Turning V.I.P. profiles into projects

Make your profiles detailed and beautiful.
Add photos/drawing/pictures.
Add documents.
List sources.
Provide links to other web pages and online books for further reading.
Start Discussions from the Profile to engage other managers or just to record your own musings as you work on the profile.

All of these things will make the profiles we have richer and more valuable.

Brendan, if someone wants to create a project about how Charlemagne is their idol and an all around swell guy, they're more than welcome. What we're talking about his the systematic creation of designated projects for each notable profile, which is what I object to.

I should say, I do write detailed biographies for my non-noteworthy relatives, since they'll never have Wikipedia profiles themselves, ex. Mary Titus.

Brendan Swemmer

To my opinion GENI should NOT become a duplicate of WIKI-Pedia, that is a duplication of investments and -not that UN-important-- in WikiPedia there is some sort of supervision about the quality of what is written and/or illustrated. In Geni that is not possible, so what determines the quality of project-pages? Yes, only the quality of the initiator and her/his 'redaction-team'. That makes it also a weaknes of Geni. so please let every platform expire what they are best in...

Thanx for your support, Brendan Swemmer! I am glad you welcome this VIP project idea.

Hi Justin Durand, let me try to explain the different approach of having a discussion here on Geni.

The way it is now, a discussion can be instigated by anyone, but noone actually hosting it right through the end, like I am doing is this discussion.

The same with creating projects you are not really project man

Thanx for your support, Brendan Swemmer! I am glad you welcome this VIP project idea.

Hi Justin Durand, let me try to explain the different approach of having a discussion here on Geni.

The way it is now, a discussion can be instigated by anyone, but noone actually hosting it right through the end, like I am doing is this discussion.

The same with creating projects, the makers are not really project managing it, I am.

In other words, it is the approach to the same existing tools. My sort of discussion I want to promote is the more forum like, chat type style. More social media like, than discussing or even debating.

Hope that this explains it a bit better for you. You allready made clear that those kind of discussions you are not interested in. Totally fine with that :)

Ok that is cool. I think I got the first 10 projects I need to get started.

As Private User points out: Projects get fewer (more specialist interest) - not more - people working on them than Profiles - hence my use of Projects as safer Template depositories for HIGH TRAFFIC Profiles.

Alex Moes 1) I would be editing Chuckie’s About weekly and sometimes daily, if we didn’t control the additional About info tacked on after every merge. 2) You cannot format in a Discussion. The function of a Discussion is completely different to that of a Project, so I do not think they are inerchangeable .

Dimitri Gazan,
On the subject of Plazas duplicating already existing Portals: I agree with the others about not duplicating project areas already filled. It's not collaborative to do so, and it effectively divides the viewership drawn in by google & Geni searches.

That’s why Geni asks you to search for other projects on your topic before you create a duplicate. Plaza or Portal – if they’re on the same topic you should not create a duplicate, but rather ask to collaborate on the pre-existing project and work with that team on the text.

I’ve seen your project text, and you bring a fresh, new editing eye to the appearance and public appeal – so, if you can work in a team, you would be a fantastic asset to the big Portal Projects. As long as you don’t erase everyone else’s work, most project groups will welcome your skills with open arms.

On the subject of duplicating Profiles with Individual Projects, I still don’t see how attaching Individual People Projects rather than Profiles to your overarching project will work better. Projects are designed to have Profiles attached to them, not other Projects.
The functionality of associating similar relevant projects to other projects is different, because the practical intention behind doing that is different.

When you hypertext a Profile name in a Discussion – eg Oscar Pistorius - all the collaborators on all the different projects that Profile is connected to are called to that Discussion (In Oscar’s case: Olympic Movement ‧ Participants‧Sports‧Hosts ‧ since 1850; Trial of Oscar Pistorius for the murder of Reeva Steenkamp; Profiles of the Day; Cover of Time magazine; London ‪2012 Paralympic Games‬ - Events and Results: Athletics (MEN) etc etc)

When you hyper text a Project in a Discussion– besides the fact that the Name doesn’t automatically substitute itself for the URL eg http://www.geni.com/projects/Trial-of-Oscar-Pistorius-for-the-murde... - all the different managers of all the Profiles connected to it are NOT called to the Discussion AS FAR AS I KNOW. Mike Stangel?

So, in the case of the Oscar Pistorious Trial Project - unless the managers of Reeva Steenkamp – Victim; Gerrie Nel – Prosecution; Barry Roux – Defence; Thokozile-Masipa – Judge, are also collaborators on the project – they will not be called to the discussion.

Closer to what you are intending I suppose, is the effect of hypertexting a project like Famous South Africans:
http://www.geni.com/projects/Famous-South-Africans/3516 in a Discussion.
This has hundreds of Profiles attached to it. Would the Discussion effect be improved if those Profiles were, instead, hundreds of Projects attached to it? That is a genuine question; not one I have an answer to – but somehow, I suspect, that isn’t what Geni is intending.

