Identify the search area
It would be really helpful if a guest asking a family history question that applies to a specific area, puts the area first in their question. e.g. "UK - I have come to a brick wll searching for ....." or "Kansas - Can anyone help me to find ......". This way the question would be answered more quickly and by someone who knows the area. Also, everyone else would not need to open every discussion to see if they could help or not. This will also apply to Indexing questions. For these queries, please don't forget to give the Batch Number that you are working on.
Comments
-
Paula
I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...
[ And, one who has been participating in the "Community.FamilySearch" Forum for a number of Years ].
And, I am not being negative here ...
FYI
In relation to what you describe ...
"It would be really helpful if a guest asking a family history question that applies to a specific area, puts the area first in their question..."
The WAY 'Questions'/'Request for Help/Assistance' are asked, by Participants, is the whole nature of the "Community.FamilySearch" Forum; and, has been such for many years.
Please be aware that ...
The "Community.FamilySearch" Forum was originally established were ...
Users/Patrons, HELPED / ASSISTED, Users/Patrons.
That worked quite well; and, had been doing so for a number of YEARS.
The INCLUSION of 'FamilySearch' "Support" (Personnel) into the "Community.FamilySearch" Forum has ONLY been a relatively recent development.
Now ...
That Said ...
Taking a realistic view ...
Just HOW would you propose 'FamilySearch', is supposed to DIRECT Participants, to phrase their 'Questions'/'Request for Help/Assistance' in a manner that you describe/suggest.
Much easier said, rather than done.
Again, I am not being negative here, just realistic and practical.
DO NOT get me wrong, it may be possible, I just wonder how ...
Just my thoughts.
Brett
1 -
This idea combines (conflates) several separate ideas.
To the idea (part) that question topic titles should be prefaced with a location, "UK" or "Kansas" or similar, I'd like to offer a contrary opinion. I find it rarely matters where in the world the question may be. And I advocate that we take care not to encourage tunnel vision. Tunnel vision already so often is part of why the contributor is having trouble.
0 -
It is my impression that the desire for sorting or categorization of questions is the reason that Communities is fractured into so many itty-bitty pieces, with separate entire sections for "Q and A", "Groups", and "Ideas", and at least a dozen subsections within each of those. If compartmentalization like that doesn't work (and I would agree that it doesn't), then how would any sort of subject-line-etiquette-rule do anything besides scare people off?
1 -
This is just a practical suggestion for questions that apply to a specific area. This would include research questions and area specific indexing questions.
There is no need to specify for general questions! It is only necessary when local knowledge would be an advantage, or even essential, to give a good answer.
1 -
I have been trying to obtain an answer to this question for some time - as you have used the term here, would you please define what a "guest" is? A number of moderators have used the expression on this forum, but I don't know to whom it is being specifically applied. I believe "patron", "member" or even "user" would be more appropriate terms, so wonder if moderators have been given an instruction to call some of us "guests"?
1 -
Paul,
Yes, Family Search has instructed all their moderators to refer to all those who participate in Family Search Communities as 'Guests'. They used to be 'patrons' when contacting Family Search for advice.
0 -
Thank you for confirming that. Very strange advice to give you, especially when some of these "guests" have been providing advice on this and its predecessor forums for over ten years!
You are rightly acting on your instructions, but many of us find the term quite patronising. Initially, all participants of Community were referred to a "members" (and still are under our profiles). I believe that term gives a far greater feeling of inclusiveness and of the fact that our contributions here are valued equally.
1 -
Count me among those who feel patronized when labeled "guest". I prefer "contributor".
1
