Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Twyman. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Recording a One Name Study - is there a "best" way?
Topic Started: Jan 6 2018, 11:30 AM (11 Views)
[ * ]

I have come across at least three people doing one name studies on different surnames of interest to me. They have all had "my people" but as individual records and I have been able to help by giving information to join them up to families. The way these researchers has shown the information on the individuals was to list alphabetically by forename and then after that all the people with same forename chronologically by year (or date if they knew it) of birth.
A few days ago I found someone had submitted a correction to Ancestry regarding the name of one of my relatives.

For more Details:

Pharmaceutical Video
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
Member Avatar
[ *  *  * ]
Quite honestly everyone doing a one-name study will have their own preferred way of doing and presenting things, and I wouldn't like to say that any one way is the best way - as what I find works for my study (with only 600 individuals with that name in the country) wouldn't necessarily be suitable for someone with a larger study. I know there's someone with the Guild of One Name Studies who has registered Smith as a study, for example, and I believe their focus is DNA rather than (if you'll excuse the term) a more old-fashioned & traditional approach to genealogy - as, of course, the logistics of even starting to research Smith by relying on the written sources would be a non-starter and inevitably would result in individuals in your research for who you couldn't possibly make a reliable family connection without any additional pointers - as there are bound to be thousands of John Smiths, for example, and differentiating between each one would be a headache waiting to happen.

From a presentation view I try to list people by their first (and second if they've got one) name alphabetically and then by date order, but also note their parents in the index where I know it. But as I say my study is smaller than many others so this is plausible for me for most first names (the exceptions being with my list of John Twymans, as that's going to be confusing!).
Edited by Simon, Jan 19 2018, 09:03 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
« Previous Topic · The Wakley One-Name Study · Next Topic »
Add Reply