Physicians - how do we want these listed?

Started by June Barnes on Tuesday, October 30, 2012


Showing all 11 posts
10/30/2012 at 4:28 AM

Can we have some guidelines on how to add people to this project please? At the moment the lists seem top be chronological within the centuries - would it be better/ easer if they were listed in alphabetical order?

Private User
10/30/2012 at 4:43 AM

Yes, list them in alphabetical order within the centuries, if you wish. It is allways people out there at internet who can see how things shall be done the best way. Aspecially people who can write English the way it shall be written, which I can not. I hope this will be a good project.

Private User
10/30/2012 at 4:45 AM

Due to the changes in medicine and medical treatment through the ages, I recommend to keep it as is.

10/30/2012 at 5:08 AM

Private User - in chronological order of birth? alphabetical is easy to refer to - depends on what you are trying to do - if you want a chronological record of medical progress and advancement then it has to be in order of discovery - people don't discover things according to their age!

Sam Brown born in 1805 discovers something in 1850 when he is 45,
John Smith born in 1800 discovers something in 1860 - when he was 60

the chronological order based on birth -

John Smith
Sam Brown

but chronological based on date of the discovery

Sam Brown
John Smith

So - for me alphabetical is less complicated!

Private User
10/30/2012 at 5:17 AM

June Barnes: Do not give up !

Private User
10/30/2012 at 5:35 AM

Anyway which system you want to list the names: Do not delete anything at all of the names and data.

10/30/2012 at 9:38 AM

Private User would never do that!!

10/31/2012 at 4:39 AM

In the project about the swedish pharmacists we did a list alphabetic within the frame of the centuries. Then there is a problem with thoose born in one century and working in the next. In the swedish priest-project I think the year of birth is the year for listing. For medicine it's odd if the person was born 1698 and made all the big discoveries in late life, let's say 1762.

If in alphabetic order and if the english alhabet is used I would be sure my close relative (now living) will not be correct listed or not be found if listed. In some of the english/american projects lists with swedish/scandinavian names this is obvious to me, but is not aloud to be changed as that would be making the projects to much "european" or something like that. So maybe it's better to use geographical lists?

10/31/2012 at 5:39 AM

Recognition for me: in the projects -I started originally- about Mayors of all TIMES and of all PLACES we could documentate, I thought it wise to range them by FAMILY-naam, for it is my experience when I started genealogy -in about 1990- I always wanted to know first: are there relatives of mine involved? In the meantime we have a very uncomforable working-cooperation where an important c. is starting lots of projects with lists, ONLY in order of co-optation, whereever the function or crafts was done, nor in what circumstances. I myself continue the A-B-C approach in combination with time-line orders, so you can make TWO lists in one project-paragraph.

But before geni-working very close with June Barnes, who did a great job there- on the huge TITANIC-job, I experienced again the benefits of ordering in order of NAME, rather then in order of TIME or SPACE. It's in that sense to be comparable with an algebra-puzzle, do you start with searching for the X, the Y, or is it the Z that finally gives you the clue to unpuzzle the chaos of a cross-country journey through genealogy.... groetUnu-jMVu-

10/31/2012 at 6:57 AM

Difficult. It seems that most people don't add the text to the project anyway so perhaps this is purely academic? :-) There are over 50 profiles attached to the project and I think less than half are written up on the project.

10/31/2012 at 7:21 AM

June Barnes, you mean linking IN the text instead of linking ON the page? I hope I use the correct english words in relation to linking. It keeps me quit some time for 'redaction' in projects with collegues not too familiar with WIKI-usage to pick-up their attributions to the page by 'outside-ON-linking' to bring that information in the page by 'inside-IN-linking', but I see that as part of my responsability of starting projects with some sort of a focus. In Titanic my focus was contribution as a helper to bring those huge amount of souls together in geni before the 12th of april, in other projects you can take your time for years or even more to fullfill your -academic?- dreams.... groet, jeannette.

Showing all 11 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion