Rodovid Engine:Community Portal

From Rodovid Engine

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents



[edit] Topics at separate pages

[edit] Very fair and scientific method

Hi everybody.

Sorry to insist, this is very embarrassing, but we do have 3 samples of DFA specialist's scientific method right now.

  1. First, the DFA specialist inserted text lines before other contributor's signature in discussion above, making thinking this contributor wrote something he didn't. See the history of this page at that point.
  2. Second, this discussion is making old informations coming back. ChorinJS a french admin, found modification done by the DFA specialist in his tree: http://en.rodovid.org/wk?title=Person:216573&diff=prev&oldid=122172 . This modification consisted in linking two different trees. Unfortunately ChorinJS is one of the most documented and active user on Rodovid FR. This was totaly wrong. He just had to revert, for this time. But how many artificial links the dfa specialist made in database?
  3. Third, the DFA specialist, complains on developer's discussion page, telling that I want to make stupidly racist things in the database. Read above what I was proposing to do.

Almoustine, Almoustine, what is this mess? --Christophe Tesson 22:51, 24 February 2010 (EET)

[edit] DFA project ideological drift

Hi everybody.

A DFA project member has significantly modified main page of english version of Rodovid. See:

Are we in DFA project inc. site? --Christophe Tesson 13:57, 20 March 2010 (EET)

No you are not a DFA Project Inc site. That is simply a statement of fact. An endorsement of all of the amazing collective effort put out by the users of Rodovid toward creating a global tree that is far more usable by multiple disciplines (Medical, Genealogical, and Historical) than any other global tree available on the internet. It is an accolade, enjoy it! Almoustine 17:05, 20 March 2010 (EET)


[edit] Needed Person Warnings

  1. The date for an event is not recognizable;
  2. The death date more than 115 years after the birth date;
  3. The birth date is after the death date;
  4. The burial date is more than 30 days after the death date;
  5. The death date is after the burial date;
  6. Any event occurs before the birth date;
  7. Any event (except probate) occurs more than a year after the death date;
  8. There is no gender specified;
  9. A surname has only one character (a '?' is okay);
  10. The birth date is before 700AD;
people born before 700AD do not generally connect to modern people and as such should not be added to Rodovid

--Fred Bergman 20:52, 29 April 2010 (EEST)

Hi Fred! when I've been questioning my aunts to mount my tree several times they knew that a relative had "N" children, but did not know the sex nor the names ... then undefined can not block the registration. I have some relatives of Rio de Janeiro did not want to disclose the full name or SURNAMES... and they put just the INITIAL, otherwise they would removed the records from Rodovid... :-( Morais 00:18, 30 April 2010 (EEST)

[edit] Needed Family Warnings

1 The family's husband and wife have the same names as those of another family on Rodovid;

It maybe boring, cause if you have 2 big trees each post you'll get this warning.
It happens all the time... especially in America where cousins often marry

2 The husband and wife have the same surname;

the same
It happens all the time... especially in the English Rodovid where surnames are often location names

3 The date for a marriage event is not recognizable;

what do you mean?

4 The marriage date is before the husband or wife is 12 years old, or after the husband or wife is 70 years old;

bureucracy imho. It maybe 10 and 75 and what?
Until twentieth century marriage age for women was 12 and men 14. This cause a bureaucratic nightmare I suggest maybe 10-75

5 The marriage date is after the husband or wife has died;

it's ok
I believe this should be flagged for review but not prevented.

6 The husband was less than 16 or more than 65 years old when a child was born;

Until twentieth century marriage age for women was 12 and men 14. This cause a bureaucratic nightmare I suggest maybe 10-75

7 The wife was less than 12 or more than 50 years old when a child was born;

Until twentieth century marriage age for women was 12 and men 14. This cause a bureaucratic nightmare I suggest maybe 10-75

8 The husband died more than nine months before a child was born;

what about spermbank?

9 The wife died before a child was born;

I believe this should be flagged for review but not prevented, the change calendar usage created some situations where reported/recorded dates for deaths and births can be inaccurate by as much as two years. This raises serious issues in cases where mother died in childbirth.

10 Child births are spaced less than nine months apart;

dont understand this idea
Ridiculous idea...it happens all the time. Twins, Triplets, Quads and Quints, Kentucky Twins (7-11 months apart).

11 A child was born before the marriage date;

pfff. we have no restrictions. what about situation when there wan no father (it called illegal birth)
Ridiculous idea... Shall we leave out all the nobility? 1 in 4 colonial women in America concieved out of wedlock (before first marriage).

12 A child was born more than 35 years after the marriage date;

Um if you get married at 12 you have 38 years of good child bearing years (as long as you supposed the woman enters menopause at 50 which doesn't always happen). What if you get married as a child but don't start to cohabit until age 12... again, shall we leave out the nobility?

