Would it be prudent to subcategorize Quakers by Meeting?

Question

I just added the category "Quakers" to a profile. That's an awfully broad category, but there are only 380 people profiles in it right now. I think it might be prudent to use Meeting subcategories where we can (sooner rather than later). The subcategories for Quakers include a couple of Meetings, one directly and one further categorized under a Quaker Meetings category.

I'm a bit shakey on Category concepts, but... I like the way the one directly under the Quakers category is set up (see Category:New Garden Friends Meeting, North Carolina) for a couple of reasons:  if all the Meetings were directly under the Quakers category and set up with the Meeting name first, it would give a nice alphabatized list with locations. In addition, if all the Friends Burial Grounds were listed in the same format, they'd be listed with their associated meeting. For instance, Category:Solebury_Friends_Burying_Grounds would be (probably) just above Solebury Friends Meeting, Pennsylvania. There is one other meeting category: http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Kingwood_Meeting, but it was like running down a rabbit hole to get to, only to find there were no entries.

I'm really inexperienced in categories, but what I'd like to do is change the Kingwood Meeting category to be consistent with the New Garden one, add Category:Solebury Friends Meeting, Pennsylvania, delete the Quaker Meetings category, and include a line about adding people profiles to the appropriate Meeting subcategory when known, along with a line about how to create the subcategory. (I think the Meeting subcategories would also be an intersting way to track migration, as families moved to new meeting houses).

Does that sound reasonable, logical, and doable?

Thanks, Liz

 

Comments

No, Quakers associated themselves with one meeting, and, when they moved, applied to the new meeting, having proved they had been members of a different meeting.

---

I'm wondering if you plan on listing each meeting that the person belonged to, i.e. if they started at Cane Creek and ended up at New Garden, it seems you should add both categories to their profile since they were involved with both.  Numerous of my ancestors moved from one meeting to another when they moved to a different state...

---

That was my intent, yes... from my initial post: I think the Meeting subcategories would also be an intersting way to track migration, as families moved to new meeting houses.

---

I agree there, Liz. I have had that experience before with ancestors that came down from the original northern colonies to settle the southern colonies.

---

Something you probably already thought of, but notes on the Meeting category page saying something like:

In 1820 a band of members of the meeting moved together from Virginia Beach, VA to North Carolina.

And in the new NC Meeting:

This meeting was founded primarily by a band of Friends who moved from the Virginia Beach Meeting.

It might help people who find an ancestor who was an early member of a meeting, but they don't know what the previous Meeting affiliation was.  It would give a place to look.

---

Speaking of migration, I added a category for my ancestors and others, called "Quaker Migration from the Carolinas to Southwest Ohio". The Bush River MM in SC lost a lot of Quakers in the first decade of the 1800s as their members moved to Miami County, Ohio.  Entire families, parents, children, siblings, etc., moved pretty much en masse north to Ohio. Four branches of my line followed this migration route.  I know that there were Quaker migrations also.  It might be very interesting to see where these Quakers started out and where they ended up.  My ancestors were in at least three different MMs.

---

I often see them asking for a letter that states they are in good standing and they give that to the place they are going next. Many other groups also do this.  One German researcher I know went to their home town in Germany and went to the Church and the pastor brought out the old books and opened it up to a page he had already found for them and it was all in German except for two words, Ann Arbor.  Yes, they had moved to Ann Arbor, MI.

---

My Lamb ancestors were presumed members of New Garden Monthly Meeting. How would I go about adding them to that category, or first, how would I go about proving them to be members?

I'm fairly new to WikiTree and genealogy in general, so thanks for any help.

---

Hi Susan, It would be better if you posted this as a new question.

---

Thank you.

Answer 1

Hi Liz, Thank you for your interest in categories and especially for your desire to "get it right".The first example you cite: http://Category: New Garden Friends Meeting, North Carolina is a good example of a correctly constructed category.  Quaker meetings are religious institutions, I fixed the Kingwood meeting to the same standards,  http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Solebury_Friends_Burying_Grounds being  a cemetery should be in "Category: Solebury, Pennsylvania" and "Category: Bucks County, Pennsylvania, Cemeteries" If it is also the Quaker equivalent of a church graveyard it could also be a subcategory of the associated Meeting house. Off hand, I wonder if "Category: Quakers" is useful,  Generally speaking categories with the potential to hold thousands of profiles are discouraged.  It seems some of the historical info might be better suited for free space pages.  

The best way to handle the Hockessin meeting might be to start from what exists today and then adding those meetings absorbed as a sub category. Hope this is helpful 

 

Comments

Very helpful - thanks! I wanted to add Meeting categories precisely to prevent the Quakers category from being overwhelmed with person profiles. The Quakers category is a good category, though (where better to find the Meeting categories?).

To start with, I want to work on creating Meeting categories based on the information in the person profiles already in the Quakers category. If we get overwhelmed with Meeting categories, then it should be fairly easy to tuck the various iterations leading up to the current Meeting under it. However, I think that for genealogical purposes, it's better to have each Meeting on equal footing in an alphabetized list (for instance, I may know to look for Newark Monthly Meeting, but wouldn't have a clue that it sorta kinda morphed into Old Kennett Monthly Meeting and that I'd find it under that category).  Oh - and the Solebury Friends Burying Grounds is a Quaker cemetery (Friends=Quaker), so I added the Quakers category back on that page. Thank you for adding the other appropriate categories :D

Cheers, Liz

---

In categories we try and standarize.  So when making categories each person would have some idea of where they should be put.  

So first

[[Category:Solebury Friends Burying Ground]]  

is incorrectly named.  It should always include the name of the town where it is currently located.  We include locations when naming cemeteries because there are many cemeteries with the same name located in different parts of the counry.  This helps us know which cemetery we are looking for.  This is a standard.  It must be done.  

We have many, many examples of where the cemeteries have been made subcategory of the church where they are located.  So, if we follow that standard practice then the category 

[[Category:Solebury Friends Burying Ground, Solebury, Pennsylvania]]

would be a subcategory of 

[[Category:Solebury Meeting of Friends, Solebury, Pennsylvania]]

In proper categorization (which we hope to achieve) you shouldn't have the subcategory and the category on the same level.  It would be much the same as having a city and state on the same level.  

So, Dan was 100 percent correct in removing it. Not only because it is not a meeting and because it is incorrectly named.  If we decide to have all the meetings in the one category of Quakers that should NOT also include cemeteries.  They are two different kettles of fish. 

While I appreciate that you want an alpha list of all the meetings no matter if it was one that had a name change when it became part of another meeting that is not the proper way to categorize. As Dan pointed out those meetings that became parts of other meetings should be subcategories of the meeting in which they joined.  If there was a split into two or three meetings then the original meeting should be a subcategory of any meetings it split into. 

Thus you can start at the meeting that was last in existence and see by the subcategories what meetings it consisted of origninally. 

If you don't know what meeting it became that is a time for our category search.  Thus it would be easily found without breaking the standarization of the way we should set up categories.

Do you understand why this needs to be done this way?  

I've got to run out for a bit but I think a further discussion on the category of Quakers is needed. We need to think not only of the Quakers but how we would properly want to categorize all religions.  Standards, as you well know, are important and no less important when dealing with categories.

gail

 

---

Thank you for your comments Gail. No, I guess I don't understand, so I'll leave categorization to those who do. Sorry for my errors. Cheers, Liz

---

I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from making categories so please, please don't stop!  My husband was in the car but I wanted to stop you before you made categories that will just have to be undone.  Work for nothing is so frustrating and I didn't want you frustrated.

I will be delighted to help you understand on or off g2g so that you do understand. So would Dan.

There are just some simple rules to remember:

1. All cemeteries, churches, meetings, etc (religious institutions) need to contain the name of where they are in the category name.

2. You set up categories just like you do a family tree.  You can't have a child or grandchild and a parent on the same level even though it might help you find them quicker.  The parent, this case, the meeting by it's last known name, is on one level.  Under that, the child, the meeting that was the first name is a subcategory of that meeting.

I hope that makes some sense.  If it doesn't I'll be happy to find another way to explain it to you.   <grin>

Once you "get it" then it will all appear a lot easier.  Until you do it seems like a muddle.  

Categories are very, very useful things but they must be set up correctly or they are just a bunch of profiles thrown in a pile.  A pile here, a pile there, and pretty soon you a mess that is impossible to navigate. We have a lot of messes in categories but we are attempting to fix them when we find them.  Just like this one called Quakers that you came across. Thank you so much for asking and bringing it up.

