« Back to Project Discussions

First name and second ,third ,4th names

Started by J P Weyers on Monday, March 7, 2022
Problem with this page?

Participants:

  • J P Weyers
    Geni member
  • Private User
    Geni Pro
  • Ann Hope-Bailie (Stacey)
    Geni member
  • Private User
    Geni Pro
  • Private User
    Geni Pro
View 7 More

Profiles Mentioned:

Showing 1-30 of 61 posts

On profile where do names go ?
First name in first space and all others in second space ?
Do we use Cape of Good Hope for event / Birth/ baptism/ Death in 1780 or Western Cape 🤔

Private

Sharon Doubell

Private User

Very old debate regarding names which never reaches a conclusion!

Private User

Think to prevent conflict some kind of guidelines or suggested rules should be implemented.
June -- you ,Judi and I worked hard on dates etc project place names in SA.
What was it for then

Good morning, why not just borrow the guidelines from Family Search? I have been working on records for them and they are well documented.

Ann Hope-Bailie - what do they suggest ?

We can debate it ad eternum; people will use it as they see fit. Question is what standard, if any, do we enforce? Example here: Martha Diederichs.

---just want to remove Cape Winelands 1724 !!
Names ? : First name in first slot then all others in 2nd slot on profile ?

To say Jan van Rebeeck landed 1652 in the Western Cape then built the Castle in the Western Cape becomes a bit weird .

Is it possible to be born in a place that did not exist when you were born ?
Piet Janse died in Gauteng , South Africa 1840 ?

I find I learn about history when adding information.
When was Graaf Reinett established , the history of the town and the more information I get , the more I learn and Knowledge is the ultimate .

Why take shortcuts ?
Then we might as well say our ancestor born 1610 in Cape Town Western Cape died 1680 Cape Town , Western Cape and not bother searching for valid primary sources .

A person or individual / Profile also differentiated from another individual /Profile from where they were born or died .

If the place is wrong why bother with any information then ? Just add anything you like or believe ?

My point is Private User changed the names to what they are now, but every time there’s a discussion the outrage is directed at curators. Conversely, when we lock the fields and lock the relationships, that evokes a similar outrage. There just doesn’t appear to be a happy medium where everyone is happy.

I prefer to use:
First name field: First field
Other names: Second field
Last name: Married name (most recent, or as per Death Notice).
Birth name: Literally name at baptism.

Re: place names, I agree they should be contemporaneous. I detest seeing new names for old places. However, I understand it is complex. A level of complexity that some users don’t wish to delve into.

Add to that the place name recommendations from Geni are modern place names. I use those for burial locations etc.

But not everyone agrees; for example Alex Armenia prefers at least two names in first name field to avoid Geni’s “optimistic” matching system etc.

Others prefer not to use the Last name field for married names as earlier archive records use the maiden name as Afrikaans women didn’t take the husband’s name in the earlier years at the Cape. It’s a balancing act that needs to take everyone into consideration. It should be flexible, but not to a fault.

Alex Armenis* apologies Alex, my phone prefers Armenia for some reason.

Filling out the names on a profile:
When I was still a novice Geni user, I used to type the full names in the first name field because when using the middle name field too, I could only see the first name displayed, and with my family where so many people have the same first names, that was very confusing.

I later on learned that one can select the name display preferences in your account settings.
Thereafter, I decided to complete the name fields on the profile as Geni provides the blank profile window. Thus, first name in First name field, and the rest of the names in the Middle name field. Then I made sure that I select the name display option that fits my preference.

By the way, a similar topic is also how to use the birth surname field....

Here are 3 URLs to this topic that may be worth reading:
https://help.geni.com/hc/en-us/articles/360038433653-What-is-the-Bi...
https://help.geni.com/hc/en-us/articles/229705067-How-do-I-know-whi...
https://help.geni.com/hc/en-us/articles/229703607-How-do-I-customiz...

Go well
Marietjie Kotze

Marietjie Kotze -- thx you a star.

Thx Drummond

--- Re: place names, I agree they should be contemporaneous. I detest seeing new names for old places. However, I understand it is complex. A level of complexity that some users don’t wish to delve into. --- Why not just learn something new ? Can only benefit one ?

e.g my ancestors born Lemberg , Lithuania not Lviv , Ukraine .

There's another element i.e. primary records with secondary information e.g. my Stieler family Saxon, Germany on marriage certificate and Duitsland, Barlyn i.e. Germany, Berlin on Death Notice for SV/PROG's place of birth. Logical conclusion is he was Prussian. Even Friedrich Wilhelm II von Preußen says "Potsdam, Brandenburg, Deutschland(HRR)"

Prussian?
My grandfather born Krefeld ,Prussia but insisted he was German.
I love the way Towns in Europe moved around from country to country.
Like going for a nice stroll
Another thing I do : check under whom or what a specific in the world was .
But then 5 hours later I am still reading about the Spanish control of Netherlands and lower Rhine.

Gotenhafen ,Gdingen or Gdynia ?
Danzig or Gdansk ?
Koenigsberg or Kaliningrad ?
Breslau ?

