Talk:Sandbox 17

Use this page as a place to swap thoughts, suggestions, and chronicle the history of how we arrived at decisions regarding U.S. Census pages.

1) Since this is where we seem to be working on the U.S. census pages, should we delete (unlink?) the U.S. census page that appears on the wiki community pages?

2) The tables are looking better each time. With the table of Online censuses:


 * I suggest making the heading all one color.
 * Note: FamilySearch Record Search does NOT link to free images from Footnote unless you're in the FHL.
 * Since the Census Bureau only has 1790 transcriptions, should that column appear on the table?
 * What might be a better word than "Partial?" "Partial" is also used to indicate an online work-in-progress. "Some?"
 * It's great to have the headings repeated at the bottom of the table!

3) Linking to other pages has certainly cleaned up the census page.

Response: 1) I'm not easily finding the link that needs to be changed. Please describe it more so I can find it. You are welcome to change the link to the more appropriate spot if you like. 2) Tables


 * We are using different colored headings on purpose in order to emphasize the different sections (free, free at some libraries, and pay). Originally the heading color was uniform, but we were asked to use slightly different colors to emphasize sections.
 * I was aware that for Record Search (Pilot) at least 1860 did not have images. Are you saying the census page images for other census years don't work outside the FHL?

Comment: Outside the FHL, the links to census images on Record Search (Pilot) takes you to an ad to subscribe to Footnote, not to the images. I haven't checked for any census images that might have been added in the past six weeks.

Genguide 21:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 1790 still belongs on the chart even if it is just a transcription because it is "online."
 * So far I'm partial to partial. Come up with a better word and we'll change in a heartbeat. "Some" isn't even close to as good as "partial."

Keep those thoughts and suggestions coming. Diltsgd 15:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Genguide 16:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I like the word "Partial." "Some" makes it sound like we left out the records or the site has left out the records. I don't won't to go to the word "missing" or "extant" then we would have to explain too much. It is a partial census, missing records.

Hardestypn 02:51, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment: I haven't been able to think of a better word than "partial."

Genguide 20:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

US Census Team 30 July 2009
Each team member is pasting Sandbox 17 (template) into one or more states, and then modifying them to fit each state. Several seem to be putting these templates in the "[State] Census - Discussion" page until they complete work on it.

Team decision: Move state, territorial, colonial, and other censuses section between the Federal Population Schedules and the Federal Non-Population schedule sections.

Comment: After implementing the above decision I noticed it may be best to combine Federal and State population schedules as much as possible. For example, see "Alabama Census" for now Discussion page but later the regular page.

Diltsgd 15:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Where do we "discuss?"
To enable the community to participate in the U.S. Census wiki project, it'd be nice if there was one place where we direct them to discuss the development. My suggestion is to use the Discussion page on the Community Portal U.S.Census Project. (The Community Portal can be selected from the right-hand menu found on many pages. Under "Projects Seeking Contributors" select the link to "FamilySearch Wiki: Wiki Project U.S. Census." This currently links to a page that's outdated. I suggest that it be linked to Sandbox 17--or that the contents of Sandbox 17 be moved to this page.)

Because David asked, here's a list of the many places a user might choose to comment on the U.S. Census Project:


 * Sandbox (17, 18, or 19)
 * Individual user pages (such as my own, where I began my incomplete census work)
 * U.S. main page
 * U.S. census page
 * State main page
 * State census page
 * U.S. Forum
 * Community Meeting
 * Community Portal
 * "FamilySearch Wiki: Wiki Project U.S. Census"

Genguide 21:00, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

"Hovering" over text
The question has been asked, "Can we have expanded text pop up when we hover over a cell or text?" I'll be playing with it but it seems that the answer is "yes." On the "Help" page we see three buttons. When you hover over these buttons you see just the kind of pop-up text that has been discussed. Perhaps someone on the team that understands more about wikitext can have more (and quicker!) success than myself.

Genguide 16:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

In today's meeting Michael explained that in order to make the "hovering" work, the WYSIWYG editor for that page has to be turned off. This means that no one would be able to edit any page for which we want to use "hovering." It has to do with the image maps that are employed. And I was so hopeful....

Genguide 17:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Scrum Notes July 31, 2009
Attending: Mike, Barry, Charlene, Linda, Pat, Patsy. Absent: David

Scrum Notes 3 August 2009
David - several changes to Sandbox 17 template over the last few days.

Barry - did another patron survey and over 70% like listing 1790 first.

Barry - believes we are advertising Ancestry.com too much with three columns per year, and not promoting our own sites as much. We will take and official vote on this tomorrow.

Scrum Notes 4 August 2009
Voted to switch from three column of Ancestry.com on the front census page to just one column of Ancestry that takes the user to a side page with all three Ancestry option like on the old page. Vote was 4 to 3 until Michael asked to add his vote which tied the vote 4 to 4. David, as team leader then withdrew his vote which made it majority for one Ancestry column. Note: This decision rendered moot by ruling of 6 Aug.

Scrum Notes 6 August 2009
Scheduling reference counters during scrum time. Yvonne Sorenson will schedule the 10:00 am counter shift with two names, for example, Kara/David. Kara would be on the counter for that hour, but David would be responsible to cover her counter during her scrum time.

Ruling: a majority does NOT create a concensus. The benevolent dictator has ruled that from now on the team has to have a concensus (approximately 70% super majority) before changing sets of pages. The purpose of this ruling is to prevent revisiting previous decisions and being trapped in "analysis paralysis."


 * Do NOT change the census page table. Keep the current template as it is with all three Ancestry.com columns.


 * Do NOT change from 1940 first to 1790 first, or vise versa. Avoid changes that involve any work on changing templates or already-completed pages. If it requires anyone to change the form of something it goes against this ruling until a consensus for the change has been agreed on by the team.

'''How to add page. '''We will discuss the details of exactly how to "do" a census page tomorrow.

New York State Page, etc.
The recent changes that have been made to the NY census page have convinced me:


 * 1) That changes can happen faster than I can pinpoint processes to describe. Therefore, I'm putting the whole description activity on hold.
 * 2) That we're not ready to actively involve the wiki community just yet.
 * 3) The necessity of having a holding place for sample state census pages.

My current plan is that I'll create a state page (Nebraska, because earlier I made several changes there) and place it in my user page sandbox (so as not to conflict with the template that's been imported to the Nebraska Census discussion page). When I have it looking the way that I want, it will be a sample of what Charlene proposes a state census page might look like.

Genguide 20:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)