Wife of Budli Leinfnisson NN - Can we start a project of unknowns?

Could I ask what the purpose for such a project would be?

For me unknown marked profiles is important because they mark a genealogical fact. The only thing I dislike is naming them Unknown because it would only work for English speaking users and is a disrespect for the rest of the world, especially if the profiles is not from the english speaking world.

Personally I use ?? because it is universal and does not show up in merge suggestions / hot-matches.

Oh dear lord, Bjorn! I believe everyone has the ability to translate to their languages. God knows I do it everyday on geni. I think it lends a lot of class to an otherwise ??! Play nice. Your cousin, Theresa

Easy enough to use the multi-lnnguage feature to overcome the language problem. Personally, I prefer an ellipses (...) because it's more traditional than the alternatives. What would really be nice, though, is if the curators would agree on a specific recommendation and really use it,instead of everyone doing it their own way.

And none of this has anything to do with the idea of having a specific project for genealogical unknowns. I'm not opposed to drifting topics, but can we stay with the original question for now?

WRT the project idea, I don't think many of the unknowns would ever leave the project. So I'd prefer not to spend time on it.

WRT the markers, I'm in the "write something readable" camp - and regard NN as more readable than ?? or ..., but frequently wanting to write things like "Unknown wife of XXX" because people have merged NN NN with NN NN because they have the same name (yes, I've seen it happen!)

Absolutely not feeling like going on a hunt to change all the unknowns into any particular pattern - and if I'm not willing to do that, I'll just live with diversity. Personal opinion....

Ellipsis, dashes, periods, etc are hard for me to read. I use a descriptive display name similar to what Harald described. That way a manager can use whatever form they find genealogically correct, and I'll still know what we mean ("XY's unknown mother").

William Owen "Bill" Irwin

You wrote you're concerned about bad merges, but the name used "wife of Budli" is unique.

What could be done differently?

I like the Idea of Unknown wife of ABC, Unknown Father of ABC, Unknown Daughter of ABC. I am not suggesting we look for them, just when we find them change to a Unknown ABC. I asked because I see so many different versions.

My question are still: Why should we have a project for them, - for what purpose and how would that "help"?

You should also know that a name like "Unknown wife of ABC" are without knowing it, fabricated facts:
1) That they were married.
2) That there is only one mother to the children.
The only fact such a profile should tell is that it is representing unknown mother(s) of the children.

Cool Unknown Mother of, Unknown Father, If we know the Grandparents but not the first name, or we know Grandchildren or siblings but not the name.

N.N.

Bill, I'm sorry your thread got hijacked into a naming standards debate, and even more sorry that it turns out to be mostly people telling everyone why their preferred system is right and everyone else is wrong ;)

This debate has been going on long enough (all over Geni) that I decided to ask one of my friends who teaches Intro to Genealogy courses about "best practices". She referred me to this blog post:

http://everymangenealogy.blogspot.com/2014/03/correct-vs-incorrect....

Here's what she had to say in our discussion:

1. If you don't know it, leave it blank. Never make up data.

2. If you can't leave it blank, do as little harm as possible.

2a. Never use anything that could be a wildcard in a search algorithm on another platform or in another program. Don't use ? or *.

2b. Never use any alpha character or combination of alpha characters. Don't use Unknown, LNU, MNU. Even worse, don't use NN or N.N. because they can be mistaken for authentic initials.

2c. Use one of the traditional methods, such as three dots, three dashes, or three underscores. She calls three dots the "Victorian style" or the "Academic style". She calls three underscores the "Commodore 64 style". She calls three dashes the "Easy Style" or the "Lazy Style"

I asked her specifically about "Unknown Father of X". She didn't like it, but didn't have a better suggestion for an environment like Geni.

Bjørn, she suggested a number of ways to overcome your objections about fabricated facts but pointed out that the solutions are so easy and obvious she thought you are probably just joking. If you're not joking, I can give you more detail.

Oh yeah. And no "Mr" "Mrs" or "Miss", according to my friend. I skipped over that alternative because I didn't think we needed that reminder ;)

Bill, as I've thought about the idea of a project one thing that keeps coming to mind for me is that there are two very different categories of unknowns on Geni.

In one case, the father / mother is unknown and will never be known. The records have been searched so thoroughly over so many years (or centuries) that unless someone discovers a manuscript hidden in the cellar of an old monastery, we already know everything we'll ever know. Here, the goal of a placeholder is to stop people from adding fake parents.

In the other case, the father / mother is currently unknown but there is some hope (real or not) that they will be discovered someday through more research. A placeholder here might be to stop people from adding fakes, but it could also be there to alert people we need more research.

Are you thinking the project would be for one type more than the other? Or just a project for all unknowns?

Yes, I once had to add such a profile, - as an unknown profile with even an unknown gender, because I had a person where the source told who he was the grandson of, not wether it was the mother or father that was in between, but the profile was well enough sourced to be added even if we did not know anything about that person.

I'll try three dashes in addition to that narrative display name. I already know I "cannot" see periods & can easily miss underscores.

Thanks, Erica. I guess I could try three dashes, too. If I want people to show some collaborative spirit, I suppose I have to show a bit myself ;)

(Not that I'm ever going to give up thinking my way is better.)

I think I could live with three dashes, and putting the info on what kind of unknown it is in the title field.

What do people think of "--- --- ---, unknown partner of Fornjot"?
(putting dashes into *all* the fields prevents more bad data sneaking in when merging.)

will you please give an example of "--- --- ---, unknown partner of Fornjot"?

I use the display name field. when I remember. :)

My example is for an English woman born about 1600 according to the calculations of genealogists who studied the line, and who "was known as" Goodwife Whiting in her lifetime.

First name: ---
Last name: Whiting
Birth surname: ---
Display name: John Whiting's unknown wife
Also known as: Goodwife, Goody Whiting

In the curator note I would add:

Parents unknown, maiden name unknown. 6 known children.

William Owen "Bill" Irwin this would be the new name for N.N.

Ok are these correct now and should they be MP'ed

N.N.

N.N.

Do you have a source that they were married and that there is only one mother to the children?

If not, using "wife of" is a fabricated fact and should be avoided.

Nope I am still Lost, would it be better as "partner"?

Not easy, - "partner" states that there is only one mother of the children ;-)
Read through the discussion above.

I am lost. I will not change any. I will handle the ones I add on a case by case basis. End of story. Sorry I caused a problem.

Not a problem, - my point was more to show that there is not an easy solution, and I agree: It has to be solved case by case.

If only one child and the father have multiple spouses I would for example use "mother of nn". - Leaving it empty in such a situation is not an option, because you have to mark that this child has another mother.

There are many options that could be applied. ie: Mother of son # 4 I don't like ? or nn or unknown. Bjorn has two very good points. You have to attach the parental lineage and it has to be done case by case. V. Beck I think does excellent and beautiful profile photos. Just ask Erica Howton. I asked her if she would send me a profile picture for died young that was inspiring. I think she said she got it from V. Beck. Whatever you all decide, I will follow.

Theresa

Apropos the "died young images", - you know that one of the most used looks like a dog-shit on a bad display?

Bjørn, I'm glad you are saying it has to be solved on a case-by-case basis. My fingers have been twitching for two days, wanting to argue with you. Now I don't have to.

What I am thinking is that often it really is clear that an unknown woman was a wife (because the children inherited, and therefore must have been legitimate). And often it is also clear from context that two children have the same mother.