13: bureucracy --Fred Bergman 20:53, 29 April 2010 (EEST) --Igor 16:35, 14 May 2010 (EEST) Almoustine 18:23, 3 September 2010 (EEST)

Hi Fred !
About "The husband and wife have the same surname" it is not a ERROR ! In my family tree ASSEIRO there are some cases of marriage between cousins, so with the same surname! How to work these WARNINGs ? Show after insert/update record ? IMHO, these validations cannot prevent the insert/update ! Morais 00:11, 30 April 2010 (EEST)

I want this warning, because it can be a mistake but if controlled the user has the possibility to overrule this.--Fred Bergman 08:57, 11 May 2010 (EEST)

[edit] Vandalism

Les spams et le vandalisme pornographique sont particulièrement pénibles et insistants ... Il me semble très important de trouver une solution rapide.
Spamming and porn-vandalism are a real important problem ! Any speedy solution ? Please, see
http://engine.rodovid.org/wk?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=100 ! Amicalement - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 11:04, 22 September 2010 (EEST)

I think, the only way is to oblige login also for engine and total obligation to give a proven emailaddress !--Fred Bergman 13:52, 22 September 2010 (EEST)

Ok, let's try to close anonymous access for 2 weeks. As I remember last year in September was the same problem. --Igor 15:29, 22 September 2010 (EEST)
Closed. --Baya 09:25, 23 September 2010 (EEST)
Parfait ! Merci !
Great ! Thank you ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 18:17, 24 September 2010 (EEST)

I hope you will continue this closing, because engine has 2 functions: 1. the easy entrance for new users and 2. the general discussionpossibility between registrated users, admins and others to develop the best Rodovid possible. Abuse of engine hurts the second goal, so we have to split up engine in 2 different parts: 1. the sandbag for possible new users with the risk of abuse; 2. the closed possibility for admins and others to discuss. --Fred Bergman 18:55, 24 September 2010 (EEST)

[edit] Sorry ... big chaos on fr:rodovid

I have very big problems with User:Tesson, since january/february 2010. Ok, he works/contributes often (every day !) on the project, has sometimes good ideas ! ... but he plays the "chief". He never searchs any consensus, will always speed for the modifications.

  1. He always writes texts (help-pages, for example) with a monstruous lot of errors (in french langage, but also in term of pure history and genealogy). His help-pages were too long, sometimes only repeats and repeats, ... very dissuasiv for the new contributors. I must spend time to do better and shorter. But he took it very bad. We had also a long confrontation with the list of the french departments and cities. He removed the begin of the list and set a new list, full of errors and with a presentation copyed from a copyright-site. I had to modify, its takes time, and naturally this mades Tesson furious.
  2. For the copyright, I had to explain to him and others, that the license SS-CC-SA must be respected, for the texts and the photos. The same problem for the copy from official sites of the french administration (documents for birth, baptism, marriage, death). Tesson took my remarks as a provocation. But I had to preserve Rodovid from big problems with the law.
  3. Tesson begins a discussion, a modification and never support critics. Each remark or critic is for him a "troll".
  4. He removes commentars or remarks on several discution-pages. I had to explain to him that a "wiki-site" like Rodovid must preserv the contributions and arguments of each contributor.
  5. Tesson obtains the "voices" of 2 ou 3 others contributors/administrators. But the others are not reactiv and never say one word. The polemic seems to be my fault. I tried 4 or 5 times since march 2010 to make "rodovid-breaks" (one time 2 months long) to preserv the tranquility of the site. But Tesson explains that I "do nothing" and my attitude since months is the cause of the low nummer of new contributors.
  6. Tesson asks soon 2 times my "exclusion" from Rodovid. He refuses to unterstand that his "bad spirit" and tyrannic methods are the one important reason that the new contributors are leaving Rodovid or refuse to come.

- Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 09:08, 8 April 2011 (EEST)

And now an other administrator remove also a lot of elements of discussion pages :

http://fr.rodovid.org/wk?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:THLA&diff=prev&oldid=307133 http://fr.rodovid.org/wk?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:THLA&diff=next&oldid=307137 http://fr.rodovid.org/wk?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:THLA&diff=next&oldid=307163 http://fr.rodovid.org/wk?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:THLA&diff=next&oldid=307253 http://fr.rodovid.org/wk?title=Discussion_Utilisateur:THLA&diff=next&oldid=307405

See what Tesson wrote here :
"Les insanités (parce que c'en sont) telles qu'on peut les lires sur le site aujourd'hui vont disparaître. C'est à dire que le principe d'un wiki a été pris (dans Rodovid) à l'envers: le propos n'est pas que tout doit être conservé. Ça c'est de la mémoire eidétique, qui est souvent une caractéristique de l'autisme (Voir wk:fr:Kim Peek). D'ailleurs c'est non seulement matériellement impossible (à un moment donné il faudra un nombre infini de disques durs), mais c'est surtout sans intérêt. Dans un wiki, on ne conserve, par collaboration que ce qui est intéressant.