Organization is a wonderful thing.

gail

---

Thank you Gail, I missed the improper contruction of Solebury Friends Burying Ground, I edited it and associated profiles to the correct convention, though for now I left the Category:Quakers alone.

I agree that  [[Category:Solebury Friends Burying Ground, Solebury, Pennsylvania]]

should be a subcategory of 

[[Category:Solebury Meeting of Friends, Solebury, Pennsylvania]]

but not exclusively. As a cemetery it needs to be categorized as such.  I don't have a real problem with a subcat being on 2 different levels if necessary for clarity.

---

Categories can be on two different levels in two different branches of the tree.  But if you have a category called

 

[[Category:Men of WikiTree]]

 

with a subcategory of

 

[[Category:Dan the Man]]

 

you should not put the subcategory of 

 

[[Category:Head of Dan the Man]]

 

as a subcategory of 

 

[[Category:Men of WikiTree]]

 

on the same level as the Category of "Dan the Man"

 

at least you shouldn't if you try and correctly categorize things.  Because you get to the category "Head of Dan the Man" by first going to "Dan the Man".   One is only a part of the other not the same thing.   

 

People have here put them on the same level.  That is not the proper way to do categorization.  I'm not just making up an arbitrary rule. Imagine if all subcategories were to be put on the same level as the category they were a subcategory of. For example:  

 

If important cities were put on the same level as states.  So if we don't follow proper categorizaiton Philadelphia could appear in the list of States.  You would look at the top of the categorization page and it would have links to Pennsylvania but also to the United States which in turn would link to Pennsylvania.  You get caught in circle of categories going around and around.

 

Someone could make a link to a particular subcategory in the text of the category page but they should never be on the same level.  

 

gail

 

---

I was simply looking at what was in the Category Quakers and tried to work with what was there to suggest a way to NOT have every Quaker in WikiTree listed in the category. If y'all can accomplish that goal in another way - great! Go for it! I find Categories exceedingly difficult, so I am happy to leave that area of WikiTree to people who understand them. Cheers, Liz

---

Gail, I agree 100% that we should avoid circular references so I'm thinking I misunderstood what you were saying.  Looks like were on the same page.

Liz, please don't get discouraged about categories, they become easier with experience and the members of the categorization project will be happy to help any way we can.,

---

Liz... I second and applaud Dan's comment.

Categories are just like making a family tree.  You start out with one great grandparent and then you have all the children and after that the grandchildren.  So you start out with something like Quakers (grandparent) and you make Quakers children (Quaker Meetings) and the great grandchildren (what previous meetings made up that meeting).  When giving them names we include the place where they were located so they don't get confused with anyone else's grandchildren.

gail

---

Wow, my head is spinning! I am certain it gets easier with practice, but it sure can seem daunting. I think it's a good thing to do, and important to follow a standard, so I'm going to read the Categories section in the drop-down menu until I get it figured out. We're lucky to have people who are so practiced at it, and luckier still that people ask questions. It never would have occured to me to categorize Monthly Meetings, but that seems like it could be a help to someone along the way, so, off I go to learn how to do this. Pray for me, and thanks, Liz, Gail and Dan!

---

I'll be happy to help if you run into difficulties or have trouble understanding.

---

David - For Meetings (not Monthly Meetings), the existing categories use the following format:

[Name] Friends Meeting, [State]

A Monthly Meeting can include more than one Meeting.

Cheers, Liz

---

I read everyones comments, and I am currentley adding the quakers category to profiles. Many of these profiles have migrated from one meeting house to another, and some of the names have changes and/or location (Delaware now Pennsylvania or reverse).  Also being new to categories and "wanting to get it right" how would you enter the categories and sub-categories to a profile. I'm confused in what and how I enter the different categories and their sub-categories.