As far as I know, the host of a Discussion is always, effectively, the person who initiated it and anyone connected to the Profile or Project can do that. Projects are supposed to be collaborative - there is not supposed to be one Project Man who is the only one who initiates or hosts discussions.

The tone of the Discussion depends on how the participants use it, and isn't really affected by whether the Discussion is initiated on a Project or on a Profile. Group discussions from big Project Portals occur already, and are often chatty. There isn't, to my mind, any reason they should be more chatty if they’re a collection of Projects, rather than a collection of Profiles.

From what I'm understanding, Dimitri - it's not so much Wikipedia you want to emulate here, but a FaceBook type forum. The South Africans eventually just added a FB page https://www.facebook.com/groups/243811932355680/?ref=bookmarks , and directed people to it from their SA Portal Page: http://www.geni.com/projects/South-Africans-Geni-Landing-Site-WELKO....

http://www.geni.com/projects/Care%E2%80%A7μiνα-◦-Carmen%E2%80%A7lit...

As I am a non-PRO-user I can not entry the profile of this beloved person, so my way of telling others I am very impressed by her life was to copy a little paper I found somewhere in a book I bought of an antiquarian...

Yes, I suppose that does demonstrate quite clearly what Dimitri is talking about, Jeannette.
Your project duplicates a profile on Geni that was already there before you created it: Saint Edith Stein

If you're saying that the reason is because you're a nonPRO user, I have to think about that a bit more.
Can you not, then, request to be added as a manager on the profile? If not, I take it that that is because you are at the non-paying limit for numbers of profiles you can manage.
Does this deliberately subvert Geni's intentions by creating a project for her instead then? ..Maybe.

Geni is trying to create one world tree, and merge in all duplicate Profiles. If we start creating duplicate Projects for all profiles we can't Manage, will this overload the Geni system?... I don't know the answer to that.

Sorry Sharon Doubell, you did not read my contribution well enough, for I did NOT duplicate the profile, the profile was there and thanks to Malka Mysels that I could make this project dedicated to a person I admire in some way.

I think you may not be reading me well enough. =Your project duplicates a profile on Geni that was already there=

how can a project duplicate a profile? two totally different aspects of working on the big tree, I think.

and why would I deliberately subvert Geni's intentions while I created over 150.000 profiles in less than five years of contribution? I seems clear to me that curatores sitting on their nice chairs long enough, do not have the faitnests idea of the circumstances users work here with limited budgets.

Jeannette, I'm going to presume that your insulting response has to do with a misreading of the purpose of the discussion, and leave it at that.

We're trying to think through whether the creation of projects for single profiles is something that would benefit Geni. You provided an example. I replied with queries.

Sharon Doubell, thank you so much for your contribution here. very useful for bystanders as well, to read how Geni works with projects, portals and profiles.

If Geni were a bible we could preach from, still it is open for all interpretations possible, hence so many different kinds of believe with only one and the same book to back it up.

Now I am surely not saying here, that you are preaching or lecturing whatsoever, but simply are sharing your point of view in the midst of millions of users here on Geni. One can not expect to dictate nor point out to any rules whatsoever here on Geni.

If you refer to what the intentions are, here on Geni, you can not expect, in this open source based internet society of today, that everybody just simply would be following these rules.

We can refer to guidelines. Not laws.

We clearly do not share our point of view, that I am possibly copying portals here. I am just not.

The more actually I am listning, I more I sence the fear, that these Plaza's are possibly stealing away the attention with it's success, that the current portals should generate in stead.

I simply think that this is not the case at all.

These Plaza's are in fact, pre-portals for the actual existing portals, which just should support the increase of attention and interest for these portals.

With the style and the looks of the Plaza projects, I think I can generate a more broad audience.

As you know by the now, the style I work in, the way I collaborate, you simply can not accuse me for not being a collaborator here. I may not work in the way you are used to work in, I am just a different person with a different perspective.

I truly applaud the way you always have worked and continue on doing so. So am I :)
I am just a new kid on the block who likes to play as well. if not with you this time, some other time, maybe we will :)

Dimitri, nobody is accusing you of not being a collaborator; and you may not realise it, but most of the people here are the ones who give poor Mike Stangel a hard time querying Geni every step of the way. (We think that's why it's such a good product).

We are not telling you the 'rules' (programme functionality is a fact, not a rule) or objecting to Plazas or the creation of single profile projects because they are something new: We are talking through the logic of your proposals.

So far, I haven't given my opinion at all. I've just asked you questions about what you're envisaging and how you see it as working - (most of which are not answered yet.) As you messaged me to come to the Discussion, I thought that's what you wanted me to do.

Sharon Doubell, I think you are mentioning a very interesting 'fact' here.

Program functionality is a fact, not a rule.

Let me rephrase that statement with a counter statement.

Program functionality is just a tool.

