[Genealib] Chris Tinney's message

Wed Dec 5 20:11:45 EST 2007

    I write concerning Kathy Grimshaw's statement, "We librarians know not 
to ever steer people towards Wikipedia as a reliable source."  I hope she is 
commenting on not using Wikipedia for genealogical data, and not advocating 
complete avoidance of the site for selected materials.  I know some 
librarians who shudder at the thought of anyone going to the site for 
anything, and the site is often not my first choice for information.  Yes, 
there have been some strange things posted, including some political 
misinformation on White House contacts that irked many librarians and also 
some side-splitting tall tales that were quickly amended as factually 
incorrect but funny and kept in for their humor.  I suppose the same people 
who have traced their family trees back to Adam and Eve might be fooled by 
such accounts, just as we see those who seem to trust and incorporate into 
their family history every online posting by anyone with a computer and 
Internet access.  Despite the hatred caused by the nasty political postings, 
there are sometimes when Wikipedia is a wonderful resource-- if one is 
careful in its use.  People who take everything on the Internet at face 
value might get some bogus results, but most intelligent users consult the 
sources and learn what to trust and what to distrust.
    Wikipedia offers quick information when a state or county is not listed 
with a record, or when county or township name is the only information 
listed.  I never knew there were so many duplicate names of villages, towns, 
townships, and counties until I used Wikipedia to find and check locations 
listed in various records.  Wikipedia's geographical and census-based 
information is quick to use by the public, and the articles on fact-based, 
general materials offer quick, outlined information and links to other 
sites, including some most librarians would approve using.  While I would 
not recommend Wikipedia for family history trees, political history, or 
biographical information posted by people who slant views, it does have its 
uses.  Not using Wikipedia because someone does not think it is a 
"librarian-approved" source is limiting resources, especially for people who 
have limited search abilities.  Wikipedia has surprised me a few times when 
library patrons have had unusual reference requests,  At least three times, 
Wikipedia has been the only source where I easily found the desired 
information and links to further details, as it is sometimes a good 
filtering device when there are too many hits, even with advance search 
parameters.  I tend to tell patrons to be careful of ANY Internet sites, 
including the supposedly sanctified ones used by genealogists and 
librarians.  Years of searches have proven that errors exist, and I see too 
many errors in Ancestry Library Edition, Heritage Quest, Rootsweb, state and 
county records, etc., to take information as correct without checking and 
rechecking sources.
     We must train people to be intelligent researchers, not to take things 
on face value, and not to assume that information is error-free, regardless 
of the source.  There are errors everywhere, in both Internet and printed 
sources.  How many times have we found "official," death records, church 
records, Bible records, and tombstones that have different dates.  In 1867 
Michigan began recording deaths, and county tax assessors would query a farm 
household  about the number of cows, horses, etc., and then ask if there 
were any deaths in the family during the last year.  The assessors would 
record whatever information was given, drop it off at a later date at the 
county clerk's office, and sometimes months later the county clerk would 
gather up a batch of deaths and record the "official" information. No wonder 
there were inconsistencies!  We have been indexing local materials at our 
library during the last year, and I yet have to find a local history or 
family history book without an error.
    Evidently, Ms. Grimshaw does not use or trust Wikipedia.  That is fine, 
as long as she also uses such distrust when approaching the many 
genealogical resources that we use on a daily basis.  Just as it is rather 
unfair to assume something has no value without fully researching its 
possibilities, it is also naive to assume that a site is error-free if 
"librarian-approved."  Wherever there are humans, there will be errors.  Use 
all resources available--just use them wisely.
Sincerely,
Linda Koch
Reference & Adult Services Librarian
The Allegan Public Library
331 Hubbard St.
Allegan, MI 49010
269-673-4625
FAX 269-673-8661
open M-Th 10-9; F & Sa 9-5:30
www.alleganlibrary.org

- Original Message ----- 
From: "Grimshaw, Kathy" <Grimshaw at cliftonpl.org>
To: <genealib at mailman.acomp.usf.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 5:19 PM
Subject: [Genealib] Chris Tinney's message

I hate to sound dumb, but I'm majorly confused by Chris's message. I
realize the data submitted to LDS is voluntary and needs to be checked
twice, but believe me, Wikipedia is absolutely NOT an example of
accuracy! We librarians know not to ever steer people towards Wikipedia
as a reliable source.