I think you mean the following (I'm probably wrong)

[[Category: Quakers]]

[[Category:Chester Friends Meeting, Chester Co., Pennsylvania]]

[[Category:Chester Friends Burying Grounds, Chester Co., Pennsylvania]]

Or are they all on the same line? [[Category: Quakers]][[Category:Chester Friends Meeting, Chester Co., Pennsylvania]][[Category: Chester Friends Burying Grounds, Chester Co., Pennsylvania]]

---

Hi Katie, When putting categories in a profile it doesn't make any difference if they are listed one per line or on the same line; nor does it make any difference where in a profile they're placed. They will display the same in a profile. Most people put them at the top of a profile for convenience. More important is the structure of the category. To use your examples: [[Category:Chester Friends Meeting, Chester Co., Pennsylvania]]; would correctly be: [[Category:Chester Friends Meeting, Chester County, Pennsylvania]] (County is not abbreviated) but are you certain that Chester County is the most local place for the Meeting? Counties in PA are divided into incorporated Townships, Boroughs and Cities, leaving no unincorporated county areas. Sometimes this takes a little research. So [[Category:Chester Friends Meeting, “location”, Pennsylvania]] would be a sub-category of [[Category:”location”, Pennsylvania]], [[Category:Chester County, Pennsylvania, Religious Institutions]], and [[Category: Quakers]]. The same structure applies to cemeteries with the proviso that if a friends burial grounds is the Quaker equivalent of a church graveyard, it would also be a sub-category of the associated Meeting.

 

Individual profiles should not be placed in Category:Quaker as that is an upper level category designed to hold Quaker related sub-categories.

 

Finally, if an individual belongs to more than one Meeting they can be in all applicable Meeting categories, just as people move from place to place.
 

---

Wow!!! Thank you very much Daniel. I appreciate your explanations, I am starting to understand, and your point on the stucture of the category makes alot of sense. I think I was doing it backwards.......I have some profiles in the "Quaker" category that I will go back and fix.

Regarding "Chester Monthly Meeting" vs a more specific township etc.....Do you know of any credible source that provides information on established "Friends Meeting Houses", by State etc..

Appreciate your reply and any suggestions you might throw my way!!!

---

I did a quick google search, try these:http://www.quaker.org/meetings.html, and http://www.fgcquaker.org/connect/quaker-finder

The Chester Monthly Meeting looks to be in the City of Chester in Delaware County (but names may have changed over the years). http://www.pym.org/meetings/location/chester-monthly-meeting/

---

I wouldn't recommend including city or county in the category name for Monthly Meetings. Unlike cemeteries, they moved around. For instance, Newark Monthly Meeting started with two Meetings - Newark & New Castle - and the Monthly Meeting would be held at Newark Meeting or New Castle Meeting. See http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~mygermanfamilies/QuakerMeet.html for an overview (it's a link from http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Quakers ).

---

P.S. Newark Monthly Meeting was set off from Chester Monthly Meeting. You might find some of the information/links given on the category page for Newark Monthly Meeting of interest.

---

How do I add Rhode Island Society of Friends so it shows up on the Quaker category page?

I have done some profiles with the following:

[[Category:Quakers]]
[[Category: Quakers:  Newport Rhode Island]]

but it doesn't seem to be showing up on the actual Category?

These ancestors from Newport belonged to the RI Soc. of Friends

Thanks

---

The category page http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Quakers:_Newport_Rhode_Island doesn't exist yet (that's why the link on the profile pages is red - e.g., http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Easton-564).  Click on one of the red links & add text to create the category page. Include in the text [[Category:Quakers]] to have the page listed under Category:Quakers. Cheers, Liz

---

Thanks, I put that in the text.

Now they are under the  general category Quakers, but I cannot get a separate category within that group for either of the following.

[[Category:Quakers: Rhode Island Friends Society]]

[[Category: Quakers:  Newport Rhode Island]]

---

I think someone more adept at how categories should be nestled needs to advise you. I was out of my league just with the Monthly Meeting categories I created. Good luck!

---

 

Hi Chris, I took a look at this and if I'm understanding properly, Rhode Island Friends Society is located in Newport, RI. If this is correct the category where individuals should be is: [[Category:Rhode Island Friends Society, Newport, Rhode Island]], which in turn is a subcat of [[Category: Newport, Rhode Island]], [[Category: Newport County, Rhode Island, Religious Institutions]] and [[Category:Quakers]]. Hope this is helpful. Dan

---

Rhode Island was approx 50% Quaker in the late 1600's.  The Great Meeting House is on the grounds of Nicholas Easton's land in Newport, where they held meetings by the 1670's in his house, or earlier, and that he later donated to them for the permanent meeting house.  Rhode Island Society of Friends  written records start in 1676 from this group - which I labeled Newport.

