GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1265572710


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] placing your research online
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 14:58:30 -0500
References: <49631.1265565678@connpoint.net><D9CACD8568D24CDD87E21DBE5D83CD34@HP><D512D553-6533-403A-8C3B-78CC0E7BC7C8@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D512D553-6533-403A-8C3B-78CC0E7BC7C8@gmail.com>


I agree. The internet has revolutionized genealogy, and one way it has done so
is to allow correction of old, published errors, though I don't see an end to
them continuing to crop up as long as one last copy of a book remains. But it's
one reason I will take the time to correct errors at WorldConnect via Postems.

As for a "genealogy wiki," there is at least one site calling itself that, but I
found it so useless I've only been there once (YMMV). IMO, the genealogy
message boards and mailing lists serve the function of "collaboration,
discussion, etc." entirely adequately, along with the USGenWeb county web sites
and the myriad of personal web sites. I have a 14,000+ page genealogy web site,
entirely accessible to anyone with an internet connection, so I feel no need to
"post" this information anywhere -- even if someone would accept it!

The important thing is to get the information online and let the search engines
index it. When searching for genealogical information, my first stop is
WorldConnect and my second is Google. Only then do I turn to FamilySearch,
Ancestry, RootsWeb, etc.

Diana
http://dgmweb.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Wilcox Lisa
> Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 2:33 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] placing your research online
>
> In fact, online availability on the web may be the best
> opportunity to correct longstanding errors. Book publication
> has become prohibitively expensive and, as genealogical
> information accumulates at an ever-increasing rate, the
> contents of a book are outdated before it reaches
> the marketplace.
>
> Might a genealogical wiki, designed for collaboration, commentary,
> discussion, source identification and factual correction over
> time, be the way to go?
>
> Lisa
>


This thread: