I would like to review some "Excellent" Examples of One Name Studies

+17 votes
545 views
I would like to review a few "Excellent Examples" of One Name Studies, could someone please tell me which studies would fall into that category.  Also if you want me to look at yours please include it!

Taylor
in The Tree House by Taylor Worthington Gilchrist G2G6 Mach 8 (89.6k points)

I have always been somewhat unclear as to what a one name study is, and how this differs, if indeed it does, from traditional genealogy. Is it

  • A history (going back in time) of a surname?
  • Is it an identification of the descendants of an individual with a specific surname (thus omitting female descents?
  • Is it the identification of anyone with that surname, regardless of relationship, if any? How would you limit this, as I can see it rapidly becoming unwieldy as there could be numerous, unrelated “Patriarchs” of a given surname.

I am no expert here, but I don't think Name Studies differ from "traditional genealogy" they assist it!  It's just another way to gather, organize and categorize information.  And so, yes, when the volume gets unwieldy, it would make total sense to discuss profiles in relation to the unrelated "Patriarchs" of a given surname!  (Of course, I would be secretly hoping to connect some of those patriarchs in some way, but that's the "Connector" in me!)

But, in addition to the genealogy, there is the aspect of "where did that name originate?"  (There is not always just one answer!)  And who are some of the "notables" with that name?  And how did the variations come about?  And how are they related?  (Oops, slipped right back into the genealogy!)

The beauty of WikiTree Name Studies is that you can shape yours into whatever you want it to be!
I agree Bartley!
Taylor, what's the purpose of your question - are you thinking of doing your own? The reason I ask is that the scope of the ONS makes a big difference. While once a study is set up you might have multiple contributors, some are very specific in scope in terms of their main focus. I have seen studies based on one family in one area, my own was focused on a name in a given county in Ireland - whereas others are everyone of that name anywhere in the world. A study might be called excellent because of its 100% coverage if the scope were small, whereas another might be excellent because of its very breadth.

To add to Bartley's comment, I've been a member of the Guild of One-Name Studies for a few years, and they began the concept back in 1979. A good snapshot is their page describing briefly what a one-name study is in their view: https://one-name.org/one-name-studies/ (though I take some professional exception with the first sentence; in business a project, by definition, is always time-bounded and a study is not). Also, some helpful ONS introductory videos the Guild put together, running from 15 to 40 minutes, can be found here.

I think a Name Study at WikiTree is pretty much whatever the administrator(s) of the study wants it to be. But a one-name study isn't a subset of the genealogy. The study can be--and often is--the superset. More realistically, the better metaphor is probably a Venn diagram. A one-name study could be approached (though I haven't seen one) solely as a population-level investigation, e.g., etymology and first appearances, variant and aberrant spellings, haplotypic DNA information and early origins, migration patterns, localized geographic saturation and distribution over time, and more. You don't need a genealogical tree to address any of those objectives. But most of us get involved in one-name studies because of genealogy.

As Jason noted, the key is scope and defined objectives. And because of that, one-name studies can look very different from each other. I don't think there's a template. When I was planning my initial ONS, a for-purpose website came first, and I had intended to use a PHP/MySQL freeware web application called Webtrees for the collaborative genealogy aspects of the study. Doable, but would have required a whole lot more administrative attention than I could spare. That's why I signed up at WikiTree in the first place: a far better idea for maintaining collaborative family trees associated with the study was a thriving site designed to do exactly that! Sometimes my handful of brain cells don't get in each others' way.
cool

So... Define the scope and prioritize the objectives. Design it from there. There isn't going to be a one-size-fits-all template of an ONS. And WikiTree set-up the Name Studies feature to allow just about all the flexibility anyone would need. I'd say the only thing WikiTree isn't designed to do that was an objective of mine was to house a large asset repository that included a wide variety of elements I wanted to be available only to participants of the study. Currently there are 4 gigabytes worth of stuff in there, ranging from audio files to scans of family bibles. I'm still waiting for someone to upload a digitized 8mm home movie from the 1940s....

I was a member of the Guild of One Name Studies for a couple of years so I have an idea of what their one name studies consist of.   However, I wanted to know what Wikitree's One Name Studies were consisting of.  

I am partially following the Guild rules.  I am including as many Fritz's from a few different countries and will then collectively compare the different types of similar data that is available from each country.  I want to see how the data varies from those born in one country versus another then put them into one large group for comparison.

I appreciate all of your responses.  I think it is good for those who are just starting out on this studies to see a variety of different studies, which will help them in designing their own.

Thanks again

Taylor

TOUR OF ONE NAME STUDIES

I just went thru all of your one name studies.  I am so impressed by the diversity and creativity that is going on in the studies.  Thank you for sharing them. 