1699: RI Quarterly Meeting included RI (basically Newport); Narragansett (Kingstown, now Greenwich) and Dartmouth.

Narragansett (Greenwich)  monthly meeting est in 1699.

Providence monthly meeting est. 1718.

Swansey monthly meeting est. 1732.

South Kingstown monthly meeting est 1743.

I thought there eventually might be sub-categories for Quakers:Rhode Island  for each locale.  I started with Newport, just because in working on profiles from RI - I found all this information on them as Quakers, but I don't know how to set up sub-categories under [[Category:Quakers]]. 

Chris

---

Yes, each of the listed meetings can be set up following the structure I mentioned earlier --just using the proper locations.  The two categories you propose, [[Category:Quakers: Rhode Island Friends Society]] and [[Category: Quakers:  Newport Rhode Island]] are not set up following the standards and styles adopted by WT and should not be used.  

Using your James Easton profile as a guinea pig, I put in "[[Category:Rhode Island Friends Society, Newport, Rhode Island]]" which now appears in red.  When you click on the red link, it will go to the edit screen for that category. Enter (or cut and Paste): "[[Category: Newport, Rhode Island]] [[Category: Newport County, Rhode Island, Religious Institutions]] [[Category:Quakers]]" and save the page.  The category will then be green on James' profile.   Dan

---

Thanks  so much for your help.  I never get the terms/brackets correct.

I will try this with James, and then copy to the others.

Chris

 

I give up!!!! I think I did what you said on the text page.  Now whether you looking within Category:Quakers or the other two it comes up under alphabetical letter E

like this:

• Editing Category:Quakers: Newport Rhode Island
• Editing Category:Rhode Island Friends Society, Newport, Rhode Island

I guess Categories are just not for me

---

Please don't give up on categories.  All you did wrong was clicking on edit when the page was already in edit mode.  I fixed it and started a free space page: http://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Rhode_Island_Quakers where I copied and pasted what you had so no info is lost.  And I added you as the PM of it.

Answer 2

Hi,

Hopefully this link may help you it is for the Quaker Society in Scotland  ( http://www.quakerscotland.org/ )& it will help you see how the Quakers in Scotland categorise themselves.

All the best

Billt

Answer 3

Using the individual meetings helps - currently some profiles are listed under both Quakers and under an individual meeting - this is not the best way to use a category.  The category should be used at the lowest possible level, in this case the meeting.

For those individuals that moved from one meeting to a second meeting, than both meetings should be entered.

New York Quakers has some examples for Easton Saratoga and Troy-Pittstown

Comments

Following Gail's comment about naming above, should

Category: Easton and Saratoga Meeting

also have the name of the state at the end, i.e.

Category: Easton and Saratoga Meeting, New York?

---

I thought about the format for Easton and Saratoga Meeting.  It is unique, that is there is only one, so I did not think that adding the New York was needed.  It can not be confused with any other place or meeting so adding New York did not seem necessary.  Perhaps I missed something but that was my thinking.

---

The Easton and Saratoga Meeting are under New York Quakers category already.

Answer 4

A couple of weeks ago, I had sent a pm to Rob Ton regarding "hooking" info from POB and POD profile fields if the [[Category:Quakers]] was present on the profile.  I had an idea that if a person started in east Pennsylvania as a Quaker they likely belonged to the "Hardwick Meeting" of New Jersey.  If they traveled to the Wellington county of Ontario, Canada, they were likely a member of the"Yonge Street Meeting."   Politics later caused many members of "Yonge Street" to transfer to "Children of Peace."  The Methodists also attracted many Quakers and Free Thinkers.

Rob, whom I consider fairly logical, stated that currently there is no way to "hook" from fields; but, there may be someone on the WT Aps project working on this. Is this doable and is there anyone working on the WT Aps project interested in this concept?

One caveat is that many Quakers were disowned for marrying out of the Society, hauling a canon, or various other scenarios.  Perhaps, WT Aps coulds also create a biography scan for Friends Burial Grounds and work with the Cemetery project for categorization.  Just a couple of ideas!