Let's build up the Jewish Genealogy Portal

Started by Randy Schoenberg on Monday, November 26, 2012
Problem with this page?

Participants:

Profiles Mentioned:

Related Projects:

Showing 61-90 of 116 posts
3/7/2013 at 7:56 AM

Hatte Anne Blejer: Upon giving it more thought, for privacy reasons alone, I agree with you it would be best to start with the 1900 census.

There are certainly others records we could use to form trees around. However, the census records alone would keep us busy for quite a while.

I also thought that whatever we do, we ought to capture the data first on spread sheets, and then apply the data to Geni.com. These spreadsheets can also be contributed to JewishGen.org and/or local genealogical societies.

Again, my other question:

1. Does anyone know if Ancestry.com, or another source, allows for a street by street search for census data? I am only accustomed to doing a search by surname.

Private User
3/7/2013 at 12:15 PM

Mark - You can browse the censuses street by street on Ancestry.

Just go to a census search page, for example:
http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=7602

and look on the top right, for "Browse this Collection". Very easy to use, if tedious. If you are looking for certain streets, I would recomend the stevemorse.org site with its "one-step" interfaces. For example:

http://stevemorse.org/census/unified.html

Hope that helps.

3/7/2013 at 2:39 PM

Jonathan B Alcantara: Thanks so much!

If we start with the 1900 census, I would suggest the following streets in South Philly. I look forward to any inputs on this.

Overall:

1. North from Lombard Street down to Oregon Avenue in the south. Is Oregon Avenue too far south for 1900? Would Snyder Avenue be more reasonable, or maybe even Washington Avenue?

2. East from 2nd Street to 10th Street in the west.

However, south of Washington Avenue, I would limit our search to be from 2nd Street only to 7th Street.

I have another question: While we are doing all of this work, ought we limit ourselves to Jewish sounding names, or do every name?

Private User
3/10/2013 at 5:52 AM

Mark - I wouldn't necessarily only lean towards "Jewish sounding names". Many families had their names Anglicized when they came through Ellis Island. For example, my family is Jewish. My Mother's side of the family owned the Stone Bakery in Baltimore...their last name was originally Stoenko (Russian/Ukrainian) and was shortened to Stone at Ellis Island. if you were going through the Census documents for 1920 for Baltimore you would miss them even though they were a very prominent Jewish family during that time all the way through to the 1980s when they sold the bakery.

Private User
3/10/2013 at 9:09 AM

My maternal grandmother's family immigrated to Philly in the early 1900's from Lithuania and Germany/Russia. Lots of Block family still there. If you need help, let me know. Perhaps it will help me get info connecting them back to the old country. It's the part of my family tree we know the least about.

3/10/2013 at 10:25 AM

Rebecca Frankel appears in the 1910 census. Age 33. Philadelphia Ward 1, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Born Russia. Immigration year 1907. Married to Leo Frankel. In the 1920 census she was in Ward 32. She appears in the 1930 census, no neighborhood.

Mother's Birthplace: Russia

3/10/2013 at 9:17 PM

@(Lori Robin Stone): I am leaning toward entering all entries from the census, but for another reason. We would be investing so much effort, it would be a shame (I believe) to expend all that energy, and not do every household.

@(Wendy Rachel Newman): I can't do anything until after Passover. After Passover, we'll need lots and lots of folks helping.

A retired US Nat'l Archivist gave a talk at our community center tonite. I asked her "Who owns the data?" - specifically who owns 1900 census data that I would collect from Ancestry.com on non-family members. She gave a much more general answer. She said that ALL data at the US Nat'l Archive is in the public domain. When Ancestry.com digitizes it and sells the use of it, the data is still in the public domain. Once we get any data from Ancestry.com that originated in the Nat'l Archives, we can do anything we want with it. That sounds like a victory for our side!!

4/1/2013 at 7:02 AM

I have another question concerning our extraction of non-relative profiles from the census records (or any non-family records for that matter): How does one go about adding a non-relative to the tree? Does one need special privileges? When I initially uploaded my gedcom file, I know that that file included non-relatives, but I suppose uploading gedcom files is an exception, and I do not think uploading gedcoms is permitted any more.

4/1/2013 at 8:49 AM

Gedcom upload has been disabled, but there is talk of bringing it back in a limited fashion (so as not to create too many duplicate profiles).

I am not sure who has permission to sever a tree, but I am able to add a profile onto the tree, then edit relationships and sever the profile into a separate tree. In that way you can create a profile for someone who is not yet connected to anyone else. But this may only be something that a curator can do. I am not sure anymore.

4/1/2013 at 8:53 AM

Mark Harold Melmed

1) view Your tree
2) add a Fictional brother
3) in profile view Relationship page - Remove your Fictional brother & Save the page

4) find the single profile by either Page back or Search - Rename it - and begin Building the Tree

4/1/2013 at 8:55 AM

Randy, looks like we were typing at the same time :)
I was doing it - prior to becoming a Curator.

4/1/2013 at 9:17 AM

Thanks Peter and Randy!

That works fine for me too, and I am NOT a curator. However, I am a Pro user. I will experiment with my wife's account (she is Not a Pro user), to see if non-Pros can do it as well.

