Hot answers tagged

7

No, because tracking living or very-recently-deceased individuals often does not require one to hire a professional genealogist. I was under the impression that the no-mention-of-living-people was to protect the privacy of living people. We should not give the false impression that one must hire a professional genealogist to trace a living person.


5

The Stack Exchange Terms of Service includes the following: Subscriber represents, warrants and agrees that it will not contribute any Subscriber Content that ... (c) infringes any intellectual property right of another or the privacy or publicity rights of another and also: Under no circumstances will Subscriber use the Network or the Service ...


5

One-name studies exist to attempt to determine a surname's origins, and I suspect that even these rarely find anything concrete. Even reputable sources such as the Oxford Dictionary of Family Names may not be correct in all cases. For example, my ONS surname has an entry in the latest edition of this book, but for a number of reasons the proposed origin is ...


5

Yes, this question is about the ethics. It technically is on topic. But this question bothers me too much. Because, I still think a living person is a distinct possibility. I have provided an answer to the question with my thoughts.


5

I voted to reopen the question. I see it as a legitimate question, whether the OP asked it because the man is part of her/his own family or because the OP is doing historical research or researching people from a particular town, etc. Anyone with a page about them on the internet is not a celebrity. My own father is far more famous than Clausen (though ...


4

This effort is admirable, but it would hurt more than help. The issue is this. A very basic goal for all Stack Exchange sites is that we want to all but guarantee that when you ask a question, you get a good answer. This is a Q&A site, so questions and answers coming together is what makes these wheels turn. On other websites, which fulfill other ...


4

Short version: We should keep the questions here and make them into 'constructive subjective' questions, as described at (see https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask). I've edited the question (awaiting peer review) to make it very clearly on topic. We don't automatically have to ban software recommendations. This question on Sofware ...


4

This is less a question of what is on-topic vs what is off-topic, because questions about genealogy software is undoubtedly on-topic – we have a software tag with 87 questions currently. Questions that generate lists are not great questions because they are simply not focused enough (i.e. too broad or primarily opinion-based), it's not that the question is ...


4

Is this a question that could have been solved with a simple change of title? Asking "How do I query my database to find missing data?" is asking how to use software. It invites a long list of answers, all based on how-to-do-it on whatever software packages our community might have experience with. Is this on-topic or off-topic? Asking for a "query ...


4

I think I was the one that nominated that question for closure, and I probably downvoted as well. My reason was that I checked the Help Centre, and I think questions about animal genealogy are already off-topic, based on my reading of the Meta question, "What is “Genealogy,” “Family History,” and “Microhistory”?", which is linked from the Help Centre topic ...


4

I agree that we are getting a lot of questions about using autosomal DNA (usually tested by AncestryDNA). I think in time we should try to write one or more canonical Q&As to make some of these questions duplicates of. However, with our questions per day still far less than the 10 per day we need for graduation, I am hoping we will keep processing them ...


4

If we include the history of Family History and Genealogy to our on-topic questions, I would like to see them held to the same standards as any other question on the site. Can we avoid these pitfalls when asking and answering the questions? How to Ask Questions in Private Beta advises us to Avoid Easy Questions such as "what are some good books on this ...


3

I notice the focus here has evolved a bit since this meta question was first posted. I think where you’ve landed, with PolyGeo’s approach of letting the answer stand but asking for info to support their claim, is rather sound. For the sake of balancing long and short term priorities, I recommend adding one more condition -- if a bit of time, say 48 hours, ...


3

I think the proposal is worth a try. G&FH SE has had issues several times with questions from individuals whose native language is not English. Their questions are phrased ambiguously, the authors seem to have problems understanding requests for clarification, and everyone gets frustrated. Requiring English only has definitely limited participation. ...


3

To be on-topic I think such questions should always start by saying why a general reference search might not be providing a satisfactory answer for a particular, and thus potentially interesting, surname. In addition, I think we should consider writing an FAQ about why we consider questions about surname origins and meanings to be of little value. The ...


3

Discussions about the origins or etymology of given names (note: surnames have already been discussed). Jan Murphy: Allowable as part of a discussion of a solvable problem. Follow the rule in dont-ask which says general "chatty" discussions are off-topic. PolyGeo: Allowable as part of a discussion of a solvable problem. For example: Why might name ...


3

I would not use one poorly worded question to ban all questions on the subject of royal genealogy. That particular question is not a good question because it displays poor research effort. The fact that it is about the topic of royal genealogy is neither here nor there. Whether or not it is easy to research a particular era or place, due to the survival of ...


3

I think it is not so much the questions as the answers that tend to be too broad. Often it is easier to provide a general answer. However, it could be possible to provide a specific answer, if there is data about the accuracy of the resource. Here is an example a study of the accuracy of Wikipedia and encyclopedia historical articles. I don't know whether ...


3

I support this idea as long as the questions and proofs are difficult and interesting. If we are not careful, I think we risk ending up with lots of questions about random ancestors that are not really useful to anyone except the OP. What I would propose is that if one posts such a proof, it utilises a unique or interesting resource, or newly published ...


3

It is meant to deter questions such as: "What is the best genealogy database?" "What is the best website for publishing my family history?" "I need a list of open-source genealogy programmes." i.e. questions without any supporting criteria that could turn into a popularity poll for a long list of options, without any criteria specified for what 'best' ...


3

I am of the opinion that it is not for me to question the motives for someone researching their family history. Whether someone wants to identify their biological father, or their great great great great grandfather, it doesn't matter. Both are family history questions, and both should have a place on this site. What does matter, for the purposes of this ...


3

Generally speaking, most queries about animal "genealogy" are going to be either genetics/breeding questions or legal/technical/financial questions about establishing pedigree. They're not about researching the historical pedigree of an animal and they can't be because to my knowledge there is no census for dogs: an animal either comes with paperwork ...


3

They're not about researching the historical pedigree of an animal and they can't be because to my knowledge there is no census for dogs: an animal either comes with paperwork certifying it as a purebred suchnsuch or it doesn't. Historical records about the pedigree of animals certainly exist. When I was a kid, I was fascinated by the pedigrees of ...


3

Our policy is to not publish the names of living people. We shouldn't illustrate questions with links to un-redacted images. We don't have the permission of the living people on the image, so why should we expose their names indirectly by linking to it? I'd rather see someone clip out a part of the page and redact the names, not unlike what a presenter ...


3

I think that we should use your wording and place it like below immediately before the last sentence at https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic which is "For more help, see "What types of questions should I avoid asking?" A note on 'lookup requests' Questions asking for somebody to perform a lookup on a site/at an archives that is not ...


3

I'm in two minds about altering our scope to include questions about the History of Genealogy/Family History. As Adrian said at https://genealogy.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3518/6485, I'm not sure we (as a community) could do justice to those questions -- doing a quick google to point to published resources isn't bringing any expertise to bear. Asking ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible