User talk:Lembley

WikiProject Illinois
Hi -- Please see the Talk:Illinois page for a proposed revision. Most of the elements on the current page are still there, just reorganized. I encourage you to see if you could generate some discussion about this proposal. DiltsGD 21:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Lise,
 * Thank you for letting me see your draft ideas.
 * Compressed counties. We know that the vast majority of our Wiki readers are more interested in county pages than in the state pages. So, the county lists have to be somewhere “above the fold” and prominently displayed. But, yes, I love the idea of the compressed list you have shown. It is much more compact. (Expect Dsammy to object strongly.) I’ll modify my draft to include that.
 * Skyline photo. The purpose of the photo is to show something the reader is likely to identify as the epitome of, or typical for the state. And the photo should be appealing. It hopefully draws the reader in, and at the same time confirms for them they are in the right state. For me that was Chicago—but I’m not overly attached to that picture. If we can get another, more typical or more epitome picture that would be wonderful. Perhaps an Abe Lincoln portrait—but that seems a bit out of date to me. I don’t think maps are a good choice. Many people are geographically challenged, and the tiny little space we normally give the photo does not lend itself to maps. A map just doesn’t have the same emotional drawing power as a picture for most people. They cannot be read when they are that small. So if you have any other non-map ideas for a photo I’m good to switch to a different photo. What building, landmark, feature or icon (other than gangsters) makes you think of Illinois?
 * Historical Records Collection I'm not sure I know what that is but it sure sounds like it would be PERFECT for and welcome on the “Unique genealogical features.”


 * State page’s purpose and scope. The primary function of any top state page is to serve as a table of contents to the rest of the Wiki pages for the state. We want it to be warm, inviting, and welcoming. But we must avoid clutter, too much fluff, and words that distract from its purpose. The state page is NOT the page to put information unless it contributes to the goal of attracting readers and getting them onto those other Wiki state/county pages as efficiently as possible. The most prized description of a top state page would be “succinct.” For the purpose of being a table of contents we cram “above the fold” as many links as we dare to that state’s other county and state pages.
 * Flags and maps above the fold are taking up expensive real estate. Are they really attracting enough readers above the fold, or imparting enough useful genealogical information to make them worth their price?—usually not. Move flags and maps to the lower right where they are visible but out of the way. Note: Clickable maps are a table-of-content-like feature and should be above the fold as much as possible.
 * Disambiguation note is called a “hat note” in Wikipedia. In other words, it has a highly formal format, position, and purpose on the page. Burying part of it in a history destroys its value and purpose. A hat note by definition MUST be the very first thing on the page—there is no other option.
 * Scavenger Hunt is a perfect news item. Thank you.
 * History vs. Unique genealogical features above the fold If we use precious real estate, for non-table-of-content purposes, is general history, or general genealogy more likely to appeal to our readers? We historians love our history. But the purpose of the top state page is not to teach history—for that, let the reader go to the history page, or if we have to, let them get their history fix below the fold. Only rarely would a one paragraph history of a state be attractive enough to readers to warrant taking so much prime real estate. But explaining tidbits of what makes genealogy a little different in the state has wider appeal and practical genealogical value—especially if it is linked to pages that expand on the uniqueness cited. And if done right, unique genealogical features do not fit as well on other state or county pages.
 * A Table of Contents on a supposedly succinct table of contents page is not good. It means we are not succinct enough. No other top state page that I know of has a table of contents. If I find one I will take it out. It would be like having an index to an index—it would be an admission of failure to accomplish the purpose of the page.
 * Moderator. Okay, if you like it better at the end of the page, so let it be done.
 * Got a Question, and Online Courses boxes on top state pages are a bad idea in general and these are extraordinarily ugly, but I’ll get in trouble if I explain how I really feel. So, if you like them on the left as part of the topics bar I can live with it. But I figured they were more out of the way and made less trouble on the right. But let’s do this one your way. Thank you for at least making them the same width.
 * Alphabetical listing of Illinois counties We waste time to create a dup page; we waste space to advertise it on the top page when our readers get exactly the same thing already in the county list. Duplicating everything is not being succinct. I get frustrated to have to read the same thing twice.
 * Alphabetical listing of Illinois counties We waste time to create a dup page; we waste space to advertise it on the top page when our readers get exactly the same thing already in the county list.
 * Featured content anywhere on the top page is always of doubtful value. It smacks of USGenWeb or Linkpendium. It turns Wiki into a links repository (bad) instead of an educational encyclopedia (good). If we must endure such a non-table-of-content section on a top page, at least move it to below the actual table-of-contents sections. And give at least one or two lines explaining each link’s value or what the reader should expect if they click the link. That way it becomes a little educational instead of just a links repository. Link titles alone are not enough anywhere in our Wiki. But better still would be to move all the links to appropriate separate state and county pages where they belong, not on the top table-of-contents page.
 * Topics at the bottom won’t work because part of our job is to put first things first and these topics are what our readers should be reading whether they like it or not. So the top left is where the Topics list needs to be. The only things that should be higher priority are what would attract a reader’s attention and get him to linger on the page a little longer.