Just a tool to comprehend what you can do with it. For example, if you give me a blank canvas to stare at, and hand me a pencil and paint,
who then says I actually have to dip the pencil into the paint at smear at all over the canvas?

Take Jackson Pollock for instance. He will proof you wrong :)

What you can create with the help of these tools is the fact.

Why do I say that, because I use the same tools as you do, for different means, to achieve, to even improve hopefully the same goal we share.

Goal is how to get more people involved in collaborating. Working together on the Big World tree in every way possible. Be a global community / family here on Geni.

Dimitri Gazan, in all your responses, you keep skirting the concerns that people are bringing up, like why create profile projects when you can do that same with profile about pages and discussions, if not better, and the problems project duplication causes. All you have been responding with is, and I'm paraphrasing, you do things your way, and I'll do them mine. That's not very collaborative of you.

This is showing up as a followed discussion for me even though I don't have a connection to it...but I guess I'm glad that I found it because it's an interesting one?

One of the things that's been an issue for years, and something that users have tried to address through coordinated efforts in the past (Randy Stebbing's clean-up initiative comes to mind), is the fact that users already feel overwhelmed by the number of projects and how many hits they have to sift through in search results. I am wondering how adding projects for individual profiles could possibly help that. I don't think it could; to be honest, I think it will make the glut of projects harder to manage.

To me, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to create projects for hosting discussions when we already have the Discussions tab. Historically, when someone has wanted to get into a deeper discussion about a figure, we've simply made a thread on them. It automatically connects to the profile and has a clean navigation, plus it nicely and appropriately utilizes the existing infrastructure. Why is a new method needed? I'm not seeing the justification, especially since now you'll have conversations going on both through those threads and a separate project.

I'm also not sure that I like the idea of (self-)appointed conversation facilitators. That tends to create a tiered system of engagement, can be intimidating, and gives too much influence to one person (who may not even be a great fit for a task like that). So that isn't a plus in my mind, even though I keep seeing it cited as one.

Ultimately, the stance of Geni is that people can have pretty much whatever projects they'd like, so it's not as if this is something I'm going to fight against. If people find this model helpful somehow, good for them; make and use the projects you want. But if we're going to encourage the proliferation of these projects, I think that it's only fair, in the spirit of community and collaboration, to consider the existing challenges users have with the projects area and ask if this is the best response to that.

Private User,
why is not sharing your point of view, not very collaborative? Who says we have to work together, if we can work side by side.

Am I not collaborative in general, just because I collaborate with others instead of you? Is that really what you are trying to say here?

Collaborating involves coming up with solutions so people can work together toward a common goal. What you're doing is not collaborative because you're choosing to do whatever you wish, regardless of the concerns and suggestions of others.

Collaborative would be doing what Sharon suggested, and bringing your portal idea to existing portals and working with them to incorporate elements of your ideas, instead of going off and creating your own.

Private User
I do come up with solutions so people can work together, not with the solutions you might prefer, or Sharon's, so it seems.

Now do you hear me complaining, you are not seeing the things the way I do? I totally respect your vision on how the things work according to you or Sharon's for that matter.

My vision goes against that, according to you. I do not agree. It is as simple as that.

I think we can perfectly coexist and work in each others advantage here. Perhaps we can learn a few tricks from each other as well hopefully. Even better!!! :)

Ashley's thoughts are very similar to mine. I'm one of the people who experience "project overload". In many ways that's the predictable outcome of being a good Geni citizen and adding my ancestors in all the appropriate projects. I end up Following more project discussions than I really have time for, so I have to take the time to pay attention and Unfollow the ones I don't think are going anywhere interesting.

I looked at Jeanette's beautiful projects. That helped me understand a Fan Project can be different from a profile.

But, the thing that stands out for me is that they don't have any discussions. If they did, I'm not seeing why it would be an advantage to have a project discussion rather than a profile discussion.

I'm not saying I've made up my mind about turning profiles into projects. I'm very happy to see people looking for new ways to use Geni tools, and I'm inclined to let the marketplace of ideas drive the outcome, but I"m still not seeing the advantage here.

I dont want to be a smart ash here or claim that I have read half of the discussions you guys refere to here!
There is insanely many projects around.
But I think given a platform like that here is sugested by Dimitri can give an egde to it.
There are for instance a ton of projects that has the topic of something in the Medieval time. If this platform can be made to work, it can gather up the projects that has to do with Medieval time and at the same time connect with people that either has some specific espertice on a specific area or just connect with people with the same interest.

Today I fell that a lot of the projects is a bit scattered and fragmented and there is no way of knowing who do what!
That way I dont think creating new projects about someone specific,makes it more confused. It just might make it possible to scroll through a menu of all related topics for a specific time period.

I might have missed something on the bigger picture, but thats my thoughts on it.

Anette, I completely agree that portal projects are a good idea. Heck, I created the portal project for portals! ;-) What I'm not for is creating portal projects where a portal project already exists. I don't see the advantage in that.