" (google translator) :

"The insanity (because we consider it is) as you can read them on the site today will disappear. That is the principle of a wiki has been taken (in Rodovid) upside down: the point is not that everything should be preserved. That's eidetic memory, which is often a characteristic of autism (View wk: en: Kim Peek). Moreover it is not only physically impossible (at some point it will take an infinite number of disks), but it is especially uninteresting. In a wiki, not canned, for collaboration that this is interesting."
For Tesson "insanités" are the points of vue different of Tesson's points of vue.
He will (with an other administrator) remove all the pages of "history" from the contribors, and all discution pages, naturally at first time from membres who think "different" as his "tyrannic decisions".
I wrote this here this morning :

"Je me permets de basculer ici, sur la page de "discu collective" des échanges commencés sur la page de discu d'Alain. L'affaire n'est pas mince et le problème (et les désaccords de "conception" entre contributeurs ne sont pas nouveaux) est absolument FONDAMENTAL.

Non et non, Christophe ! Cela a déjà été plusieurs fois abordé ! Tu te trompes complètement quand tu écris et proclames ci-dessus : "Dans un wiki, on ne conserve, par collaboration que ce qui est intéressant." Dans un "wiki", c'est le résultat le plus récent et le plus abouti d'un "article" qui est affiché quand on consulte la page correspondante ! Ne pas confondre, stp, "affichage immédiat" et "conservation" ! Par contre, la collaboration de la communauté des contributeurs, elle, est bel et bien (et obligatoirement) CONSERVÉE et consultable, pour chaque "article" sous l'onglet "Historique", montrant à tout moment, si besoin, les étapes successives de la production. Par ailleurs, chaque "article" est systématiquement lié à une page de discu, qui elle non plus n'est pas inintéressante, et montre les arguments éventuels des uns et des autres au cours de la production du contenu. Cette même page de discu a elle aussi un historique, qu'il est inenvisageable de détruire ! RODOVID est un wiki ... il faut tout simplement en respecter très strictement les règles fondamentales, sinon, il faut très officiellement avertir toute la communauté (y compris Baya et les autres modules/portails des autres langues). Prenons une image pour montrer le côté parfaitement réducteur de ta conception "révisionniste" des statuts : RODOVID a été proposé et mis en ligne comme une autoroute à plusieurs voies, sans péage ! Et tu voudrais, directement après ton implication (certes intensive) de pas encore 2 ans en faire un sentier creux avec barrières, péages et octroi ? Soyons enfin sérieux !

(with a little help from google translator) :

"Let me switch here on the page of "collective discu" started trading on Alain's talk page. The case is very important and the problem (and disagreements "design" of contributors are not new) is absolutely fundamental.

No and no, Christophe ! This has already been discussed several times ! You are mistaken when you write completely above and proclaim : "In a wiki, it retains, for collaboration that this is interesting." In a "wiki", the result is the newest and most advanced of an "article" that is displayed when you read the page! Do not confuse, please, "Instant" and "preservation"! But the collaboration of the community of contributors, it is indeed (and necessarily) stored and available for each "article" tab "History", showing at any time, if necessary, successive steps production. Moreover, each "article" is systematically linked to a talk page that it is also not uninteresting, and shows the potential arguments of each other during the production of content. This same page also has a talk history, it is unthinkable to destroy ! Rodovid is a wiki ... we must simply abide by very strict ground rules, otherwise it is very formally notify the whole community (including Baya and other modules/portals/locations of other languages). Take a comparaison to show your hand perfectly reducer design "revisionist" of the statutes : Rodovid was proposed and put online as a multi-lane highway without toll ! And you want directly from your involvement (albeit intensive) 2 years of not making a path with low barriers, tolls and grant? Be finally serious !" - Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 11:12, 11 April 2011 (EEST)


