I have a family line that has two variations of spelling ...

Question

... HELSABECK and HILSABECK.  

Would it be reasonable to suggest to the PMs who hold the profiles to standardize the last name for each individual? In other words, we could change all of them to be HELSABECK and put HILSABECK in the Other Last Names field. That way, all of them would be in the same surname list.

The reason I ask is because it seems like any one of the individuals can be found in different records with either spelling.

Anyway, just want to get the opinion of people who know more about this than I do!

Thanks!

Answer 1

In my opinion, profile managers should not standardize spellings. The spellings should reflect the history of the individual.  The WikiTree profile page is very flexible, providing for last name at birth, current last name (last name at death) and other last name. A note in the biography section of the profile can explain anything that is not apparent or random spellings that show up in single records.

One of my eastern European immigrant relatives used his LNAB (Bernatowicz) and the Americanized "Berno" spelling interchangeabley. His tombstone and death certificate state "Berno". I used Bernatowicz for LNAB and Berno for current last name. The profile accomodates this situation. The children all used "Berno", and I used this as their last name at birth. 

I have a generation of siblings that changed the spelling of their names, differently, and I described in a note:

 Note regarding surname: The family surname was generally spelled "CARNES" when found in references to Reason's father, William. The spelling changed in the following generation. Among William's children, the name was, at their respective deaths, variously spelled "CARNES" (those who remained in Illinois), CURNES (Abel and John, who settled in central Iowa) and Curns (Reason and Phillip, who settled in Colorado).

Comments

I agree Ellen. I was in contact over the weekend with one of the Cornish OPCs regarding just this. A grandmother of mine on the original of her marriage document was named by the Vicar at the time Mary 'Hockey', she signed her name very clearly Mary 'Hawkey'. The OPC had made a note of this on her own site, but official records don't and she is on all other record sites as Hockey. It's made it quite hard to find her! But, the OPC explained transcriptions must be verbatim no matter what the transcriber thinks. She said to me that changes in spelling often came about with changes in Vicar, maybe it was how he heard the name spoken, or simply how he thought it should be spelt! But she said often for a whole generation family names would be spelled differently. It's important we don't change names to suit ourselves, even if it does mean a bit of confussion and extra work - with that extra work we can usually get to the truth of  matters, and often along the way we learn a whole lot of other new things about our ancestor  we never would have otherwise :)

Answer 2

i know the family is connected...I spell the name as it appears,,My fellow researches on the family do the same,,

Comments

So, your vote would be to just use whatever comes up on the record for an individual and then note the possible variation in the Other Last Name fields?

---

Julie, yes, that is the practice that wikitree recommends. The preferred record for spelling choice is the birth record-- or that closest to birth-- i.e., Last Name At Birth (aka here as LNAB).

---

I got the answers I expected :)

The reason I asked is because most of the profiles are currently unsourced.

I like Jillaine's practice of using the birth record (or next closest).

Thanks, everyone!

Answer 3

Last names are personal, as much as we want to change them to be convenient. The LNAB is, to me, just that. I work with my Cunningham line.. this to me is the accurate spelling: however there is one branch that spells their last name 'Cunninghame' and another is spelled 'Cunnygham' (close to this) - what right do I have to decide my spelling is more accurate? Isn't that arrogant? I also have 'Johnston' and 'Johnson': just because I believe Johnston to be valid, because my ancestor chose that spelling, even though it differed fron her Great Grandfather's? I use the LNAB for all of them and the others variations in the other field.

Comments

Not intending to be arrogant ... just trying to find the proper way to handle a situation when source documents are not definitive.

Thank you for your perspective!

Answer 4

I have several ancestor's were the name spelling changes.  People used to use the phonetic spelling (how it sounds) vs the way it was really spelled.  I have one ancestor who Meador is the family name, however someone documented her name as Meadows and that was used in alot of documentary proof.  In Ancestry I put the main name Meador (it is family name) then / Meadows.  Like Wiki Tree there is another place to put alternate names.  The family actually has a document that states why there is a possible name spelling difference which helps.

I also am part of a Scottish Clan Douglas but in the 1500's a branch of the family got into trouble with the King and had to change it.  They changed it to Drysdale.  Luckily again we have documentation that states why there was a name change.  I have Douglas blood under the name of Drysdale because of this incident.  Again, there are multiple areas on both ancestor and wiki tree where you can put an alternate spelling of the name and there is an area where you can note why there is a difference.

Good Luck, Deb

Answer 5

House Holy Man & The Cow Field = my last name = Vicare, Vickere, Vicaire, Attvickers, atte Vicars, Viccars, Atvicars, Vicary, Vickery, Vickarman, Viccars, Vickers, McVicar, Vikery, La Vacher, Livaccari, La Vache, Vassiere, Verrick, Verrechia, Verick, Vickere, Vicar, Verick, Verecker, Vick, Vitterey, Vittory, Vittori. I have seen it spelled Vochery, Vocrey, Vacherie Vachery, Vatchery, Victory.   Also Duesler & Dussler, Cook & Cooke, Goode & Good lol