 * Facebook and Skype fans will want that note somewhere. News seems the most logical to me.
 * Extinct Counties Is that deleted on purpose? It needs to be there, or in the overall county list.


 * (Yeah! You have more guts than I have!) I totally applaud doing away with:


 * the ISGS link under Featured Content—a great outfit, but they are now covered adequately elsewhere
 * Research Tools (which you turned into Featured Content) but belonged scattered on other pages anyway. If you still want to keep them as Featured Content, I would rather keep the expanded version with a line or two explaining what each one is.
 * Did you know? is a dinosaur holdover from the first weeks of Wiki before there was content
 * Help expand the Wiki. Ditto.


 * These sections were not table-of-content-like sections and never belonged on the top page anyway. In other states they were also magnets for poorly conceived “miscellaneous” entries and pseudo-advertisements. They detract significantly from the purpose of the top state page. I would be more than happy to delete them.


 * Please feel free to let me know where you disagree with this assessment. Perhaps you can see a little of the reasoning behind my opinions. I can be taught (it just takes awhile). Please let me know if I’ve misunderstood any of your reasons for doing things a certain way. I’m honestly trying to help, not ride roughshod over other contributors. DiltsGD 01:42, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Lise -- What a great idea we've got rolling. I set up a "home page" for the project: https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/FamilySearch_Wiki:WikiProject_Illinois using Idaho's WikiProject as a shell. Would you like to start tweaking it with the adopter's input to come up with some tasks? I made a link to your County Boxes page too. Murphynw 22:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Would you let me know if you would be able to teach me a little on a Skype with Share Screen?

Thanks! Ancestorseeker 20:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello again! How was your trip home? I hope all is well! Can you please tell me where to access the link to attend Tuesday's meeting? Thank you! Ancestorseeker 22:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I finally got to email to see you had added a note on my Talk page! How was lunch with programmers?Ancestorseeker 19:16, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Lise. I'm Dorothy Horan and I met you during NGS. I work with NaDine, who left you a message below. I wonder if you know my Mom, Kay Cavender. Kay was the FHC director in Frederickburg, I believe, before Mom and Dad moved back here almost 5 years ago.

NaDine mentioned that I should check out your comments. You mentioned that you don't like the style guide where it is. Maybe I'm trying to do too much with it. I'm sort of trying to recruit and encourage folks to use the style guide. There is a second style guide reference at the end of the article, so I could just go with it.

We're also looking at changing the contribute template that appears at the top of the article.Is there anything that you can think of that could encourage folks to contribute? It amazes me that folks are afraid to change the wiki pages. Do you think the style guide actually discourages contributions?

After reading Wilma's paragraph below, I'm wondering if you think that the Illinois State Genealogical Society would be interested in adopting this page to help give it more value?

My contact info is: [mailto:Horandm@familysearch.org Horandm@familysearch.org] I'm at 801-240-6125, or you can just write on my wiki page.

Dorothy Horan

Hill Lise -- I am the coordinator for all the United States FamilySearch Historical Records pages. I would like to have direct contact with you. Here is my contact information: NaDine Timothy

[mailto:timothynb@ldschurch.org timothynb@ldschurch.org]

office -- (801) 240-4487

cell -- (801) 347-3783

Thanks for adding information to the Illinois Cook County Vital Records (FamilySearch Historical Records) page. The page has been split into three pages. I tried to preserve all your comments from the original page.

Thanks. NaDine

Hi, Lise! I have recently joined the Community Services team and very much need to talk with you directly. My new assignment is with moderators and a very recent addition of "page adopters," which consists of societies and groups. You are the moderator for Illinois and the Illinois State Genealogical Society has "adopted" Illinois. So, you and I need to talk so a conversation can be started across the board to understand the differences, similarities, and overlap in the roles of moderators and page adopters and to promote encouragement and collaboration. This "page adopters" came from the recent FGS conference in Knoxville. My number is 801-240-4530, cell 801-641-1080. Thanks, Wilma AdkinsWH 16:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Mrs. Lembly, for the encouraging words about the Orange, California FHC and Periodicals pages. We have had a website for a few years, but the powers-that-be want them eliminated in favor of the wiki pages. So, we are trying to learn wiki-speak. :-)

At the Directors meeting earlier this year, we were told to try to use Riverton's site as a template, which I did not find helpfull at all. At this time I am waiting for approval of an image (our logo) to put on the site. After I'm done, I hope ours will be a better "template", than Riverton's. But, I'm still on a pretty steep learning curve.Jimmyk418 17:25, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Sister Embley, thanks for catching my "Wikipedia" versus "FamilySearch Wiki" mistakes earlier today--I'll fix the boilerplate I'm using to avoid this problem in future gehringjg; 21 Apr 2010