Taylor

13 Answers

+18 votes

I've been working on this one for some time now Devlin Name Study But I don't consider it an Excellent Example. I've got a long way to go on it.

by Richard Devlin G2G6 Pilot (503k points)

I personally think this is an Excellent Example.  It's so rich and comprehensive in scope.  Well done!

Richard,

Thank you so much for allowing me to review your study.  I left with many good ideas for my study.  I left you a note.

Taylor
Wow! Incredible work!
+11 votes

I think it is hard to consider my own work "an excellent example" but I am proud of my work putting together the Mason Name Study. I am also working on the Gore Name Study and the McGannon Name Study. I have not done as much with the McGannon Study, yet. When I first started working on them, I looked at a lot of different name studies and incorporated what I liked into what I have done. The main thing with a potentially large and unwieldy name study is to build a good working knowledge of categorizing your name study. 

by Sarah Mason G2G6 Mach 5 (56.4k points)
+12 votes
I would like to offer the https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Maupin_Name_Study for your perusal, not that it is as extensive or refined as the Devlin study (which is impressive!) but I'm proud of what it is becoming.  Which I would like to think is a resource for all things that relate to the name Maupin.
by Bartley McRorie G2G6 Pilot (162k points)
edited by Bartley McRorie
+13 votes
How about taking a look at the FAQ page, which includes examples? and it may answer a few other questions, too:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:One_Name_Studies_FAQ_Page#Are_there_examples_of_one_name_studies_on_WikiTree.3F
by Ros Haywood G2G Astronaut (1.9m points)
+8 votes

I have a study where I have identified all the people I think I'm going to, and the origins.  It's not complete as I haven't done the analyses as suggested by GOONS but it's so small (200 people) that I think it would be meaningless.  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Tilliduff_Name_Study

by Christine Searle G2G6 Mach 4 (41.2k points)
+11 votes

I'm proud of what I've accomplished so far with the Rowland Name Study. I'm looking forward to seeing others so I can "steal" some additional ideas. 

{{One Name Study|name=Rowland}}

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Rowland_Name_Study

Some of the categories include:

- DNA Studies

- Famous & Notables

- Interesting & Quirky

- Untimely and Unnatural Deaths

- Historical Homes & Buildings

- Be Fruitful and Multiply

- Revolutionary War Participants 

- Rowland Cemeteries

by Ron Rowland G2G6 Mach 2 (23.3k points)
+9 votes

This is a fun question and I've enjoyed looking at each of the name studies in the answers. I've gotten some good ideas for the Frazier Name Study which I will offer up https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Frazier_Name_Study  here as an example of a name study with a slightly different goal than some others. I know there are several on the FAQ page for One Name Studies mentioned in another answer that are excellent -- highly developed and well-organized. The Frazier Name Study is a broad study with the main goal of tracking different family lines from Europe -- mainly Scotland and Ireland -- to the New World and then tracking those families as they migrate across their new countries. Frazier is a fairly common name, so this is a big study and my passion. There are many people who are interested in adding their family lines to the study and they are always welcome -- and it is always a work in progress.

by Edie Kohutek G2G6 Mach 9 (97.1k points)
+8 votes

Excellent or not is a call I'll leave to others, but a lot of work has gone into the name study I started for my surname:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Beardsley/Beardslee_Name_Study

by John Beardsley G2G6 Mach 4 (44.1k points)
Very nice ONS! I would call it excellent!
+7 votes
by Eric Weddington G2G6 Pilot (513k points)
+6 votes

I don't think that it is "excellent" but here is my Starr Name Study if it helps. 

by Caryl Ruckert G2G6 Pilot (205k points)
Lovely. I love the photos and maps.
+3 votes
Highlighting excellent ONSs is a welcome idea, but because of the wide variety of studies, with completely different measures of success or quality, perhaps it would be useful to identify a range of good or best practices? These could then become a ‘menu’ for people to use to scope their own ONS?

Some examples:

1. “Source-led” Extract all of the BMD events for a given names, area and time. Stops spurious people being created, but every one appears 3 times, and the name of the game is connect and merge. The profiles become a valuable resource for others.

2. “Spouses or not” Are spouses of a Name included or not? Which children are included? This depends on naming patterns, such as matrilineal or patrilineal. Is there a DNA component and is it Y-DNA or mt-DNA?

3. “One Place Study” aspects. Many populations are highly static, punctuated with periods of local, regional or global migration.

4. “Sub-projects”  - how else would you do Smiths? ;-)

5. “Size the task” Do some simple searches by name/area/times/BMD and record the number of hits. Usually no need to to look at results or have a subscription, but knowing whether 10/100/1000/10,000/100,000 Results is useful.

