Shou;d reaad Canonicus ( the father) --- Posh PU ( the mother
Judith A Loubris
last name: Canonious
Judith "Judi" Elaine (McKee) Burns = original profile added by Judith A Loubris
firts name Chief
last name Canonious
Posh PU ( the mother) - your profiles you entered has
under conflicts - no one has wnet in and settled them first name is Iyanough , Chief Sachem & Iyanough Iyanough
as well as varied middle names and surnnames and birth names
first daughter of Canonicus, indian, Princess canonicus, Princess canonicus, Posh-Pw
as well as varied middle names and surnnames and birth names
this one is masterd and seems to have been decided upon - Mary No Pee ---John Yanno Hyanno, Cummaquis Hyanno
this one is masterd and seems to have been decided upon - mary Little Dove-- August/Augustine Bearse
you need to go to the tab Actions in upper right had corner click on it go down the 4th item which is to resolve conflicts click on it and check there and click on the correct variables under each category - it looks like that some may have more than the 4 visible and you will have to do it a second or third time -
from what I see no one has tried to do this - I have not done anything to these profiles since that are profiles you entered and I am just joint custodian/babysitter for them with you
You need to check the conflict revision tab and correct items that you can and then if its not solved...
It was supose to be PU .I just hit the wrong letter. i notice you have done the same on occassion .We are all human. I listed the order in which all my reference had the family.
Canonicia/Canochet is the same name spelled diferently. He had no last nasmes. Indians back then only had one namcolonist's e.They had the name they were born with and later changed it to a name they picked after a vision.Often the spelling is English spelling and that's how they are recorded.
I don't need to go anywhere to check this out. Look at the tree , notive they made Canonicus 's daughter both his daughter and wife. Then they made Iyanough also a husband , which he was. Go back futher and you will find the husband and wife have been switched.No GTook seit is a woman not a man .
That was supose to be back then they only had one name. Wow, I need spell check on this one. I missed that totally. Anyway, go to the tree via Mary Little Dove and back tract and you will see what is the problem . I
supose I could go in and reverse all the names but then all the info would be under the wrong people. I figured one of the managers and mergers,it was recently merged again, could go in and reverse profiles, so they are in correct order.
I added this profile on Geni, it never had no connection, nor existed before this from what I saw back then when it was added. As of now it still shows as my Gr. Grandmother. In one of several Bearse lines I have that go back to her. I have only 1 Geni Account . Sometimes multiple Geni accounts make for bad merge issues.
Elwin , it's kinda of a mess right now. When I orginally added everything it was just me and the Judi McKees was added by me and rtook them over for me while I was gone for awhile. Anyway So then there was just the ywo of us but along the way other people who have also been adding this line to their profiles began merging. i am connected to the line. Ya I only have one account also.
Most of the so called "new profiles" I have seen were probably added as private trees and have been abandoned by the creators and has just been released by GENI and they have been merged in remember sometime after the "Big" crash of aug 201? GENI started allowing people to create "Private" trees up past the 3-4 generation they deemed private and it created a lot of havoc for all, and is still as the abandoned accounts are slowly being released - remember a lot have become disillusioned with GENI and have left. To me it it is still the best online program - outside of the new familysearch.org set-up.
Yes we all do make mistakes - but what I was pointing out you were the only one holding the Posh-Pu profile and that I seen now other account/ person who had been merged into that line/branch from her
I was working through all the profiles you listed noting the "added by & date added"; checking the merges & when they occur, the revisions made and then the actions - resolve conflicts - since they involved you profiles mainly - I did not want to change anything without knowing first I am only on them because you wanted me to have them during your hiatus from GENI and to protect your work which I was willing to do.
AS GENI states "We all are related' and we all must be willing to make concession as for Indian having last names I agree they did not but it how it was add in the profile for Posh-Pu it was in both profiles as
First name Posh-
Last name PW
Until I done the resolve conflicts and placed Posh-PU into the first name field.
Working through the revisions tabs seeing when and where the profiles were merged and what the original values was when and where (and it does show all changes made) , and the resolve conflicts which shows all the values & variables which ranged from 1 to 4 in this branch all has to be brought down to "one general" consensus until this is done a profile and line will generally be "messey'
No the spelling is how it's pronouced not a last name . Often broken down that way so we can pronouse them. My last name at birth is LOUBRIS . no one promouces it correctly Broken down it would be Lou Bree but of cousrse this is not how it is spelled . The s is silent like in Illinois. Pu is not a last name.
I agree with Judith Loubris' description on the best way to represent native American profiles. They did not have surnames unless baptized (perhaps) or married women to Colonists (definitely).
Also titles such as Sachem do not belong in the first name field, they should be in the display name field.
And there is no such thing as an Indian princess. The whole concept of "prince" / "princess" / king / emperor etc is European. Should be in nickname / AKA field or in the display name in "quotes"