Any objection to Marytje Thomas (Maria) Badie as LNAB ID, b. 1608 in France?

+3 votes
329 views

This Marytje Thomas (Maria) Badie-4 is my direct ancestor. She was probably a New Netherland immigrant Settler, rather than born there. Quite doubtful, as early as 1608. Dutch exploration did not even begin until abt. 1615, near Albany. Her father was finalized as Thomas Badye, by prior default merging, before our new system.

There were some prior merged variants as Baddie, and also Badye, but mostly as Badie. In my desktop database I also have most researchers showing her with the varant as Badie, but also Baddie. And none as Badye. Her current match to merge is Badye.

I am inclined to keep Badie, as it is here, by prior default merging. I don't know if that is the proper French birth name, but it clearly seems to be the name by which she was most known. She married three times, and left quite an extensive legacy in New Netherland.

So, if no objection, or only minimal response, I would like to move this Badie-4 profile to NNS, in one week, on April 12, 2014, and then complete the merge.

But this G2G should stay open and linked to the profile, as a place to further discuss the validity and meaning of the names, or any more proper French LNAB, or other relevant data or sources.

WikiTree profile: Maritje Badie
in Genealogy Help by Steven Mix G2G6 Mach 4 (41.2k points)

John Reynolds Totten, "Aeltje Braconie-Baddie-Cool-Bredenbent Family Notes," New York Genealogical & Biographical Record Vol.65, pp.234-245 (1934): 65:236. Estimates her birth date at about 1608. Hereinafter cited as "Braconie, NYGBR 65 (1934)."
Harry Macy Jr., "Some New Light on Aeltje Braconie and Maria Badie," New York Genealogical and Biographical Record Vol. 142, page 21 (2011): 142:32. Revises the estimated birth date of Maria Badie from ca. 1608 to "say 1612". Hereinafter cited as "Some New Light on Aeltje Braconis and Maria Badie."
Totten, "Braconie, NYGBR 65 (1934)", p.236 "as early as 1626."
4 142:32.
New York Genealogical and Biographical Record Vols.93, 94, 95 (1962-1964):
6 93:197. 93:196-197.
10 Records of The Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Flatbush, Kings County, New York, Vol.1, 1677-1720 (New York: Holland Society of New York, 1998)
11 Old First Dutch Reformed Church of Brooklyn, New York: First Book of Records, 1660-1752, New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1983), page 122.
14 142:29.
15 142:32.
16 " New York Genealogical and Biographical Record Vol.123 (1992): 123:23.

These are all paid sources, the rest were added with the baptisms. At that point, just quoting the PDF, which was made buy a guy with an excellent reputation among us New Netherland researchers, is better since almost no one can see the source.

The reason I looked into it was that a Ranger said it looked odd.

This profile is not what they were saying looked odd. :)

Italics also is a way to show something is quoted from a source , you can use blockquote or italics to show or make clear something is quoted. and now I really have to go ..sorry ..will be back later ..have a nice day all !

Re Carrie I don't agree but my point that I maybe not explain good enough is that resources, pdf files , web sites on the internet disappear so just having a link to a pdf is not prefered it is as bad just as linking to a Ancestry file....

But that is my thought.....I also think transcriptions should be done on records you find and are important as they can disappear....
  

Very true, but we know that she's discussed quite a bit in the NYGBR, the main sources in the pdf, which probably isn't going anywhere as it's been kicking since 1869. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Genealogical_and_Biographical_Society

Best practice is to use Wiki templates for external URLs if they change URL.... then if you are lucky you just change the template....

Last month Anbytarforum the best genealogy discussion board in Sweden, it was started 1998 dec 13, changed platform ==> all URLs to discussions you link to at Anbytarforum doesn't work any more..... 

Indeed for anything extremely important, I use the Wayback Machine https://archive.org/web/ (it's free) to archive the page, which is possible 95% of the time.

Just put https://web.archive.org/web/ in front of an url and you'll be asked if you want to archive the page. Then you can always retrieve the archive if the original link quits working by either visiting the original link and putting the https://web.archive.org/web/ in front or by searching for the url at the Wayback Machine.

That'll work as long as the Internet Archive does at least!

@ Magnus , I of course do agree about the need for and importance of adding primary sources and that's what I said also :

Than we start looking for primary sources , like the church records Carrie is adding, so baptisms of children, wills, deeds and everything is going to be added to the different profile(s). If we have found and added these primary sources, that's when the hopefully second and last trimming can start, the ancestry sources than are replaced by just these primary ones and maybe some reliable secondary sources we all can watch.

and what I mean by not being ready for review is : 

1. you are already asking and looking for duplicate and maybe wrong children ...we are not ready for that because : the maternal grandparents seem to be duplicates of the mother, the paternal grandfather also looks like just a duplicate with wrong dates of his son . These things still have to be solved as well.

2. We are now looking for and adding baptism (and other) records (+ primary and or reliable secondary sources) to the profiles of the parents. To be able to sort out and know for sure how many children Marie (her different husbands) had and from which marriage / husband. Only if we found all of those we can start to look at and sort out the children, merge duplicate children if needed and so on. 