Dear Marc,
I accept and understand your discussion problems with Tesson, but it is not my parish to solve such kind of problems. Rodovid is an open project, which exists thanks to such people as you, Tesson, other admins and users. So, please, don't force me to make rodovid bureaucratic and to put restrictions on any persons creative work. Be more tolerant and wise and try to find a common language with Tesson and the small Rodovid community.
with respect --Baya 13:11, 11 April 2011 (EEST)
Baya ! I really wish no restriction on any persons. No restriction on Tesson ! But ... it's always impossible to negociate anything with Tesson. I am really patient and always total tolerant ! But ... we must know if the "project" is changed, or going to change ! Tesson had removed some pages and talk pages, and will now remove "historic pages" of articles, persons, families, and talk pages. That is very important ! Preserving the "historic pages" and the talk pages is absolutly necessary. This is the only garanty to know who makes what (at what time) and who writes what. Removing talk pages and history pages is very dangerous ! Manipulations, no respect of the work of each contributor ! The members write datas on Rodovid only when they are sure that their datas and works prove and attest it's their own contributions. This is really fundamental. When I began to contribute on Rodovid (end juny 2008), it was also because Rodovid's system is a wiki, with total preservation of the historic of the modifications and the works/ideas/critics of each contributor. I contribute on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. It's my experience on WP that made me understand that Rodovid is a very good "tool" and fantastic collectiv project. Also, when Tesson obtains the removing of the historic pages and talk pages, I am sorry, I will definitly quit Rodovid, because the project and the tool becomes an other site ! Best regards ! Marc ROUSSEL - --Markus3 20:11, 11 April 2011 (EEST)
I don't see any problems here. Except the discussion page of THLA and Tesson. But that is his own discussion page. More important is that any user can do whatever he wants with his discussion page. If you want you may ask them to move its discussion to "archive". --Baya 10:39, 12 April 2011 (EEST)
Please, do not edit any comments that already have answer. It is very difficult to understand changes after same changes. Also there is a button "Show preview/Prévisualisation" that can help any of us make less unnecessary changes in any page. I mean, please CHECK your text BEFORE saving.
with respect --Baya 10:47, 12 April 2011 (EEST)

[edit] Conrad Rooks?

To whom it amy concern,

I was recently advised that you have my father, Conrad Rooks, listed as deceased in 2008. This is incorrect and we would ask that you please correct this info ASAP.

Sincerely. (There was email and phone-number in original message).

Alexander Rooks

Are you talking about: en:Person:465264?
--Christophe Tesson - talk. 11:37, 23 October 2011 (EEST)

[edit] Data Respectability vs fallacious entry

I come here to expose my issue; I try to correct persons entrees and make Rodovid a genealogical reference like Wikipedia is for encyclopedia. But some contributors continue in implement fallacious link between people when no sources exist ! Based on them feelings (some time on the surname, some time on name, some time of geographical, some time on other aspects), but it is theory and no texts can confirm this though the link is impossible due to other aspect ! Do we have to conserve this records ? The problem is; these people are in them right, to creat such link, regading the Rodovid policy (no sources asked despite the fact that sources for old periode like european middle-age are well-known) !

For my point of view; Rodovid can become a genealogical reference if we stop creapy entrees making everybody descendant from Zeus, Adam and Eve, etc ... as weel as fallacious entry that make me descendant of a guy born in -4000 BC !

I don't ask for very strict rules making it boring, I just whant to have a genealogy tree with possible links ! like, I gues, many contributors; I am agree that all theory have to be written on the page for information but not linked as parent/child if it is not sure !

Can we clear the situation on the degre of sureness we have to have ? what we do after trustable sources stop ? It seems the french Rodovid have servral tools to comunicate these theory/feelings/etc...

P.S: I beg your pardon, the diplomacy is not a had skill for me, and my English is not my mother thong, Regards,--CharlesF 00:48, 7 July 2015 (EEST)

Sorry, Rules exist already in the French and English pages (for other language I don't know), but what about tools ?

[edit] Independence

I questioning myself on the independence of Rodovid against association of people wanted to make everybody descendant of Adam and Eve with religious smell beside that, and other crazy associations who have them own Templates here in Rodovid to say that Rodovid is not independent and making advertisement ! (It is like Universalis make "Point of Interest" template in Wikipedia, it is a non-sens form my point of view)

Moreover, one association is very active and don't respect rules (4.3. Controversy or uncertainty about a family link) and make a big mess. I try to clean but they undo my cleaning very fast ! making a diktact on global Rodovid by imposing them point of view !

Regards,--CharlesF 10:50, 7 July 2015 (EEST)

[edit] Blocked in Rodovid.en

Hello everyone, Unless my ask to respect Rodovid rules, the Administrator named Almoustine continue to don't respect Rodovid rules (4.3. Controversy or uncertainty about a family link 4.3.1. If parents are controversial do not add any parents "as parents". Just add all controversial info in notes.) moreover she ban me form Rodovid.en without explication or warning. Can somebody remind here what are the Rodovid Rules, she make Rodovid dependant to her assosiation,. Please react on this subjets and unblock me. Best Regards, --CharlesF 10:12, 10 July 2015 (EEST)

Personal tools
Genealogical Research in the archives of Ukraine
Your Email*
Your First Name*
Your Last Name*
Postcode of your ancestors' place in Ukraine*
Capcha*

Reload
the service is provided by Genealogical Society «Ridni»