Thanks, Sister Embley, for continually contributing to the Virginia portion of the Wiki. As the moderator for this section, I hope that you will continue your efforts. Wouldn't it be great if the Wiki could become the most comprehensive starting point for researchers?Gregorybean 04:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Lise
I miss you guys, but I'm serving a mission in FamilySearch support, working in new FamilySearch &amp; Product Support. I was asked to be an MLA (Mission Lead Assistant) within a few weeks of coming out of training and that gave me several more meetings to attend during the week &amp; one of them is right at the same time as the wiki group. I do get opportunity serving this mission to tell folks about the wiki and when appropriate to let patrons know about it as well, so that's a plus. I ought to review the meetings so I know what you folks are up to these days, but am not that organized yet. Retirement is good and I'm really enjoying the mission as well, although I'm not doing all the things I intended to do, at least portions of my day are spent in serving. The cats seem to enjoy me being at home too. Thanks for the shout-out and I'll try and keep in touch better. Laralee 04:03, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Maryland
That's terrific. Those online church records at the website of the Maryland State Archives were one of my biggest finds when I visited Annapolis. I'm very glad to hear they have been helpful to someone.

With regards to Catholic (arch)dioceses, one of our staff User:BingamanTD has identified which Catholic diocese every county in the United States belonged to under the "Church Records" section for each state. As far as I know, he didn't try to connect each county with their archdiocese though. It might be useful to state Richmond's records are in Baltimore on the Richmond, Virginia page under the "Church" section. You're right, I probably wouldn't have gone to Baltimore to search for these. All the best! Murphynw 18:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Virginia
Thanks Lise. It looks great! Murphynw 23:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello! =)
We noticed you recently edited one of our articles and we wanted to send out a quick thank you for contributing to a FamilySearch Historical Records' article. You may not know it, but this is a new project that is just getting off the ground and your contribution helps! The information you provide is invaluable to those users who are searching out further information about collections in FamilySearch; it helps them make a deeper connection with their research, especially when it has to do with their own ancestry. It’s your contributions that are keeping the project rolling forward. Thank you. We'd love to have you become part of our community here. We've got lots of ways to get involved a little deeper into the project and what the project entails: https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/FamilySearch_Wiki:WikiProject_FamilySearch_Records. In this page you will find information about the FamilySearch Records project, getting started in wiki editing, tasks for which you can sign up to volunteer, etc. We are excited you have decided to share your talents, time and resources towards forwarding the goals of FamilySearch.org and those who use it (including you!).

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us. We’d love to hear from you and help you out in any way we can.

Sincerely,

The FamilySearch Records Team User:HoranDM User:LakeCL User:ginabegin

Login glitch mentioned in 19 April Tech Meeting
Just tried to replicate the problem you reported in logging into the wiki, after logging into the Indexing program. No problems on my side, even was able to go into consultant.familysearch.org and see those things I'm able to see. You should be able to see what you needed there if your calling is up to date both in MLS and on that page under preferences. JamesAnderson

FHC articles
Lise,

I focus is the SLC FHC designations - FHC (IE Ward FHC), Stake FHC, Multi-stake FHC &amp; Large Multi-stake along with the branch variations declared in April 2010 when SLC sent out new certificates at least to the Large Multi-stake and Multi-stake facilities renaming them as such. Coming up with new designations not approved by the LDS Church for obfuscation is dishonest in many ways. Providng the general description based on the type of of FHC is the more appropiate way for both member and non-member.

I do not wish to have any more input other than the warnings and reasons given here and on the Talk:Family History Centers page. Anyone can make changes ... Whether or not they are appropiate is another manner. I would much rather see an official statement from SLC regarding the types of FHCs rather than labeling them generally as film or non-film facilities.

PS Library class - a designation of a facility approved by city, county or state meeting the minimal requirements of a library. This makes them eligibile for library discounts on books and other material. For example in California, only 3 FHCs are listed under the approved state library category. Oakland, Los Angeles &amp; San Diego - all now designated as "Large Multi-stake Family History Centers" by the LDS Church. None of the hundreds of other FHCs in the state have earned this distinction.

I really hope this helps.

JRC Jrcrin001 19:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Jrcrin001 19:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Change in welcoming 

Lise,

Much thanks to you, for spending time in the Wiki with Illinois and all you and Thomas are doing with the project that is helping the Wiki to grow.

Because of that I am not even sure you are doing anything with the welcoming you only have so much time.

But because you are a member of the committee I wanted you to be aware of some changes coming in June:

 We will have another Welcome Message Template designed to be more individualized. The others will be there too but we hope that you will use this new welcome message. Steve Cottrell will be helping us with the Template, a special thanks to him. Please read more carefully what the contributor or editor have put on the page. The current steps listed for reviewing the contributions are good to follow. Avoid adding the welcome message before following the steps outlined. The question Templates will stay the same.

We thank you again for all you do. Dawne 15:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)