I suppose that I am suggesting some FAQ pages for starting a ONS.
by Chris Little G2G6 Mach 5 (51.5k points)
edited by Chris Little
There is already a FAQ page:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:One_Name_Studies_FAQ_Page

It's been there since 2016.
And you could always look at the One Name Studies Project page, with its list of tasks:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Project:One_Name_Studies#Task_List
Ros, thank you pointing out those pages. I could see my suggestion #2 is adequately covered. I think #5 could usefully be added to the FAQ.

As an aside, without being given a link, I find it hard to find the ONS pages, as I didn’t think of ONS = Project. Of course ONS is under O in Help (Doh!)
Chris, I just wanted to comment on #1 and your reference to merging. There are some examples of this sort of approach where people have taken individual sources (a census entry or a marriage for example) and added people individually. While as part of an overall approach where you planned to merge people as couples and families were identified, I really do not think that is the way to go - especially in cases where they are not finished or even completely abandoned. One example that springs to mind is essentially a heap of orphaned profiles that include multiple duplicates.

A better approach is to document all the sources you have (a list of births, marriages, deaths, census entries) and tick them off as the families are created. Duplicates will of course arise as not everything will be mapped correctly at first but far less.

I think #5 is very important - be it a ONS or OPS or whatever the project is, doing it right is often a lot more work than could ever have been envisaged at the start.

Hi Jason, thank you for the considered responses. I was not advocating ‘source led’ for most ONSs, but in Cumberland, England, where there may be 3 or 4 cousins of similar ages, all named William, all baptised in the same church, and all with several children, and parents, called William, Mary, etc (and pre-census), the approach has been effective.

I agree that littering WikiTree with orphaned and isolated individual profiles is not desirable, but leaving profiles like the original behind [[Little-4509|Robert Henderson Little]] May be the greater sin!

I think an issue is that people do not have enough context for decisions. In the good old days when some of us sat in archives pouring over parchment looking for a baptism, one got a feel for the ‘data’, locality, names, etc. That experience is missing with many digital tools.

And yes, I agree with documenting all the sources being tackled. E.g. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Cumberland%2C_Little_Name_Study#Progress_Report

+4 votes

I've done two One Name Studies:  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Eastman_Name_Study and https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Rowley_Name_Study.  Sorry I can't translate it into wikiese but two keys on my computer are currently broken.

Anyway, I took two different approaches to the two different studies: Eastman and Rowley. Hope you enjoy looking at them,  Let me know how I can improve upon them, please,

I've also worked on them in two different ways. With Eastman, my documentation has been limited to Wikitree. With Rowley, I have documentation on Wikitree and I have spent more than 20 years on supplementing Http://www.RowleyResearch.org web site which was started by Tedd Rowley, now deceased.

by Judy Bramlage G2G6 Pilot (209k points)
+4 votes

I would like to offer the Beasley Surname Study as an example for this discussion. Like others, shying away from the "excellent" standard, I feel confident in a measure of progress. A central link outside of WikiTree is at the registered domain https://www.beasleygenealogy.net/. Always a work in progress.

This study is heavily organized around tested Haplotypes, using a color code system for identification using the colored headings at the Beasley YDNA Project.
The work is intended to be worldwide, though more results are present for the USA. The limiting factor is time. I would love to have partners, particularly in the UK, because all ancestral paths lead to early England.

I'm picky about definitions, particularly the naming of the Haplotypes containing tested and confirmed lineages. Only a small portion of the work is located at WikiTree. My work here is to connect, collaborate and maintain organizational identification. I gladly share all work for others to use as a means of expanding their own Beasley connection. An example of the Lineage work within a Haplotype can be seen here: Y-STR Blue Group. More examples of the use of color-coded charts can be found here: Beasley Chart images

All Study trees are located at Ancestry using the Study's naming convention [Haplotype color][Patriarch's name][DOB][POB][migration path]. Well, it isn't all perfect, but it is a goal.

I don't consider Ancestry as an ideal home, but given the size, this is the best way for me to keep track. Trees there are Private and Searchable. Private because I don't want speculation to be taken as fact without specific cautions on the development of each tree. With inquiries, I gladly share whatever is relevant.

That being said, the longterm home is at the Guild supported website: Beasley Project Trees using TNG software to archive all the Ancestry trees. The advantage here is that search can be done across all trees. It is periodically updated from Ancestry.

My biggest problem is finding a way of organizing and facilitating collaboration by cataloging all of my hundreds of contacts, including many who are not on WikiTree. I want people to find one another. The work-in-progress on this system is to be at https://www.beasleygenealogy.net/ using the Joomla component called Community Builder.

by Douglas Beezley G2G6 Mach 3 (35.4k points)
edited by Douglas Beezley

Related questions

+3 votes
2 answers
+14 votes
3 answers
+13 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
+16 votes
1 answer
+9 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
1 answer

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

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...