FamilySearch Wiki talk:WikiProject New York

Items to Add to Task List

 * 1) https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/New_York_State_Archives
 * 2) Instructions for finding items in New York State Archives
 * 3) Checking external websites such as local USGenWeb county sites, they be current, not "abandoned" before linking.
 * 4) Change FHL templates to current universal version.
 * 5) Updating and repositioning of Municpalities/Communities template. - assigned
 * 6) Regiment pages, shouldn't there be links to the counties in question? - assigned

Specific Assignments

 * 1) Muncipalities/Communities Template - Dsammy
 * 2) NavBars - Dilts
 * 3) FamilySearch Catalog -
 * 4) FHCs - Sandra Pond - completed
 * 5) Coords - Dsammy
 * 6) Eliminating Websites, Deeplinking -
 * 7) New York State Archives -
 * 8) Newspapers -
 * 9) Nonfunctioning codes - Dsammy, after hours only (10pm-6 am Mountain time)
 * 10) Courthouse pages -
 * 11) Headings updating (to be in line with general county layout) -
 * 12) Military Regiments (Civil War) - Marilyn Markham
 * 13) Military (Other wars) -
 * 14) Inuser template - Dilts,
 * 15) Census Line - Lsgc - completed 22 September 2011

Comments Requested
There are two proposals by some contributors. Your comments are welcome on the talk pages for those two proposals. Dsammy 02:40, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox 3 - total removal of Historical Facts portion including Parent County and Boundary Changes.


 * Historical Facts, parent counties, etc. -- these are ESSENTIAL information for users and should be in their own section, not under "Resources." I can, however, see some confusion for users in having two sections for History. AdkinsWH 15:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Suggestion: change "Historical Facts" heading. Perhaps "Quick Facts" or another heading will avoid the confusion. AdkinsWH 16:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You're in for a surprise, "Quick Facts" are being replaced by "Historical Facts". Nothing is perfect yet. Dsammy 18:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * It'd help me compare apples to apples if there were a link not only to this sandbox/proposal but also a link to a page where the Historical Facts section was done pretty well. Linking only to the sandbox/proposal page leaves no basis for comparison. RitcheyMT 21:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Per your requestAlbany County, New York and Adams County, Illinois

Sandbox 4 - flat page, where all headings are same "H3", irrevelant of subsections.


 * Subheadings help people understand, they give context. A flat page is less helpful.AdkinsWH 15:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I am completely flummoxed by the flat table of contents. It's not all alphabetical, but since there are no subheadings, I'm left completely clueless about what's important, what's not important, and where to find things. RitcheyMT 21:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Size of Images
When putting in images, try to keep the "forced" size to 200px. Infoxbox has automatic resize feature built in. The request is for the images not part of Infobox. The line is. If comment is needed, make it 200x|Lt. Gov. John Broome. Dsammy 17:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * No coprenday, buckaroo. :) Do you mean "The request is for the images to not be part of the Infobox?" RitcheyMT 21:23, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * the movement to remove historical images from inbox was already underway months ago because of problems cropping up involving top part of the page, including TOC. By moving the historicals out of Infox into historical facts section solved to a very considerable degree the problem. That leaves the "adoption" sign problem. (what good are adoptions when the adopters aren't doing anyting to add contents??) Dsammy 21:54, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Consideration for Removal
Two items are recurring, one serves no purpose if nothing happened and other is not enticing. Dsammy 22:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) "Record Loss"
 * 2) New York stub

"Record Loss" does serve a purpose if the word "None" is added. Otherwise it can appear that it was not considered at all. The word "stub" is not clear to new users. It is not enticing.AdkinsWH 15:19, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * One suggestion - moving "Record Loss" to applicable sections. Dsammy 21:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)