Better defining the palaeography, transcriptions, translation, language(?) tags?

Question

I've noticed there does not seem to be a whole lot of consistency with the palaeography, translation, and transcriptions tags.

I think they all have their place, but their use is not yet well defined.

For palaeography we have in the wiki:

This tag may be used for:

• questions about the study and practice of palaeography
• requests for assistance in deciphering and/or interpreting handwriting

This makes perfect sense. The other two tags have no usage guidance defined, but on some questions seem to be used instead of palaeography.

For example, looking at the 10 transcriptions questions to date, I think 6 would be better tagged palaeography instead:

• Translation & Transcription Request, French birth record from 1842
• Did Edward Buten change his name from Edward Bulen?
• What does this Y symbol abbreviate in a Quaker birth record?
• Reading and interpreting baptismal record (from 1706) in old Danish script?
• Is word (like) etus likely to appear on 19th Century Cornwall Will?
• Where can I get help transcribing and translating Danish records?

The 4 transcriptions questions that I think are tagged properly are:

• What tools are available to support transcription on Mac OS X?
• Where is the transcription effort for various census and other large record sets documented?
• Copyright Issues with Content Providers
• What criteria should I look for to publish my cemetery records online?

I don't think any of the above questions should be tagged both palaeography and transcriptions, though it is possible a question could be asked in the future that may need both. A question that could probably be tagged with both: Is there a transcription standard that separates unclear words from added words? I think the distinction between the tags is that palaeography questions tend to be about reading or interpretting a single record or small number of records, while transcriptions questions are generally more broad in scope (not about reading handwriting).

So for the usage guidance for transcriptions I might propose:

For questions about making or using transcriptions of genealogical documents, and transcription practices or projects. For questions about deciphering and interpreting handwriting, use the "palaeography" tag.

Obviously defining it in this way would require a few of the above questions to be re-tagged, but I think it would be easier to do now than at a later stage when transcriptions gets further overused.

---

translation is somewhat related as a lot of palaeography questions in foreign languages also have this tag. I see no problem with that overlap. I kind of question the usefulness of this tag since it is so vague; it makes me wonder whether it would be better to tag the language instead (or in addition?).

For example, I created the latin tag the other day as I thought this would be useful since a lot of early European genealogical records are in Latin. However, I can see that it might seem a bit silly to tag a question both france and french. At the same time, as the site grows, tagging the language might help French speakers more easily find questions about French palaeography and translations.

---

So...any thoughts or agreement/disagreement with better defining palaeography, transcriptions, translation, language tags, etc.?

Answer 1

I would like to see palaeography reserved for questions about the study of palaeography and NOT for the second usage currently in the wiki. Note that Wikipedia's article says (emphasis mine):

Palaeography (UK) or paleography (US; ultimately from Greek: παλαιός, palaiós, "old", and γράφειν, graphein, "to write") is the study of ancient and historical handwriting (that is to say, of the forms and processes of writing, not the textual content of documents).

If someone is looking for tutorials on how to read old handwriting, why should they wade through all the Q/As where people have requested help with individual documents?

I don't have a good suggestion for what to call it yet, but in the same way we have feature-request, I'd like to have a specific tag for those posts where people need help with translation, transcription, or otherwise deciphering the handwriting.

Giving those questions a tag of their own would leave language free for questions about getting advice about genealogical word lists, or the meaning of individual terms and how best to interpret them, and transcription for questions about transcription standards and the like.

In regards to the question Is there a transcription standard that separates unclear words from added words?, I don't think it is proper to tag that paleaography. It is NOT about ancient and historical handwriting -- it is a question about modern standards of how to accurately convey the researcher's opinion about a reading of a historical document.

To sum up:

I think the distinction between the tags is that palaeography questions tend to be about reading or interpreting a single record or small number of records, while transcriptions questions are generally more broad in scope (not about reading handwriting).

I disagree with this. palaeography should be for the questions which are broad in scope. We need a new tag for the questions about reading or interpreting a single record, where the basic question is help with what word is in the record, not the definition or larger meaning/usage of the word.