Sorry for being late to comment on this post, but I am in Myanmar and the internet is very poor here as is the constant supply of electricity so doing anything on the internet is problematic!
I created this category structure for the 52 ancestor challenge. There were several reasons for it:-
- For Wikitreers to be able to keep track of their work relating to the challenge
- For others to be able to see the type of ancestors people were choosing to showcase; and
- For the challenge to keep track of what Wikitreers were submitting to the challenge
The use of categories was optional.
The reason for the categories is explained on the main category page and on each of the subcategories. So I don’t agree that the reason for the existence and what they are meant to capture is unclear. The main 52 Ancestors category refers back to Amy Johnson Crowe's Challenge page, and to the original G2G thread suggesting the challenge be initiated. For the weekly ‘prompts’ these are published monthly and I have been created them then. When the new thread for each week is published by Robynne, linking the sub category page to the thread. When Amy sums up the challenge for the week, then also linking that to the subcategory page. This way people can follow the places on the internet where Wikitreer have highlighted their ancestor. Some of the links for March have not been finalised due to my internet woes in Myanmar.
A number of those participating in the challenge are writing extensive blogs about their ancestor. Others just a little. Others working on improving their WIkitree profiles. I don’t see a problem with having the categories remain on the profiles as a way to:-
- allow others with the same ancestor to see another view of their life, that they may not have considered;
- see the overall contribution Wikitreers have made to the challenge;
- a source for other researchers who may be focussed on a particular ‘prompt’ research area. Eg Misfortune. Wikitree is not just about documenting people lives, it I can be a source for researchers of all types, people, places, stories (such as e.g. misfortune in 1800’s? etc).
Not all WIkitreers are following the same process in how they contribute to the challenge. Not do they need to. On the G2G feed some talk about their ancestors, some put a link to their blog, not all are connecting their post to the ancestor. I think that is a problem and the category process helps that if they add the category (as I said previously it is optional).
For me, I have created a free space page to keep track of my own progress and am documenting links to my blog posts where they exist. If I don’t created a blog post and just want to highlight my ancestor for that week, I post to G2G with a link to the ancestor having usually done work on improving the profile and add the link to Amy Johnson Crowe’s challenge page. When I create a blog post (and I aim to do one for all in time), I add the link to the G2G page, then also share to 'Wikitree in Australia’ Facebook page, plus Amy Johnson Crowe’s main challenge page, also on Facebook. This helps Wikitree get highlighted a bit more on Facebook, which I had understood was also a preferred strategy to get more people linking back in and discovering Wikitree, not just to increase membership but I recall Chris saying it was good for our priority in searching somehow (not really sure how). For my profiles where I write a blog post I am also creating a sub heading of 52 Ancestors and directing people to my blog post directly from the WIkitree profile. My blog has lots of Wikitree links, so (if anyone reads it!) then they get more exposure to Wikitree.
Someone else mentioned the challenge was a good vehicle for encouraging people to be involved in genealogy. I must agree with that and also say it can also help to encourage profile improvement on Wikitree as some members will just choose to update their ancestors Wikitree profile.
Many of us are doing the challenge slowly. It is a big commitment. I am behind, but do intend to achieve them all in time and I certainly don’t want the categories removed. The last challenge was 3 years ago. It is unclear if there will be another.
As Robynne has pointed out the categories have been set up under Challenges, so I don’t see a problem with the category structure. I am a member of the categorisation project (albeit not very active) and am happy to continue to take responsibility for maintenance of these categories.
