yanceyfamilygenealogy.org
PRESERVING YOUR FAMILY RESEARCH - in and outside of FamilySearch Family Tree
see my thoughts here:
http://yanceyfamilygenealogy.org/preservation.htm
@Yancey/Yancy Family Genealogy
@Ansley Family Genealogy
@Nuckolls Family Genealogy
@Nanney Family Genealogy
@Justiss/Justice Family Genealogy
@Kavanaugh Family Genealogy
Comentários
-
I always keep my own database available when I'm working in Family Tree.
0 -
Great suggestions Dennis. I'm leaning toward digital publishing with a physical option. In my experience, people tend to put a lot of stock in genealogy when it comes in the form of a book. Often, better information can be found on someone's website or posted tree, but for some reason putting it in book format draws far more attention. I hope to take advantage of that factor--family websites require maintenance and eventually become defunct; ancestry and similar turn your great tree into a needle in a haystack of empty calorie trees; Family Tree allows your research to be destroyed with a click of a careless user's button; FindaGrave doesn't have room or functionality for showing extensive research on a person; file repositories are not easily shared or publicly found, and may be discontinued by the vendor after a few years of no activity, as is happening right now with Dropbox. Book publishing is the only thing I can think of that will both preserve the research far into the future and hopefully be able to attract the attention of future generations.
Family Tree Memories requires a more nuanced reasoning. These memories *currently* cannot be deleted by anyone but the user who uploaded them, and cannot be detached from the ancestor's record except by the person who attached it, which at a glance might make us think that it is a good vehicle for preserving research in a highly visible way. However, I do not know if these restrictions will continue long-term--there are strong arguments for loosening these restrictions. Even if they do remain, improper merges and careless misuse regularly result in an ancestor's identity changing. Just the other day I reversed an effort from a careless user who changed Thomas Buford into Thomas Early, two starkly different individuals. As a result of this careless identity hijacking, great memories were attached to what appeared to be the wrong person. At that point, the research "memory" is buried once again--a needle in a haystack, the same as an ancestry or similar public tree. Because I see identity hijacking commonly, and because one day I will not be around to monitor and fix the actions of the few but real careless users, I don't see FamilySearch memories as a good way to preserve research in the long term.
As a secondary location I am considering wikitree, which is also a one-tree model so your research is more likely to be found, but it also has some basic data input controls that dissuade careless destruction of hard-fought research. I have no experience contributing to it but would be interested in insight from anyone who has.
0 -
what I have uploaded to FamilySearch as a Memory - I am in total control of - -- I cant imagine Familysearch ever loosening that restriction - people would riot if other people deleted their memory items.
I think we can trust that feature staying around.
I dont necessarily agree with the "put a lot of stock in a genealogy book"
you can tell by the content - the quality of research it is - - you don't need a physical book for that - the content speaks for itself.
and you can distribute out to hundreds or thousands of more people if you go digital.
File repositories are very easily shared - thats why they are so popular.
the nice thing about them is you can control who knows about them and who has access.
but you can link to a box site from a public link. who knows about it is totally up to you.
0 -
Arguments for allowing others to remove memories after original user is non-responsive include (but not limited to) 1) memories no longer being relevant (e.g., a more recent or authoritative record is found), 2) memories being attached to the incorrect individual(s) or otherwise wrong, 3) data was republished without permission (regardless of non-copyright). On the contrary, I would be surprised if FamilySearch in the future did not relax the absolute restriction. Rules governing system use tend to get more nuanced with time, and FamilySearch has been no exception to that trend.
But again, doesn't really matter if they do or don't, because there is no way to ensure the memory will stay attached to the correct person(s) when those person(s) identities can be hijacked when no one is looking. The memory will still be in FamilySearch, but will be attached to the wrong person(s) and thus will be both buried so few will ever see it, and will be confusing for those who do find it. That is worse than simply having an Ancestry public tree (or similar), because although Ancestry trees suffer from the same "good research is hidden among tons of other stuff" problem, you can at least be sure that the sources you attach to a person will still be attached to that same person 50 years from now.
I don't think my points are getting through about books--of course everyone can evaluate what they find no matter what. Many don't, but their evaluation isn't a factor anyway. The key factor is that people will be able to find the content among the flood of less helpful resources. A published book on Twymans among the very few published books on Twymans will attract more attention than a published tree on Twymans among the hundreds of other published trees on Twymans. Good research that no one can find might as well have not been preserved to begin with. Publishing a digital book does not preclude allowing that book to be broadly shared, and even better, it can be shared on websites that index and share the content of the book with web search engines. File repositories suffer from the same "hard to find" problem (for those not aware of its existence), in addition to the likelihood they will eventually be removed by the vendor when activity stagnates for a few years, as is sure to happen if no one else takes up my cause, which seems highly likely. Digital books seem to last forever, and retain their visibility.
A final point--I have a social media group of people interested in the Twyman family, but most are not willing to use FamilySearch, even when I link to it. They have various reasons for this. Yet most have expressed a willingness and desire to read (the same content!) in book format.
To be clear, I am explaining my perceptions for my situation. I am not claiming this is a one-size-fits-all solution. And even it it were, none of this precludes using all sorts of systems and platforms simultaneously to hedge bets.
0 -
agreed - never put your eggs in one basket
as to memories uploads
I have uploaded thousands of documents across many years - - I cant think of a single instance where the identity of the person has changed and the document no longer applies.
is it possible - sure
but I would never make decisions of preservation based on the possibility
I fully expect that 50 years from now I will find 99% of the many thousands of documents I have uploaded - still hooked to the same person
the only reason they would be removed is due to issues like copyright.
(and for all this I havent been charged a penny for the service)
0 -
have you ever considered publishing a book with LULU or KINDLE or just posting it in pdf format on line?
0 -
Agreed--if you are confident few or no identities will be hijacked, Memories sounds like a good option, especially if experience has confirmed your expectations thus far.
I don't have that confidence in my case because someone begins hijacking the identity of one or more of my ancestors roughly once every month or so. Out of necessity I need an alternative solution for long-term preservation. It seems to me that few people seem to notice or experience this like I have, because few seem to join my requests for changes. I honestly don't know if this means I just happen to experience an inordinate amount of record hijackings, or if most users just don't know it is happening.
I've glanced at the kindle option but am waiting to explore it until I am closer to publication. I will look into LULU--thanks for mentioning it.
If anyone has experience with wikitree, I would very much like to hear how well it has worked for you in terms of preserving good research despite the one-tree, wiki-based nature of the program.
0 -
Various options below for preserving your family history data/reports/compilations
(in no particular order listed)
Creation of documents in compiled/conglomerate documents in PDF format.
PROS: NO additional cost
Can be easily shared via many mediums, email, cloud storage, web pages
document can be formatted as a complete book and bring many items all together into one document.
a compiled report/book etc in pdf format can be shared via just about any medium
CONS: This is more a file format than it is a storage entity
BUT any compilation you create on the computer you should have a pdf format for.
EXAMPLE:
http://yanceyfamilygenealogy.org/BOOK_Justice_Family_in_Virginia_Vol1_001_030.pdf
WEBSITE CREATION
WICS, Yahoo, numerous other vendors
PROS:
almost total control of format, content, structure
virtually no limit on file size and site storage
CONS: Requires specific technical knowledge of web site maintenance - which is not a genral knowledge
Getting around the Cons: Training with basic HTML and website maintanance (not as hard as you might think)
COST: Very nominal cost for basic website
EXAMPLE:
http://yanceyfamilygenealogy.org/
TNG - The Next Generation of Gneealogy
PROS: Incedible amount of features and options
Customizeable
virtually no limit on file size and site storage
Designed specificially for genealogy
Much of the difficult technical work - has already been programmed - and it is mainly configuring
CONS: Learning curve in use
COST: $$
EXAMPLE:
http://tngsitebuilding.com/usersites.php
Cloud based File sharing systems
BOX, DROPBOX, GOOGLE DOCS
PROS:
access to items can be controlled/managed (not just open to the world)
great for items such as family photos/videos/audio etc - that are semi-private
no real limitation on file size or storage limit
Can be used to backup items used for other preservation methodologies.