3. So point 1 until 4 and point 7 of your review , is what we now still and in fact are working on and until we have found all baptism records and sources, we probably are not going to be able to, or merge any of them, because sometimes there was more than one child with the same name, so to make sure and to prevent mistakes we now first need sources for all children. 

4. Leaves point 5 and 6 , I think you mean just about all foot/source notes and ancestry.com sources we can't access if we are not ancestry members ? This is also something we do when the profile is more finished and when we have found and added all info and primary sources there are to find , that's mostly when the profile is going to be reviewed and reedited /reorganized, so with just one Bio and sources, because than the sources we can't look at can be replaced with ones we all can view or check . 

I moved this to the bottom because I think a profile should be about the person, his or her live is what the profile is meant for. A profile of course is not the same as a forum (G2G) or comment box, a short note at the top or somewhere in the Bio is fine especially when we are still working on profiles, or have some problems differences that need to be solved or explained, but for questions or reviews like this I think it's better to use the comment boxes or start a G2G and add it there, if we all would place reviews like this on top of all profiles I think you can imagine how some profiles would look like eeh ;) Research notes are placed at the bottom normally so that's why I added this to the bottom as well, it's less distracting and the profile stays more easy to read. Many NNS profiles because of all merges and info that came along or was added later are way too long, so that's something we have to think of and try to prevent as well of course. 

And for the quotes or copied and pasted info, we can take a look at that of course and remove what is not really needed or important and maybe replace or rephrase it with just a little bit of the info and in our own words 

And of course we all are still hoping for a solution that really would prevent and stop the import of duplicates of these so very popular Pre-1700 lineages, it indeed probably will kill the idea of a common family tree if more members means more imports of again the same lineages.

Some profiles/families are merged about 30 or more times already, so I guess you can imagine the amount of work it is to integrate all these gedcom Bio's into one more or less still easy to read and not too long Bio... 

@ Magnus you're absolutely right, indeed links sometimes no longer work, in the Netherlands many archives over the years have been reorganizing or moved to a different location, sometimes resulting in links that no longer worked , so I always will add as much info from the archive ( transcripts and an image of the scan) as possible with the links and all info, to make sure at least the info is still here even if the link would not work. Which of course is a reason why I think sometimes quoting a bit of info maybe is not so bad/ wiser.... if it is clear and acknowledging the person or source you're quoting of course ...

@ Carrie that's great I have heard about and sometimes was redirected to this wayback machine , will for sure use it now as well to keep some valuable info safe.
@Scott thanks I understand what you mean and will take a look at it and fix it if possible or needed, It's been a while ago, so not sure of the why , when or how as well now ...

Wayback machine
At Wikipedia if you find a dead link you add {{Dead link}} after it 
then a bot is finding all those marked deadlink and see if they can rescue it  example adding
{{wayback|url=http://shakespeare.palomar.edu/timeline/genealogy.htm |date=20070329205405 } ==> You get URL https://web.archive.org/web/20070329205405/http://shakespeare.palomar.edu/timeline/genealogy.htm

Example a dead lik I marked regarding Shakespear genealogy now looks like:

 A Shakespeare Genealogy Archived March 29, 2007, at the Wayback Machine.

Wikipedia page: Mary_Shakespeare cite_note-3 
Page history

2 Answers

+2 votes

>> I moved this to the bottom because I think a profile should be about the person, his or her live is what the profile is meant for.

Maybe the best place to discuss is on G2G in Wikitree?!?!? I think Wikitree should have a dedicated area for discussion... compare talk tab in Wikipedia ==> Genealogy is complex and a never ending work ==>

  1. Easy to list outstanding issues
  2. Easy to track different people opinions
  3. Easy to track the status...
  4. .....


Example over at Wikidata how they do it. Right now they argue if Wikitree is ok to add as an external source to Wikidata (property) ;-)


In red comments with Strong Oppose as a way of expressing your opinion... added today 11:46 and comment 2 hours later... using ~~~~to get a timestamp
 

Page Wikidata:Property_proposal/References

by C S G2G6 Pilot (274k points)
Yes you're right I think this subject or something similar was brought up in a G2G a while ago about the comment boxes, if I remember correct someone asked if maybe something like this or  the comment boxes could be added as a dropdownmenu (so hidden and instead of like they are now at the right side of the profiles) for each profile, so I think we all would love something like that ;)

That's why we are working so hard on getting them all sourced and improved eeh :D
0 votes

I'm about 5 years late with this answer :) The 2011 paper:

  • Macy, Harry, Jr. "Some New Light on Aeltje Braconie and Maria Badie", New York Genealogical and Biographical Record 142:21-36 (2011).

shows pretty conclusively that Marie's parents were French Huguenot from Liege. Marie was probably born there about 1612. The French used surnames, so her LNAB at birth would be Badie (or perhaps a variant thereof).

by Jim Moore G2G6 Mach 1 (11.2k points)

Related questions

+3 votes
1 answer
+2 votes
0 answers
54 views asked May 21, 2019 in The Tree House by Jim Moore G2G6 Mach 1 (11.2k points)
+1 vote
0 answers
+3 votes
1 answer
+2 votes
0 answers
+5 votes
0 answers

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...