Talk:England Major Websites

Offer of help
I would like to help with this section. I served a Genealogy Mission 1994-1996 at the Hyde Park Family History Center and actually visited a number of major English Genealogy Sites. I have brosheres and data from many of them. How can I be of the best use for those of you that are working on this project. My email address is arthurwhitt@gmail.com. Arthur

Proposal to rename article
To whom it may concern: FamilySearch: Research Wiki would like to make this comprehensive website page a Featured Article on the wiki. Many users could benefit from its contents which do not just include England, but all of the British Isles and also is useful for research in general. Therefore, I propose the renaming of the article as follows:

"England Major Websites" to "Major Genealogical Websites featuring the British Isles".

With the new name all researchers could assess the information and know of the article's relevance.

One other suggestion: a subheading might be included as part of the FamilySearch.org titled wiki.familysearch.org/en/Main_Page which is a user friendly Wiki Home Page of FamilySearch.

To all of you out there who have an interest in this marvelous page ("England Major Websites") of genealogical websites, please respond with your suggestions as well. Thanks ahead for your advice! Gloriaannclark 22:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Gloria, I would support the article being renamed. The current contents already include sites that cover more than England. I would be interested to hear the thought of the major contributor to the article Daztrue. --Steve 15:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I think the titield should be condenced '''down as much as possible. Perhaps "Major Genealogical Websites of the British Isles"   or  "Genealogical Websites of the British Isles" or  "British Isle Websites of Importance"'''

Many of the links are already on pages on specific topics  October 4 2011

Renaming and sub-headings
On the surface renaming and creating sub-headings may seem a good idea, but there are a number of factors to be taken into account.

First of all, too often various titles/headings (including England Major Websites, which I didn't name) are too vague, thus I don't believe a rename of Major Genealogical Websites would help much on a long-term basis, although I agree that retaining England in the title, rather than something such as UK and Ireland, would be deceiving. Whilst the various areas remain together, however, maybe something as simple as UK &amp; Ireland Major Websites would suffice.

Regarding sub-headings: because the emphasis of the title is aimed at England I'm guessing that thoughts for sub-headings are geographical. This would be at the expense of the existing sub-headings - unless the same were to be set up for each geographical catagory, which is close to what I see as the most practical option (see next paragraph).

Despite England Major Websites being created by administrators relatively early, since then they have created numerous geographical pages (amongst others) with the intention of giving the wiki a uniformed structure. One of those was England Websites, which has only had minimal input (and has since even been proposed for deletion), and I suggested that it be merged with England Major Websites, emphasising that on a long-term basis it would be more practical to have separate pages for Scotland, Wales etc., with prominent links to other UK/Ireland pages. Daztrue 10:32, 23 September 2011 (UTC).

Link websites to pages
I noticed that www.gro.gov.uk, the first link listed has a description of the website. The website is where birth, marriage and death certificates can be bought. There is quite a lenghty page about England Civil Registration. There should be a link to that page. The links bypass the pages in the wiki that discuss the topics in detail. This pertains to all the links found in this article. I imagine that this page was set up many years ago before many other pages were developed. Donjgen 23:45, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

New Family Search Dialogue
I don't have any idea why this is in this article. I will delete this section in the near future  Oct 3 2011