We all know that secondary sources (even primary sources, sometimes!)
need to be checked and rechecked for accuracy.

Not being a member of LDS, I have no clue as to what the rest of the
message is about!- Assuming that a majority of the people on this
listserv are not LDS members, is it even appropriate?
------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 09:00:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Chris Tinney <vctinney at sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [Genealib] nFS: New Family Search and Evidence Hierarchy in
Combining Names [UPDATE]
To: genealib at mailman.acomp.usf.edu
Message-ID: <206010.2437.qm at web56109.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

nFS: New Family Search and Evidence Hierarchy in Combining Names

Why not make the nFS system do
an evidence hierarchy? For each data
entry, there is the "best" source record,
then the next best and so on. If the system
operated with a sequential presentation of
formats listing the most primary record available
for any given event; also, added thereto
a computer system search to attach that
given evidence to any indexed reproduced
online original record sources, (as well as
the ability to recheck these databases over time),
the whole Temple Ordinance Work record
system would consistently become fully acceptable,
as well as train submitters in correct record keeping.

It should be the responsibility of the nFS
creators, to assert their powers of reason
and establish all the criteria necessary to
avoid contradictions between theory and practice;
namely, to establish the relationship and preserve
attached Temple Ordinance Work within the
hierarchy framework of the reference records
available for any given event.  Does the given
individual have a provable relationship in the record
source or sources?  Do any questions exist in
the record(s) which need to be resolved before
closing the assessment process?

Temple Ordinance Work would remain in effect,
from oral tradition to original document, with
the printout giving information from the most
primary record. Automatically, the record system
could become self correcting, whenever any name
or identity was matched within the series of various
references, by producing in the end, the name,
dates and places noted from the most original "best"
primary sources; attaching thereto the dates
and the duplicates of Temple Ordinance Work
done over time.

It is my own personal opinion, that genealogy
and family history will NEVER become the
Higher Education discipline that it ought to be,
(and LDS Temple Work become part of the
majority interest among the "Mormon" community,
as a primary interest among the whole church),
unless and until the largest genealogical database
in the world becomes immune to constant
and significant truthful criticism, and that from
the very elite in the field that uses it the most.
In other words, the compiled database must NOT
be less reliable than a bank statement, a title search,
or an originating official archival depository source,
irrespective of the good intentions of the compilers.

I also believe that it takes human reasoning.
Modify the process developed for
Name Extraction Programs. . . .
"To ensure accuracy, two transcriptions
of each entry are made and compared
to find and resolve discrepancies."
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/family_history/name_eom.htm

To ensure accuracy, "highlighted" information
should be provided in summary format to compare
and contrast submitted reference evidence discrepancies,
(similar to a Norton Internet Security full system scan):
I. list of total field items scanned;
II. error "risks" that were detected;
III. "attention required" tab:
(a) requiring attention, and
(b) resolved. Some problems are easily
cleared up by novice submitters, while
others may jeopardize the record file, with
attached personal temple ordinance work.
(c) Evidence Hierarchy is mandatory because:
"Whenever the evidence hierarchy is altered,
submissions are automatically reviewed by
professional staff personnel at Church headquarters
to validate the assumptions made are in accordance
with professional genealogical standards, before
inclusion within the Master Database."

ASK Genealogy & Family History
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/archives.htm#Research
is a current online resource available for the novice,
and upward.  Part of the nFS computerized record system
"self correcting" ability, would include in its
handling of contributed data, (upon patron request),
direct online link reference suggestions to qualified
researchers.  I have no problem with the marketplace.
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/documentationpublications.htm#Professi
onal

This system, which includes complex problems,
will work, by resolving disputes.  Using, as a prototype:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes

The only necessary change in the process
is to consider the Third Opinion arbitration, as
either (1) reference directly to LDS professional
staff, or (2) certified professional evaluation
paid by a patron in behalf of the disputed
area of interest, as approved by the nFS system
coordinating committee.  It is as SIMPLE as that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Third_opinion

A general prototype of this kind of methodology is:
Wikipedia: Reference Desk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk

This would stop, once and for all, excessive errors
and weed out all entries submitted from fictitious data
records, made up by individuals trying to corrupt the
database, or by unintentional neglect or ignorance,
(according to the continued interests of the patron
users of the database itself).  I would also add the
option of any certified professional to challenge a
given entry section, and freely make corrections
for the benefit of the profession as a whole.