4/1/2013 at 9:28 AM

As a non-curator, non-Pro, my wife was able to create a fictitious brother, but she could NOT break the relationship. I suppose I ought to verify that with Geni.com personnel.

4/1/2013 at 9:41 AM

I think that is correct Mark Harold Melmed. Relationship breaking used to be a Pro only feature and I suspect it still is.

4/1/2013 at 5:32 PM

I put the question to Geni.com, but I suppose we know the answer already.

4/1/2013 at 8:48 PM

Relationship breaking (splitting the tree) is a PRO feature.

Private User
4/2/2013 at 4:11 AM

I am Pro but still get the messages that don't allow me to break the tree.

4/2/2013 at 5:39 AM

I am interested in continuing the discussion of using US census data to grow the Big Tree, and all the issues that entail, but I am afraid it is a bit off topic here. So, I have opened up a separate project, entitled "Adding non-related profiles to Geni.com using US Census-based data to grow our Big Tree".

My thoughts are that we can thoroughly discuss the issues there, come up with a workable formulation, use "The Jewish Quarter of Philadelphia" (as defined by Harry Boonin) as a test case, and then apply the results to other areas.

I invite everyone to this new project as we explore the possibilities.

Mark Harold Melmed,
do you mean a new project or new public discussion? I can't find either. Can you post a link please.

4/2/2013 at 7:41 AM

Private User - I get those too under certain circumstances when I'm merging in Tree View. When it happens, I go into the Profile View and Edit Profile of the person in question and Remove the wrong set of parents from the Relationships Tab.

4/2/2013 at 11:00 AM

I've started a new project which i would love you all to consider joining. We definitely need thoughts from many folks to get things moving.

The project is called: "Adding non-related profiles to Geni.com using US Census-based data to grow our Big Tree Discussions" (sorry it's so wordy!).

The link is: http://www.geni.com/discussions?discussion_type=project-14342

Please let me know if you have trouble finding it.

4/2/2013 at 11:02 AM

I agree with @Hatte Anne Blejer. In fact, the recommended solution from @Peter Rohel is to do precisely that.

Private User
4/2/2013 at 5:29 PM

Thanks!

Mark Harold Melmed,
regarding mass-adding census data to Geni, I was working with the MyHeritage copy of the 1940 census yesterday and this got me thinking - MH already HAS this data as *individual records*, so going from records to profiles, while not trivial, IS doable.

The stated goal of MH is to double the size of the Big-Tree in a year. At a meeting with Curators it WAS suggested using census data for this purpose. If you like I could try and mention this again, when CEO Gilad gives a presentation to the Israeli Genealogy Society, sometime next month. Of course with the 1940 Census privacy of profiles would be an issue (but this issue would also exist if entered manually).

Adding the census would be SO much easier from THEIR side. I would wait a few months.

4/3/2013 at 5:44 AM

@Shmuel-Aharon Kahn: That is an excellent point. My concept was to extract data from the spreadsheets that Ancestry.com produces, not from the raw completed census forms. On the other hand, MyHeritage is going to be producing the exact same thing (spreadsheets or more likely a data base) for the 1940 US census.

If Geni.com used to take gedcom inputs to produce profiles, I am sure they can take spreadsheet or data base outputs to produce profiles - if they are so inclined.

If MH can be persuaded to add these profiles to Geni.com, that would be wonderful. MH and Geni.com folks could (rather easily) go directly from census entries to Geni.com profiles on their own. Our involvement would be to put families together from the census info - no small task.

Of course, privacy and security will be a major issues. Also, resolving duplicates will be an issue once more. I certainly wish that Geni.com had developed a way to handle duplicates in mass, the way Family Tree Maker does it.

PLEASE, bring these issues up at your meeting next month. I will post a note about that at my own project site (Adding non-related profiles to Geni.com using US Census-based data to grow our Big Tree Discussions), and hold off any further activity until we hear of the results.

Please, either you or someone from MH or Geni.com, keep us informed. This could be terrific!

Thanks!

4/5/2013 at 2:38 PM

Private User can you take a look at this path? I am wondering if we should sever this line, which looks a bit suspect to me.

Rivka Teomim
→ Lipke Luria (Frances)
her mother → Mordechai Frances
her father → Yosef Frances
his father → ? Frances
his father → ? Frances
his father → David Frances
his father → Rabbi Moshe Frances
his father → ? Frances
his father → ? Frances
his father → FRANCES -- Frances
his father → Shmuel Frances
his father → Yosef (Lucer) Frances
his father → Moshe Frances Tzarfati
his father

4/5/2013 at 2:40 PM

Private User can you look at the profiles above? Most are managed by you. Is there a source or should we cut them?

Private User
4/5/2013 at 3:03 PM

@Randy Schoenberg

I took a look.

I applaud your recommendation - it should be severed.

Perhaps Rahel Jarach-Sztern can provide argument against severing; lacking a sound argument, I say sever it.

J

4/5/2013 at 3:12 PM

Ok, we'll reconvene after Shabbat to give Rahel a chance to look it over.

Private User
4/5/2013 at 3:43 PM

Shabbat Shalom,

J

Showing 61-90 of 116 posts

Create a free account or login to participate in this discussion