(backing up your local genealogy database to the cloud for example)
CONS:
with large amount of files - ease of access to specific files can be more challenging
This is not built specifically for genealogy - but is just a generic file on line storage system
COST: free for basic - $$ for higher capacity
Getting around the CONS: Create a table of contents with all the files listed and their file name and location
https://www.cloudwards.net/comparison/
FAMILYSEARCH FAMILYTREE
PROS: Free service
Can upload thousands of documents quickly and still retain total control of documents
CONS: Is a collaborative site - where others can overlay your genealogical data (but not your uploaded documents)
Cost: Totally Free - always will be
Getting around the cons:
Upload your data as as FamilySearch Memories - which wont be overlaid by others
Use albums to store compiled reports etc.
EXAMPLE
https://www.familysearch.org/en/
EXAMPLES OF ALBUMS: https://www.familysearch.org/photos/gallery/album/508613
https://www.familysearch.org/photos/gallery/album/508280
FAMILYSEARCH LIBRARY CATALOG
PROS: Free service to maintain your digital document.
Can be accessed easily by anyone anywhere
CONS: Must be in some sort of book format (not for many individual files)
not many - this is a great way (among many) that you should seriusly consider in sharing your compilation
EXAMPLE:
WIKITREE
PROS: Free Service
collaborative - but with tighter controls than FamilySearch
CONS: YOu wont have the freedom and total control you have on other options like a web page etc. (if the profiles for the people in question are admnin'd by other people)
You are forced into the structure/archuitecture that the system provides.
Cost: Free
EXAMPLE:
https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/yancey
LOCAL DATABASES like FTM, Rootsmagic, Legacy etc.
PROS: Total Control
Some programs have a way of generating the data in a way that could be uploaded to a web site for sharing.
CONS: sharing data is not always as easy as it could be
Cost: Does Cost
EXAMPLE: https://www.toptenreviews.com/best-genealogy-software
Digital Publishing or Print on demand
Examples: KINDLE, LULU many others
PROS: Little up front costs for the author
Easy distribution
Some technical knowledge needed - but not very much
EXAMPLE:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Kindle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lulu.com
https://www.familysearch.org/blog/en/publishing-genealogy-traditional-ebook/
NOTE THAT these options are NOT mutually exclusive
any smart and serious family researcher will select various of these options to use concurrently
to both share and "back up" their data.
Many of these items can all be used in a jointly orchestrated implementation
(like a web site, with pdf documents, along with use of a collaboratuive system like Familysearch/Wikitree - as well as cloud storage and backup)
Never put all your eggs in one basket!
always have at least three copies in three different medium of any item you have.
0 -
Mike Yancey is an avid user of WikiTree
feel free to contact him and ask details about his feelings of the pros and cons of Wikitree
mikeyancey@gmail.com
0 -
Ken Yancey
has compiled numerous impressive family booklets as a way to preserve his family research
on line they are available in pdf format - - he also had them printed and plastic bound for a very nominal fee so he could share hard copies with close family - but very professional looking.
you an see examples here:
http://yanceyfamilygenealogy.org/ken_yancey.htm
would this type of methodology meet your desires and wants for your research preservation?
0 -
In some of my prior comments I stated a few things in a rather confusing way
as to book versus non books
I was mainly focusing on "physical books"
what I meant was that there is much less need in printing a physical book
when a digital book can have exactly the same content - and not cost you anything in printing and distribution.
I do totally agree that a person that has taken the time to compile something in book format - can often (but not always) be held to a higher esteem and respect for their research. Just that there is not always the need these days to print physically.
0 -
I have some experience with Wikitree. You can set profiles of living people to private. Profiles of people born more than 150 years ago or who died over100 years ago must be open. Others can modify details of Public or Open profiles. We are encouraged to propose merges to Profile Managers. That helps avoid the kind of identity hijacking you described. I have been happy so far. People have made helpful changes and I have learned new information from relatives I didn't know. But I have had the same good experiences in Familysearch.
In one case I was grateful for some added protection in Wikitree. My end of line ancestor is Edward Hawes who was born in England around 1620 and mysteriously floated across the Atlantic with no records. He lived in Dedham in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. There is also an Edmund Hawes from Yarmouth, Massachusetts Bay Colony. There is no proof that they are related. Somebody incorrectly made Edward a son or brother of Edmund. I posted my concerns, and Edward was moved into a protected group of profiles, The Puritan Migration. The problem was solved. Here's a link to Edward's profile. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Hawes-177
0 -
Thank you for that helpful insight.
0