Geni has told us pretty clearly to use the naming fields as they intended them to be used

  • First name in First Name field.
  • Other names in Middle Name field.
  • Married surnames for women where the country / era records show that they used them, NOT if they didn't. (IE Remain historically accurate.)

Geni has told us repeatedly - and proved to us - that it is a fallacy to believe that matching works any better with the names all in the First Name field.
In fact, because merges in SA then tend to create situations where the names are duplicated in the first and middle name field, it actually clogs up the matching process and creates extra work load to correct them each time.

When it comes to the historically accurate naming of places, I don't think there are any SA Curators who want them to be anachronistic. If you have more historically accurate / precise data than Cape Winelands - then everyone is pleased if you change it to that.

We have agreed on a convention - years ago:

1.See https://www.geni.com/projects/South-Africans-Geni-Landing-Site-WELKOM-CUZZINS%21/2504
South Africa - Profile Guidelines We endorse standard Geni data entry conventions. Use the fields as they were intended, please.Married Surname Rule of Thumb on SA Profiles: Before 1800 only British women tended to use married Surnames. After 1800 the British govt in SA usually means Married Surnames as well as Birth Surnames for all women

2.AND WE HAVE AN ENTIRE SA PROJECT DEDICATED TO THIS: https://www.geni.com/projects/South-Africa-Profile-Naming-Conventions/16231

Thx Sharon .

@Leon Johan Pierre van Aswegen, a1b1c5d2e5f7g5h3

I thought we use the place names as it appears on the documents. I would however like to be able to say where it is today in SA. E.g. Hay was near Griekwastad.

Maryna, that's what I alluded to above with the Saxon, Germany and Berlin, Germany etc. above. That information was taken from primary documents, but it's secondary information i.e. if the profile reflected the document it would be, if not totally incorrect, inaccurate. But the other example I used (King FW II of Prussia), an MP, also has inaccurate information. It's nuanced, but to some people it makes a very big difference. Examples:

Freeburgher Colonies (1656–1795)
Republic of Swellendam (1795)
Republic of Graaff-Reinet (1795–1796)
Zoutpansberg (1835–1864)
Winburg (1836–1844)
Potchefstroom (1837–1844)
Natalia Republic (1839–1843)
Winburg-Potchefstroom (1844–1848)
Republic of Klip River (1847–1848)
Lydenburg Republic (1849–1860)
Utrecht Republic (1852–1858)
South African Republic (1852–1877, 1881–1902)
Orange Free State (1854–1902)
Klein Vrystaat (1876–1891)
State of Goshen (1882–1883)
Republic of Stellaland (1882–1883)
United States of Stellaland (1883–1885)
New Republic (1884–1888)
Republic of Upingtonia/Lijdensrust (1885–1887)
etc.

E.g. Sharon, I agree with and abide by the naming conventions and guidelines. There are too many examples where users put whatever they see fit in those fields (for whatever reason) and we're expected as curators to correct that. Martha Diederichs has a curator and 40 something managers. Who's responsibility is it to enforce the conventions?

I'm only chiming in here as I was tagged in this discussion i.e. no gripes or qualms here; weighing in, as requested.

I really find this discussion interesting as I run across issues all the time with census records and I think the new Geni "consistency" marker is making it more of an issue than before.

I do think this discussion has a lot of various threads from the past and the real issue is that there is no global "standard convention for names". Frankly, that issue is what makes countries/ethnicities/nationalities important enough to be noted on a platform such as Geni. I think that Geni tries to work through it with the "translation" tab or marker. I have worked with some of my Finnish cousins with this feature. It is something to consider with any international profiles and I know it is useful for medieval profiles.

Had my cousins in Finland known of my family's adoption of the name "Beck" for "Bjorkbacka" we might have found each other earlier. Sadly, the internet was not around in earlier days. It took us almost 90 years to reconnect.

I find myself using the "Also known as" field more often to suggest differences with US census data, etc. and Geni seems to pick up those if you put the comma and space between names. Perhaps that is an option for multiple names. I have used it.

Thx Susanne

Drummond - your input is very welcome and needed.
This issue creating conflict and people changing from one to the next names and / place nanes.
Cre absolute unnecessary confusion.
Surely the more correct we can get information the better it is for all with GENI as a reliable source itself .
I personally would like anything I add to be as correct as it coukd possibly be.
I spend hours or even days and weeks searching for the correct information.
Trawling through 3000 pages of unindexed baptisms to find the right information .
Maybe why I was successful in my profession?

Drummond Corrie - then also all the Eastern Cape colonies we forget about .

I agree whole-heartedly with what Sharon Doubell quotes from the projects. However, sadly there are many who do not follow these conventions and who insist on adding all names to the the first name field for various reasons - searching being one. Things have improved in recent years to overcome the problems that were raised!

Showing 1-30 of 61 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion

English (US)   eesti   Svenska   Español (España)   Français   עברית   Norsk (bokmål)   dansk   Nederlands   Deutsch   »
To enable the proper functioning and security of the website, we collect information via cookies as specified in our Cookie Policy. Geni does not use any third-party cookies.