Difference between revisions of "Talk:Sanpete County, Utah"

From FamilySearch Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(moved websites to discussion)
(21 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Fairview has a museum - it houses historical as well as individual genealogical contributions.
=== Web Sites  ===
This will be taken care of when the city pages are created in due time. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 20:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)  
*[http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~utgenweb/index.html Utah GenWeb] project - [http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~utsanpet/ Sanpete County]. May have maps, name indexes, history or other information for this county. Select the state, then the county.  
*{{FHL|Utah%2C+Sanpete|subject|disp=Family History Library Catalog}}
*[http://mtpleasantpioneer.blogspot.com/ Mt. Pleasant, Utah Pioneer] Histories, Biographies, Photos and More
*[http://www.linkpendium.com/genealogy/USA/UT/Sanpete/ Sanpete County, Utah Genealogy and Family History] (Linkpendium)  
*[http://www.scandinavianheritagefestival.com/ Scandinavian Heritage Festival]
familyjournals- you succeeded in BLOWING up the section so BIG, it now taking up almost entire window instead of 1/3. BAD PRACTICE! [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 21:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
NOTE: Removed websites from county page Quick facts because they're found other places in the article.
Cemeteries belong on cities/towns pages. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 21:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Sammy we are in the middle of a lesson on the wiki. Would you please leave things alone. Thank you. [[User:Familyjournals|Familyjournals]]
{{Talk header}}
I was working on city pages when you undid it. [[User:Dsammy|dsammy]] 21:15, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
That is not true and you are giving me a great example of bad behavior. You also just took out information from a brand new user on the Fairview Page. [[User:Familyjournals|Familyjournals]] <span id="fck_dom_range_temp_1237314133234_737" />
This exchange violates Wiki policy on treating wiki contributors with fairness and civility.
Dsammy using CAPS and words like blowing up and telling someone what they are doing is bad practice is not proper etiquette.&nbsp; There is no policy in the wiki that Cementeries belong on cities/towns, that is logic and personal preference.&nbsp; Please do not enforce personal preference or logic. I have a cemetery near my house that is on unincorporated county land, it could not go on a city or town page.
Familyjournals, accusing someone of bad behavior is also not fair or civil.&nbsp; I know there is a history here between you two that is not on this page but is spread over many pages.&nbsp; Nevertheless, a casual observer seeing only this page would think that both of you are violating policy with your directness and rude tone.
I am going to plead with both of you to back away from each other's pages.&nbsp; I am asking for a voluntary moratorium, please stay away from each other for at least a week until we can get this all sorted out.
I need to tell you that I appreciate both of your desires to help with the wiki, I know your hearts are in the right place.&nbsp; And so I hope you will see that mine is too.
[[User:Jimgreene|Jimgreene]] 18:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Will do. Sounds good to me! Thank you Jim. [[User:Familyjournals|Familyjournals]] 18:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed a potential problem with the truce. Whose page is this? The History shows that although lately Familyjournals has made most of the edits, Dsammy made his first edit of this page on 6 May &lt;2008&gt;, while Familyjournals' first edit&nbsp;here was 14 March &lt;2009&gt;.&nbsp;If "ownership" is calculated by first edit, Sammy would be the owner of this page.&nbsp;
That said, I don't think first edit&nbsp;really matters here so much. If first edit were the deciding factor of all conflicts on a page, then a user could set up "squatter's rights" on thousands of pages just by creating stubs for them. That practice wouldn't ensure the pages in question would have the best guidance, now, would it?&nbsp;
The larger issue in this specific conflict between Familyjournals and Dsammy is enforcement of a&nbsp;style that is not a policy.&nbsp;Dsammy feels that all cemetery listings&nbsp;should be&nbsp;tied to a&nbsp;town, whereas Familyjournals&nbsp;feels that wouldn't work for all cemeteries and thus cemeteries should be listed at a county level.&nbsp;Dsammy feels his method is enforceable. I don't agree because the community hasn't ruled&nbsp;on even a ''best practice'' regarding this issue, let alone a&nbsp;''policy''. In my opinion, best practices are generally&nbsp;encouraged but not&nbsp;enforced; policies generally are both encouraged and enforced. But neither a best practice or policy is documented on this wiki regarding this issue, so no matter how much anybody supports&nbsp;either side here, neither side is &lt;enforceable&gt;.&nbsp;
Do we have a&nbsp;"three reverts" rule yet? That would apply here, because these two users are reverting each others' edits.&nbsp;I'm guessing at least three reverts have occurred, whether they occurred in the form of a rollback or simply an editing out of another user's&nbsp;changes.
To really solve this conflict, we'd need one of three&nbsp;things.
#A&nbsp;three reverts rule (the third revert would be the last, no matter who makes it).
#A ruling on who owns this page (the non-owner would have to withdraw from the edit war).
#A ruling&nbsp;by the community on&nbsp;which method we should use to link cemeteries (the county method or&nbsp;the town method).&nbsp;
[[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 16:06, 17 November 2011

Web Sites

NOTE: Removed websites from county page Quick facts because they're found other places in the article.