The process suggested is equivalent to an LDS
Temple Ordinance Work "TITLE SEARCH".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_search
The time that it will take to verify all the
information is unfortunately, tremendous,
but it is necessary, expedient, and must
eventually be done.

Life Browser to include: ALL OF THE ABOVE, and:
(1) Record of all those "who consecrate properties,
and receive inheritances legally from the bishop".

(2) Link reference to members, "their manner of life,
their faith, and works" (Individual and Family Biographies).

(3) Record of the apostates who apostatize after
receiving their inheritances. Church Court link to
Priesthood actions, "whose names are not found
written in the book of the law, or that are found to
have apostatized, or to have been cut off from the
church, as well as the lesser priesthood, or the
members" . . .  This would not allow everyone to
link to Church Court Excommunication records;
only that internally, within the confidential record
keeping system, there should be the connective
information for evaluation.

(4) Records received from beyond the veil. This
will require, in my own opinion, the restoration of
the Office of Church Patriarch, within the family
of Hyrum Smith, to oversee and expand the
full family history record program, from Adam
on down to the last person to live upon this earth,
in a mortal state. The office of Stake Patriarch
would provide the worldwide church channels
from which The House of Israel could be brought
down to the present generation, within the local
jurisdiction of the Stake Presidencies of the Church,
by revelation, to worthy Temple recommend holders.
http://www.josephsmithsr.org/documents/newspaper/sltrib_20061230.pdf

Biological validation of the pure
Ephraimite status of the Smith Family
are noted in  D&C 124: 91-96  . . . that
my servant Hyrum may take the office
of Priesthood and Patriarch, which was
appointed unto him by his father, by blessing
and also by right; That from henceforth he
shall hold the keys of the patriarchal blessings
upon the heads of all my people, That whoever
he blesses shall be blessed, and whoever he
curses shall be cursed; that whatsoever he shall
bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and
whatsoever he shall loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven.  And from this time forth
I appoint unto him that he may be a prophet,
and a seer, and a revelator unto my church,
as well as my servant Joseph; That he may
act in concert also with my servant Joseph;
and that he shall receive counsel from my
servant Joseph, who shall show unto him
the keys whereby he may ask and receive,
and be crowned with the same blessing,
and glory, and honor, and priesthood, and
gifts of the priesthood, . . . That my servant
Hyrum may bear record of the things which
I shall show unto him, that his name may be
had in honorable remembrance from generation
to generation, forever and ever.
. . . D&C 124: 123-124
Verily I say unto you, I now give unto you the
officers belonging to my Priesthood, that ye may
hold the keys thereof, even the Priesthood
which is after the order of Melchizedek, which
is after the order of mine Only Begotten Son.
FIRST, I give unto you Hyrum Smith to be a patriarch
unto you, to hold the sealing blessings of my church,
even the Holy Spirit of promise, whereby ye are
sealed up unto the day of redemption, that
ye may not fall notwithstanding the hour of
temptation that may come upon you.

Respectfully yours,

Tom Tinney, Sr.
Who's Who in America,
Millennium Edition [54th] through 2004
Who's Who In Genealogy and Heraldry, [both editions]
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/
Family Genealogy & History Internet Education Directory
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://mailman.acomp.usf.edu/pipermail/genealib/attachments/20071205/b00
435a0/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
genealib mailing list
genealib at mailman.acomp.usf.edu
http://mailman.acomp.usf.edu/mailman/listinfo/genealib

End of genealib Digest, Vol 51, Issue 4
***************************************
_______________________________________________
genealib mailing list
genealib at mailman.acomp.usf.edu
http://mailman.acomp.usf.edu/mailman/listinfo/genealib

-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.15.23/1114 - Release Date: 11/6/2007 
8:05 PM