Lacking the ability to answer any of the recent questions (better than they have already been answered) I took me to the tag garden to do a little weeding... As usual, I started at the lightly-used tags and found which was attached to a single question, and didn't have a definition. I've removed it from the question it was associated with as I couldn't see that it added any value, but then remembered that I'd recently rejected a tag-edit on that also referred to traditional-genealogy so it clearly has a meaning to some people.

In case I'm deleting something that has value, could somebody explain it to me?

  • Do you remember what question you removed it from and who added the tag?
    – lkessler
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:22
  • @ColeValleyGirl - The tag wiki needs alot of work. Does weeding include defining synonyms (which alot of sites do). You might start with defs and synonyms on the wiki if you have time. Should we be weeding until we have more questions (we still are pretty light)? Clearly not until the tag wiki is better populated. Only a very few people are allowed to edit the tag wiki - you are one of them.
    – Duncan
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:40
  • @Duncan, yes I have been adding synonyms, and excepts where they're missing. Basically, I look for a lightly used tag that hasn't got any content, look where it's used, look for likely synonyms and either (1) propose a synonym if there's already a similar more-used tag (2) create an except if I'm able (3) leave it alone if I think it adds value but I'm not qualified to define it or (4) rarely, as in this case, delete it if it doesn't add anything that I can see. I'm not just deleting tags willy-nilly.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:46
  • @lkessler, this one: genealogy.stackexchange.com/q/2201/104
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:50
  • Looking at the edits of that question, yes it was Tamura Jones that added the tag. See my answer below.
    – lkessler
    Dec 16 '12 at 16:06
  • @ColeValleyGirl - great. Thank you.
    – Duncan
    Dec 17 '12 at 11:50
  • 1
    This situation exemplifies the weakness of the tag system. A term that has a specific meaning for one person has been added to a question asked by someone else without any explanation of the "claimed" meaning being given in the wiki. This is a recipe for disaster.
    – Fortiter
    Dec 18 '12 at 9:26
  • @Fortiter, my concern exactly.
    – user104
    Dec 18 '12 at 9:29

I believe Tamura Jones coined the term "traditional genealogy".

Tamura says traditional genealogy is the concept that there is just one genealogy that can be proven through vital records. Traditional genealogy treats official relationships as biological ones, because that has been the social convention for ages.

Traditional genealogy software places the traditional nuclear family at the core of its genealogy, in part because of the influence of GEDCOM is "couple-centric" and software developers followed with a "Family Group" report.

Tamura then goes on to introduce scientific genealogy as the alternative.

A guest post Tamura made on Randy Seaver's blog sums it up, and a followup by Randy gives a few more references back to Tamura's articles.

  • Ah. Thanks for the explanation and references. Perhaps @TamuraJones will join in the discussion?
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 16:25
  • Thanks for the clarification. Also, @ColeValleyGirl, just a heads up, pinging only works for the first five users on a post. Because Tamura Jones has not said anything here yet, the ping won't do any good. Dec 16 '12 at 18:21
  • @Luke, is there any way to ping him? -- seems like he's pretty essential in this discussion.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 18:29
  • Sorry, no. The only alternative is chat. If he has been in chat before, ping him there. He'll receive it in his inbox. However, if he has never been to chat here, only a mod can get a hold of him in chat. A mod can do something called 'super-ping' in chat. Even if a user has never been to chat before, mods can use the super-ping to get their message to show up in the users inbox. Because we don't have mods pro temp yet, you could ping him on the original post instead. Dec 16 '12 at 18:34
  • @Luke, he didn't actually participate in that post -- just tagged it.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 19:15
  • I'm not sure, but you might be able to ping an editor. Try typing his name and if it suggests it, it'll work. Otherwise it won't. Dec 16 '12 at 19:25
  • @Luke, it didn't work. Guess I'll give up and hope he finds this discussion.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 20:19

Traditional genealogy (at least in Europe) was a system for ensuring the exclusive control of inherited property and authority through the application of principles of partilinearity, legitimacy and primogeniture.

In other cultures, there were very different views of the proper relationship between people and the land, and people of different generations and this led to quite different traditional approaches to genealogy.

Family historians in the modern western world identified the enormous value of many of the tools used by traditional genealogists while at the same time rejecting many of their underlying assumptions. Family historians wanted a system that valued all individuals; was inclusive rather than exclusive; descriptive rather than prescriptive.

You may be able to identify the essential difference between traditional genealogy and family history through the GAT (great aunt test). When shown a family tree, look for your grandmother's sisters. If you don't find them, ...

  • I can find my grandmother's sisters' partners' parents. Guess that means I'm doing family history.
    – user104
    Dec 18 '12 at 11:01

It may have been my proof tag you deleted. I just referred to the definition of genealogy (I don't recall it mentioning traditional genealogy but it may have) and the meta discussion where the proof/evidence discussion was taking place. I did find a few other sites to reference. As deleter - can you look at what was deleted? I don't think I can.

  • No, it wasn't yours.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:50
  • The proof tag that is there currently is one I constructed with some subsequent edits from others.
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 15:53
  • Duncan, have you seen this? meta.genealogy.stackexchange.com/a/1470/104
    – user104
    Dec 16 '12 at 18:31
  • @ColeValleyGirl - actually I hadn't. Thanks for heads up.
    – Duncan
    Dec 17 '12 at 11:55

You must log in to answer this question.