Who should qualify for the Italian Roots PPP?

Question

Hi.

I'm a newly minted coordinator for the Italian Roots project and I've been talking things over with the boss, Mike Miranda. We've been scratching our heads trying to decide how we should PPP pages that fall under our jurisdiction. We went over the rules for PPP and we were wondering how exactly would this apply to us. We're a small group. I made a ton of pages and we got to thinking about what applies to us.

What do you all think?

Personally, here's my belief.

If you have an ancestor who came from Italy to the US or anywhere else, that person gets PPP'd. The problem is that for me and really a lot of people who are grandchildren of Italian immigrants is that it'd be WAY too current according to the rules. My grandfather came to the US in 1929. Immigration from Italy to the US went from the 1880s to the 1970s with the most coming over at the turn of the century.

Would that qualify as a PPP? Others I talked to agree with that. The thing is....again....it'd be my grandfather and two sets of great-grandparents who came over. That's fairly recent and doesn't gel with the PPP rules.

So, Wikitree might have to make exceptions for people who have not just Italian Roots. But, German, Jewish, Canadian etc. The rules may have to bend just a little bit here.

I'm not sure what to do. That's why I am asking here. The profiles I made don't have a lot in the biographies. However, they are well sourced by documents from either the commune offices or from actual records I got from a professional genealogist on Ancestry.com who went to a family center. That's where I get my information from.

So, the question is. Who do we PPP? Immigrants who came over regardless of how close they are in the timeline? This should also apply to anyone who has an immigrant ancestor. Works in Quebecois and in other groups.

Thoughts?

Answer 1

I don't understand why you would need to PPP an immigrant ancestor who arrived in 1929. Is there a great possibility that the person(s) will be duplicated, have parents removed/changed, etc. just because they were the first generation in your line to live in the US? From what I can see, the further back you go, the more likely you are to need PPP, since there are increasingly large numbers of descendants. I don't know how large your family is, but if there isn't a lot of danger of duplication, etc, it's not really necessary. FOREX: my 4th great grandfather came to the US from Germany in 1843. He has no PPP and his profile has been up since 2016. No duplication, nobody has been changing his parents, asking for merges, etc. There is no reason for a PPP. He has a sticker for "German immigrant to Ohio" but that's it.

If your ancestor came to the US in 1929 and was born after 1868, you can use privacy to "protect" him/her anyway.

Comments

Right. That was just an example. Who should we PPP then for the project? Who qualifies? For my tree, a lot of my cousins aren't on Wikitree. I have one connection here on the Carrabs side and she's been inactive for a few years. Been talking to her via e-mail, though.

My other cousins don't have wikitree accounts and the rest are in Italy. So, then for a project like this one would anyone really qualify? We haven't struck anyone from the nobility in Italy, yet. I know I haven't.

I'm not sure who to PPP. I suggested immigrants because the Quebecois and PGM groups have done the same even though they arrived centuries before the Italians did.

This could also apply to other nationalities too. Because they were the first in the line to be in the US they probably should be PPP'd despite cousins not being on the site. Just saying is all.

---

I do not believe that all first gen immigrants for any place need PPP, and it depends on how many generations back you are talking about. I don't have a ton of experience with PPP yet, as I just took on the Switzerland Project and it's very small right now. Nobody has asked for PPP or prepared a profile for PPP. 

The guidelines for PPP:

There are four requirements. All four need to be met before protecting a profile.

One: They must fit within a project

Two: They must be 200 or notable.
Do not protect any profiles under 200 years old unless they fit Wikipedia's guidelines for notability.

Three: They must have the lowest-numbered ID
If there are duplicates, only the profile with the lowest-numbered WikiTree ID with the correct Last Name at Birth (LNAB) should be protected.

Four: They must be controversial or duplicated.

These are the WT guidelines, and I plan to follow them when I do finally PPP a profile. You should be prepared to scrutinize every profile you are proposing to PPP.

:-)

---

Ultimately, your project will include people outside your own tree and you will have to make decisions on PPP using the same 4 criteria. I'm going to be searching for the Italian ancestors of former Boston mayor Tom Menino, and I don't know what I can find! Also, Guy Lombardo's parents were from Italy and I'd love to learn how to research his ancestry.

---

Good points. =)

Let's see. I do have a few people from 200 years ago on the tree. The records in Gesualdo, Frigento and Grottaminarda helped built that up. As did records online for San Pietro a Maida.

The thing is, I dunno if they are notable. Probably not because a lot of people back in southern Italy at the time were farmers. Unless they had a goat that could sing "La Donna e mobile" they weren't famous.

Now you got the image of the goat singing in your head. I am so sorry.

Almost all of the Italian profiles I made so far have had insanely small numbers. I'm the manager of almost all the "Ferraiolo" profiles on wikitree.

I don't think anyone's controversial.

My project does have people outside my own tree as I built up my sister in law's tree. She has Italian and Irish roots.

Mike and I were just wondering who we could PPP for our benefits because we have no idea. It's a small page and it would be weird to have the immigrants PPP'd in my case because my Italian ancestors came to the US in the 1910s and 1920s.

Without the singing goat.

---

Laughing over the singing goat!

It's 200 OR notable, not both. So you have some over 200 years of "age," now  you hit up the other requirements. Not controversial or duplicated? No PPP needed. (controversial is not necessarily in the "I hate him, he was such a jerk" way, but the "Hey, he was NOT married to her; she was just his concubine. Their babies were bastards" sort of controversy. Or the "the family name was spelled THIS way, not that way."

PPP doesn't make a profile better or more important. It just means that the LNAB won't be tampered with, parents won't be changed. (Read about it here: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Project_Protection; and here: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Project_Protecting_and_Merging) I have to go pretty far back in a few of my lines to find a PPP'd profile and it's fine by me!

NOw I'm going to check my Schrader line to see if anyone owned a Singing Schwein.

---

There are goats that faint, climb trees and scream bloody murder. One of those animals has GOT to be able to carry a tune, Natalie.

I think I see what you are saying. A few of the 1776 project guys I have aren't PPP'd. They have a lot of kids, sure. They aren't controversial.  I do have some PPPs in the PGM though and they are a century or so earlier than the 1776 people.

I also have some Quebecois ancestors who ARE PPP'd and some who aren't. This is why I got confused.

PPP is like making a profile a Master Profile on Geni. It's the same basic principle, I think. Usually Master Profiles are for the same reasons you stated.

Still doesn't stop people from making duplicates, though. Oy....So many duplicates.

Thanks for your help!

The pig will be hanging out with a spider named Charlotte.

---

SOME PIG.

---

Man did we derail this thread. XD

---

Nothing wrong with that as long as we accomplished the mission of answering the original question.

---

Yup! =D Though, I COULD close the thread....

 

Nah....

Answer 2

I don't see why they should be protected just because of emigration. My recommendation would be just to protect those that are at risk.

Comments

Right. Got that covered. =D