Difference between revisions of "Talk:Portal:Genealogy"

From Gramps
Jump to: navigation, search
(Proposed move: added new criteria to table "Redistributable with documentation?")
m (Proposed move)
Line 31: Line 31:
| [http://www.genealogywiki.org/ GenealogyWiki.org]
| [http://www.genealogywiki.org/ GenealogyWiki.org]
| Unknown licenses
| A Creative Commons license, but the license link is dead. I've written to him.
| {{?}}
| {{?}}
| {{?}}
| {{?}}

Revision as of 05:49, 16 October 2008

Proposed move

I've been working a bit recently on the gramps wiki in this section (portal) about genealogy. Then I thought "why do we have our own gramps section about genealogy instead of contributing to a common resource.?"

So I found these wikis which are not associated with any specific software, which I think is good. What do you think about these? And please add more options for adding content. --DuncanNZ 14:51, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

Website License Positive points Negative points Redistributable with documentation?
Familypedia, the Genealogy wiki GFDL + ? ?
WeRelate.org GFDL ? ? ?
FamilySearch Wiki-Beta Test BY-NC-SA ? ? ?
GenealogyWiki.org A Creative Commons license, but the license link is dead. I've written to him. ? ? ?
GeneaWiki BY-NC-SA + in french, very active - only in french ?

  • What about translations ?
  • What about internal links ?
ex : Events in Gramps or GRAMPS' Glossary


The pages you linked there are GRAMPS specific. I don't think they should move, just the generic pages, or pages which with some rewording can be generic. --DuncanNZ 07:47, 26 July 2008 (EDT)


Uncertain if this is where to post my question, but - would someone advise me on how to include a page within a GRAMPS book that contains the Gallery items? Alos, how to include gallery items in a report?

I have not been able to find this in the documentation.


Please join the [gramps-users] email list and ask there. That's the best place to get help. --DuncanNZ 14:29, 22 July 2008 (EDT)


Great idea, why duplicate effort.

BUT what about making it a practice to add documentation of reference notes to the bottom of a section. Wikipedia does this, but only at the bottom. I think it makes more sense to make it closest to the subject. On my personal wiki, where I keep configuration notes, I have made a practice of this.



  X Over SSH2 - A Tutorial
  Jerry Perkins' Genealogy
I tend to do that too. But it depends on how much information you want to have in the reference. A full reference with name, date, website, author takes too much space. --DuncanNZ 07:45, 26 July 2008 (EDT)