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

From FamilySearch Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(added information about cemeteries)
(moved websites to discussion)
(17 intermediate revisions by 5 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)
(The following is an excerpt from an e-mail sent from Dsammy to [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] in response to Ritcheymt's comments above. See Ritcheymt's post below this post.)
Common sense, not enforcement. And it was pointed out to me by others <br>the need to relocate the cemetery information as soon as the city/town <br>pages become available.
Think carefully, when you see in obituaries, death certificates, family <br>records, they mention towns.
By the very nature of the record, you go straight to the town, not county.
And incidentially every one of those cemeteries in Sanpete are located <br>within the towns, very unlike those up in Box Elder or down in Juab <br>counties where some cemeteries are way out in middle of nowhere far<br>from any town.
And I had this very simple line that she deleted. This is same line that <br>shows up in quite a number of counties throughout USA.
An experience today only reinforced the town first approach. A lady was <br>looking for Goshen, she was NOT looking for Utah County. She went <br>straight to that town because that is what her family record said.
I asked one of Library staff for her astute opinion, she said it is the <br>nature to go straight to the town first.
I can understand listing of cemeteries on the county page only IF there <br>are NO town pages.
&lt;here Michael snips out some of Dsammy's e-mail&gt;
I am trying to figure out how to grow Salt Lake City more because of lot <br>of information available for the city alone (hundreds of church records, <br>15 cemeteries within the city boundary, something I brought up to Fran <br>to consider.) [[User:Dsammy|Dsammy]]&nbsp;22:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Dsammy sent me the e-mail above because he thought he was not allowed to continue this discussion here. As community and content manager of this wiki, I'm going to clarify something and tweak the community's understanding of what Jimgreene said. (Jimgreene&nbsp;is the product manager.) Jim was right in asking FamilyJournals and Dsammy to stop the edit war on pages they both care about. However, Jim's appeal for that edit war to stop has left at least one of you believing you can't continue the discussion here. Preventing that discussion will just delay a solution, so I'm instructing Dsammy and Familyjournals&nbsp;now to continue posting on this discussion page the merit of your ideas regarding whether cemeteries should be linked from the county pages or the town pages.&nbsp;What you should not post is further edits to&nbsp;genealogical content pages on which you conflict.&nbsp;I am also going to invite some cool heads (James Anderson, Jimmy Parker, and David Dilts) to weigh in to this discussion. Above this post, you will find a post I <span id="fck_dom_range_temp_1237389216887_736" />added here which captures most of Dsammy's e-mail to me. I've going to sign it with his username, but I want everyone to understand he did not post it; I did. (So please, admins, don't discipline him for posting.) [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 18:10, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
A topic is: should cemeteries be listed on the county page or on the city page. I say do both.
Here are a few examples of cemeteries on the web that have been placed in order of their county.
*[http://members.tripod.com/~wnyroots/  Erie County, New York Cemeteries] this is a great little site, you will notice that some of the cemeteries serve several cities.
*[http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/localList.php?local=22858&locTGroup=Cemeteries&direction=down&sec=0&qty=18&stateAbbv=&stateName= Weber County Cemeteries on ePodunk]  lists the cemeteries with links to the towns that they are in.
*[http://www.mass-doc.com/bristol_county_cemetery_guide.htm Bristol County, Massachusetts Cemetery Directory] has all of the cemeteries listed with links to the USGS 7.5' Map Location
*[http://politicalgraveyard.com/geo/CO/AL.html Alamosa County Colorado] The Political Graveyard lists information by counties
*[http://userpages.bright.net/~ralcha/cotable.htm Pickaway County Cemeteries] has a map locating the cemeteries in the county and lists the community they are in with links.
This is just of sampling of cemetery lists that are published by the county they are located in. When there is a case that the sheer number of cemeteries would overwhelm a county page, a new page with a link could be created. i.e. [[Des Moines County Cemeteries|Des Moines County Cemeteries]]. In this list is found a Miller Plot Farm. How would you know what city to look for that farm in? But, by checking at Des Moines County Cemeteries you will see it listed there along with the community it's in.
For example: the cemetery located in North Ogden named Ben Lomond Cemetery has people (dying to get in) from not only all over the Ogden area, but from out of state too. One might know that ggrandmother was buried there but have no idea of which city or county that is located in. A quick check of the county page would show Ben Lomond Cemetery instead a long search of each city in Northern Utah.
Until something more elaborate could be created about the cemeteries, I see no harm in listing the cemeteries on a county page and city pages in tandem.
What do you all think?

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.