serious as you > are. It didn't occur to me until it happened either (a) that that was what > I needed or (b) that it would be as rewarding as the genealogy itself. > > APG can also be a place to find those people, again depending on where you > are and the nature of your local chapter, if any. We (I'm on the board) are > doing more discussion/mentoring sessions than before, so if you considered > and rejected joining in the past, you may want to look again. > > Good luck and keep posting (especially if we have missed the point to any > extent)! > > Harold > > > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Eva Goodwin <edwgoodwin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I'm feeling a little stuck in a rut in my genealogy path and could use some >> suggestions to get me going! >> >> I'm currently completing the American Records certificate from the NIGS, so >> I'm always working on the coursework for that. But of course the program >> itself is online and pretty self-guided. It also is great for getting me >> familiar and comfortable with all the various kinds of sources and records >> available but I think I also need to be doing other things concurrently, or >> working towards other things, in order to really feel like I'm moving >> forward. >> >> My eventual goal is to be CG. Eventual. And in that light, I know that what >> I really need to do a lot of is methodology work. And I also need social >> support - people around me who also are excited about this work who can >> help motivate me so it's not just me and my computer and my filing cabinet! >> >> Here are some things I feel like I might be looking for: >> - intensive in-person institutes or programs where I can meet people and >> also immerse myself in method work >> - ongoing study groups, whether in-person or interactive online >> - one-on-one mentorship with (a) more experienced genealogist(s) >> - a home learning course that is more methodology centered rather than >> records centered >> >> I am 26 years old, extremely motivated, I have an undergraduate degree from >> a prestigious liberal arts college and I am an excellent researcher. I know >> I have what it takes to be a good professional. I have already self-taught >> my genealogy research until now using books, internet, whatever I could get >> my hands on. But it's also hard to just do it all by myself in a vacuum. I >> went to the NGS conference in Cincinnati in the spring and it was a taste >> of how exciting it could be to be a part of this bigger thing! And I'm >> seeking people who also want to push themselves as hard as possible to >> connect with and have in my community, and seeking also learning >> opportunities that are directed towards an advanced hobbyist looking for >> the next level of learning. >> >> Any suggestions? Thanks so much :) >> >> Eva >> The Transitional Genealogists List was created to provide a supportive >> environment for genealogists to learn best practices as they transition to >> professional level work. Please respect the kind intentions of this list. >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> TRANSITIONAL-GENEALOGISTS-FORUM-request@rootsweb.com with the word >> 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > >