Can't post on Google Group [closed]

+4 votes
205 views
I'm a PGM member, but can't post a question on the Google group page for some reason. What am I doing wrong? I think Lucas-2931 could qualify for PGM and need to know if he is in the Migration Book.
WikiTree profile: Thomas Lucas
closed with the note: Had enough input. Thanks
in WikiTree Help by Ellen Altenburg G2G6 (7.3k points)
closed by Ellen Altenburg
According to Ancestry, Thomas Lucas is mentioned four times in the Great Migration Begins/Great Migration series, but does not have an his own article.
So should he be added to the PGM?

In summary these are ...

  • In March 1659/60 Thomas was fined for “abusive and threatening speeches ...”
  • In 1661 Ann, wife of Thomas Savory was fined for being at home on the Lord’s day with Thomas Lucas
  • On 2 March 1651/52 Thomas Lucas “complaineth against Richard Hawes ...”
  • George Watson was on a coroner’s jury 8 Mar 1678/79 on the body of “Thomas Lucase”
All of these dates are outside of the Great Migration period, and all of them are in articles on others, there is no article on Thomas Lucas.
Hhmmmm.... maybe that is why the Puritans wanted to forget my great grandfather

The inhabitants of the Plymouth Colony got in trouble for all manner of minor infractions. (There is a basis for the word puritanical!) Being mentioned in court records is not an indication that a person was a habitual troublemaker.

There is a good chance that you can find additional mentions of this man in Plymouth Colony court records. Those kinds of sources could a good basis for assembling a life story for him.

3 Answers

+4 votes
 
Best answer

Ellen,

The PGM project account google group is a Read Only google group, used for tracking comments on project-managed profiles; some project leaders/coordinators have permission to post announcements to it. It is not a discussion group. 

You can post a comment on the PGM project profile  page itself, and the message will be posted to the Google group.

by Jillaine Smith G2G6 Pilot (781k points)
selected by Traci Thiessen
+3 votes
Groups are read only on mobile now, is that the issue you are having?
by Jonathan Crawford G2G6 Pilot (102k points)
??? I access mine on my PC all the time.
Like Jonathan says, it is no longer possible to post to Google Groups from mobile devices.

Additionally, I cannot participate in Google Groups from the email domain where my WikiTree account is registered. And sometimes when I post to a Google Group from my Gmail-hosted address, my messages get rejected or held in a moderation queue.

If you want to contact a project-specific Google Group, you should be able to do so by sending an email message to the @googlegroups.com email address for the project account (unless your email address is on a domain that Google does not like).
I just tested this from my iPhone.  You have to select "request desktop view" from the three-dot menu, and it's wonky, but it is possible to post to a google group from a mobile device.
+5 votes
There is no Thomas Lucas listed in the "Great Migration Directory".  It lists a Mr Lucas (from London, arrival in New England, possibly in 1640, possibly lived in New Haven, but states he probably never came to New England) and William Lucas.
by Linda Peterson G2G6 Pilot (531k points)
The Thomas Lucas profile indicates that he was born in 1630. Thus, if he immigrated to New England by the 1640 cutoff for the Puritan Great Migration, he immigrated as a child and would not have his own listing in the Great Migration Directory. William Lucas supposedly arrived in 1638 (so he is not the Great Migration books other than the Directory) -- did he have a son named Thomas?
I don't know where that birth date came from, so I removed it. His oldest son was born in Plymouth in 1656. Thomas is listed as having a son William. I only have a single secondary source, and I just started working on this ancestor's profile last night. I don't have "the book" ( I'm a newbie), that is why I was reaching out to the experienced group members.

I see that you changed his birth date from 1630 (which implied that this was a date certain) to after 1625. I am puzzled by that new entry. If he had a child in 1656, it would be reasonable to guesstimate that he was born about 1630 (and estimates like that can be helpful in WikiTree), but saying after 1625 implies that there is good evidence that indicates he was born after that date -- for example, a will written in 1625 that lists children in the family, but does not include him, or a document from 1645 that identified him as a minor.

Do you have evidence for his age?

I found a baptism certificate from Cornwall with the birthdate of 1625. I know some of the Puritans left from Cornwall. I'm not saying this was the same Thomas Lucas, but it is a better source than wherever the 1930 was from. I figured "after 1625" would be better than an unsourced 1630.

Well, it is possible that the 1625 baptism is this man, but we have no positive evidence to connect that baptism record to him, so we cannot assume that it is him -- and if it was him, it would indicate that he was born on or before the specific date of baptism, not after 1625.

One of our common practices in WikiTree is to make approximate estimates of birth dates based on dates we know. The text of the profile should show the evidence used for making such an estimate. Since there is a recorded date for the birth of a child, that is a valid basis for estimating a date of the birth of the father. If this man filed a complaint against another man in March 1651/2, it is probable that he was an adult by then, so that is an indication that he probably was born in 1630 or earlier.

If a date or anything else is changed!on a profile, the source for that information, such as a possible baptism Certificate, should be added to the profile.  Looking at the changes log for that profile, there was an Ancestry tree that was included, but that was removed from the profile.  Although family trees are not good sources, it is possible that there is information attached to that tree that may have information, so nothing should be removed from profiles, especially since that profile has limited sources.
There were two Family Search trees. I moved on down to a research or see also (as they are not first or secondary sources). I may have accidently deleted the other. I try never to delete anyone's work ( See Thomas' son Benoni. It said he died in war, but he lived long after the end of the war. I just noted that I thought it was incorrect)

Related questions

+7 votes
1 answer
115 views asked Aug 14 in WikiTree Tech by Margreet Beers G2G6 Mach 7 (74.5k points)
+2 votes
1 answer
116 views asked May 8, 2020 in WikiTree Help by Terry Fillow G2G6 Mach 4 (46.2k points)
+3 votes
0 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
117 views asked Feb 14, 2019 in The Tree House by Sheryl Moore G2G6 Mach 9 (92.9k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
217 views asked Jun 17, 2017 in The Tree House by Deborah McDonald G2G6 Mach 1 (17.7k points)
+26 votes
7 answers
781 views asked May 11, 2017 in The Tree House by Aleš Trtnik G2G6 Pilot (566k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...