South Africa - Profile Guidelines

Thank you June - will work through the information there - I think guidelines are important - special for us that is still newbies and trying to work with, not against :-)

Awesomeness

So wish I had had something like this to refer to when I started on Geni - I better go and do some editing of some profiles :)

Thank you June, and I see Donovan advertised it on our FaceBook page too.

Great gif too!

June and all - wonderful document. In fact most of it applies to the American tree as well! The big distinction is that with the exceptions of the New Amsterdam etc colonies, it's been English Common Law since 1620.

Thank you Erica Howton. Can you tell us more about the 1620 date - what happened before that?

June - how do we deal with people that was married to more than one person ... I started to use the "display as" to show it the way I did with mine (only woman though as the men's surnames stays the same no matter how many times they married, usually). Obviously that is now outside the guidelines ...

For me personally - it makes it easier to find the person, profile or tree view. I am fairly new still - though my searches started 10 years ago, it is only the last two years that I am truly active time wise. So not just new to GENi, but to Genealogy too and I am learning a lot though, still a lot of learning to do :-)

Hi Willa

What we have been doing is to use the maiden/birth name in both surname fields, then adding the surnames of all the husbands in the AKA field. This means on tree view she will be displayed under her maiden name.

If you do want her married name displayed (if that is what you use in your preferences) you would need to decide which to use in that field - but you will need to collaborate with others if there are other managers! Does that help?

In 1620 the Mayflower landed in Cape Cod Massachusetts establishing the second British colony in the "New World" - Plymouth Colony, later the Dominion of New England. The first colony was a Jamestown, Virginia, later abandoned.

There was also New Netherlands, New Sweden, New Spain, and New France - so for the length of those colonies they of course followed the naming laws & conventions of their parent countries. But all eventually became British and / or American (I'm glossing ... :))

June - before 1620 there were indigenous persons in the New World who had their own languages and naming conventions. Far too many different groups to make any "rules.". We do have some projects and guidelines established though - see the Geni Wiki.

Yes, thank you - I love the idea of woman been listed under maiden names - cause that is the tree we belong too :-)

I do utilize the name holders as said in guidelines - it is only the "display as" that I do a bit differently ;-) but I think I will try and add the info to the aka field and leave the display to automatically add's the names - think that is what most people do?

Going back to Willa Potgieter x Huang xx Truter's point on multiplymarried women who assumed many surnames- sorry for the interruption:

With more than one husband, I've been experimenting with putting the married surnames (if a woman used them) in chronological order in the Last Name field.

It's an idea and I'm just trying it. until the hoped for multiple surname field option that has been suggested by June & others gains favour with Geni programmers :-)

The other alternative is to take the Last Name designator literally and put the surname she died with into the Last Name/ Surname field, and the Surnames she was born with in the Birth / Maiden Name field; while putting all the inbetween surnames into the aka field.

Thoughts?

Erica Howton and Private User [has anyone else noticed the @ html isn't working in Discussions?], on the point of pre colonial, indigenous population's naming patterns in the new world:

Interestingly enough I've been struggling to come to a usable way of inputting the names of the indigenous population in Southern Africa - which also goes back to before the 1600s.
There is a relatively complicated usage of patronymics as well as clan designators, in a polyganous society – where the status of the mother’s house is a very important designator of inheritance patterns.

Sharon, that is why in the display name I use the x in front of the surname ... without x is maiden name like for me I was born Potgieter married to Jeff, sadly divorced then happily married to Andre
Willa Potgieter x Huang xx Truter

It just seems that if all the surnames is placed in the Last name place holder we create new surnames ... I've tried that and on the tree view it created a mess ...
that is why I utilized the "display as" to show the multiple surnames and not a name place holder

I do hope the programmers will add place names for multiple partners/marriages as that will truly be the solution.

Thanks all!

That's interesting and thinking out of the box too, Willa: Always a plus in my book.
I hadn't thought of 'Last name place holder we create new surnames ... I've tried that and on the tree view it created a mess ... " - you could be quite right about that.
What does the option of using Willa Truter (Potgieter) with Huang in the aka field sound like to you?

Frankly I find multiply married women & surname changing immigrantd (i have a lot if those) easy.

The "last name" is the name at death according to records.
The "birth surname" is of course the maiden name or original surname.

Any other names during a lifetime in the AKA field.

Findagrave is one of the biggest sources in US & this works great for the match.

If you put both surnames in the last name field do you get tree matches? I don't.

Erica you're correct - it would mess with tree matches.

Private User what do you think?
The "last name" is the name at death according to records.
The "birth surname" is of course the maiden name or original surname.

Any other names during a lifetime in the AKA field.

Heres an example I put in AKA for a 4 times married late medieval English lady (I do not know her "legal" surname so am leaving it as maiden name in both fields - that's probably right for her position, time & location)

Christian (Pawlett) Hull Chichester Martyn Chudleigh

Christian Chudleigh

And as you can see that way I also get an alternate spelling on her maiden name in there ...

What do you think?

I totally agree with -
The "last name" is the name at death according to records.
The "birth surname" is of course the maiden name or original surname.

The only comment I have on that profile Erica Howton is that the I would have a comma between the AKA names.

Something that I have been pondering over for some time - dealing with my very common surnames names (Smith, Jones, Bennett etc.) to differentiate between them and other John Smiths etc. I started adding the mother's maiden name in the middle name field using [...] which seems to work well but as yet these names don't affect many other people/managers. Any thoughts?

The "last name" is the name at death according to records.
The "birth surname" is of course the maiden name or original surname.

Will not work with/cannot be applied to the pre 1800 compromise on the SA tree though.

If you have the time write out each of the names she held that would be best but frankly I do not, and the comma separates the names into blocks, and would not be accurate for some of the widows.

For example, if Christian lived in 1600s Massachusetts, I might see the records like this

Christian, daughter of Paulet
Christian Chichester, relict of Henry Hull

....

The AKA field is not very robust. So I make it as succinct as possible.

No, I never use middle name for anything but the middle name or a medieval byname. Display name if you need disambigution.

June there's a naming fashion in America (1700-1950) to use the mothers maiden name as a middle name. Massive confusion with our similar Smith & Jones, don't you think?

June said =The "last name" is the name at death according to records.
The "birth surname" is of course the maiden name or original surname.
Will not work with/cannot be applied to the pre 1800 compromise on the SA tree though.=

I think it can: the logic still applies. If the legal surname remains the birth surname until her death, then it is also her last name.
(PSDoesn't Geni have an autopopulate facility that kicks in in this case, Erica?)

Not sure I understand Erica? If John Smith is listed as John Smith there will be many matches. Having him as John [Bennett] Smith (the brackets emphasising that it is not a given name) makes who he is clearer. Maybe we need a mother's birth surname field!!!

So do you think the solution is to have him as John Smith and use the display name "John [Bennett] Smith" or John Smith, mother Bennett to clarify?

June - it's not his name, it's invented. :)

And it actually causes MORE confusion because his son or daughter may very well have taken on their mother's maiden name as an actual middle name - it's a naming pattern.

You really can't go wrong with what a name really was, you know. :):)

I use curator notes as need be if it's that confusing.

"son of John Smith (d 1612) & Joan Bennett. Married 1) Mary ?? 2) Mary Sommers, widow of Henry Hull

There is a tree preference that derives last names from parents / spouses. To turn it off select "do not guess last names.". I believe this only affects the add family dialog in tree view.

I think you are dead right Erica - just reviewing some of those it seems that the search/match may have improve since I implemented that so will revert!