Cochoit Working 17

Date: [unknown] [unknown]
Location: [unknown]

Is this going to prevent Project Protection on profiles that need it?

As long as we are making changes to who belongs in the project, I would like to make another. Our end date is wrong. There has recently been a large number of recent posts to exclude profiles where there is not a clear record of someone in New England by 1640. This sort of exclusionary approach is eliminating profiles which clearly belong in the project. Do you really think someone immigrating in 1641 was in anyway different from someone immigrating in 1640? It is also eliminating people who almost certainly were in New England prior to 1640 but didn't leave a record until 1641-1642.

We should go back to where the project started - studying the early migration to New England which led to the founding of the US. Anderson was always considered a tremendous resource and guide for the project, but it is only recently that people have been acting like a profile belongs in the project ONLY if Anderson has covered the individual. To me, the migration of people from England to New England looking for religious freedoms and economic opportunities can be said to have continued at least until 1650. Anderson has his own reasons for having a sharp cutoff date of 1640, mainly because it captures the vast majority of Great Migration immigrants and allowed him to complete the project so it could be published in a timely manner. However, it is not because the Great Migration officially ended on that date. It is certainly recognized that immigration to New England dropped sharply with the start of English Civil War, but that begs the question as to why we don't use 1642 instead of 1640.

In the past, project leaders recognized all this but also felt that the project was already too large. So to them, it made sense to just use the 1640 date since that's what Anderson was using. The greatest improvement to WikiTree since I have been here has been the advent of Project Protection. The number of errors in print and on the internet number in the tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands. Project Protection has allowed us to cleanup and block a vast number of these errors from reappearing in WikiTree. The greatest service PGM can do for WikiTree is to take in any profile for which there is any question or past error with regard to their English origins. This is where PGM Adjunct came from as a way to PP profiles which did not meet the strict 1640 cutoff. I am not concerned about the size of the project - it is already so large that a few more will not make a difference or be noticed.

I don't want to be slavishly devoted to Anderson at all as the rule setter for PGM. The definition PGM uses should be whatever works best for the project and for WikiTree (this may be very close to Anderson for obvious reasons). Anderson himself completely acknowledges that he misses a number of immigrants that came after 1640, and a fair number that were here by 1640 but left no record; however, he states that he is okay with that as these profiles will be captured by the Early New England Study Project. We don't have a similar way to capture these profiles. I would want the definition to be more inclusive to capture immigrants that Anderson misses. So my definition would be any immigrant to New England prior to 1650 as it would capture just about all relevant profiles. I would even be okay with 1645. Note that I would not include children born in England if their parents are in the project; this is my way of limiting the size of the project. I would aggressively use PGM Adjunct as a way to Project Protect any profile with known false origins or parents - there is no reason not to and, as I said, it is the greatest service PGM can provide to WikiTree.

I can understand people wanting to stick with the 1640 definition. However, my default would be to be inclusive and take in borderline profiles, rather than have all these G2G questions about removing profiles from the project. Really, why? Do you really think someone whose first record is land ownership in 1641 wasn't in New England prior to 1640? If they truly immigrated in 1641, do you think they are in anyway fundamentally different than someone who immigrated in December 1640? I want all these profiles in PGM, because I trust the project to watch over them and help keep WikiTree as accurate as possible.