MAIDEN NAMES

As a genealogist I agree completely with you Diana Raquel Sainz y Wilson I have told Mike at Geni many times that having a namefield called "Lastname at birth" is completely wrong and that Geni is almost alone in the genelogical community to have such a namefield. I have also asked Mike to get rid of this field since it's only making a mess to us genealogists.

I disagree completely with Jonathan Scott Krengel that Geni has fileds that are purpose built. to contain the information that is appropriate. Last name field, genealogically, is not for the surname at death, but for the surname at birth. Geni has made the name fields uncertaine, uninventive and unsupportive of the genealogical standard, which is incomprehensible for us genealogists.

Jonathan Scott Krengel if your great grandfather was born an Olsson, his lastname genealogically should be Olsson. Then when he changed his lastname later in life, that should be written in the AKA field on Geni, which is genealogically correct, as long as the namefields are as they are on Geni at this moment.

Hopefully, Geni will change their namefields to become more like the genealogical standard and have the possibility to add multiple names according to both time and source. But as of now, Geni is lacking bigtime compared most offline genealogical software.

if you want to view only maiden names then you can change your name preferences to birth surname instead of last name.

https://www.geni.com/account_settings/name_preferences

the vast majority of us prefer using married surnames. i dont know who these many curators you are referring to are besides Remi.

Remi is quite alone about that. He have the option show surname at birth only if that is his wish without destroying for others.

We need to fully use the fields that we have on Geni, independent of what a Remis program made last millennium is using.

I do however agree with Remi that Geni need a total redesign of the use of names with having multiple complete name fields with a classification (maiden, immigrant, military etc), time period and source option. These names should not be mixed as today. If they ever implement that, it is important to use both the last and maiden name field as of today in Geni to make it possible to automatically convert them to the new format.

However: When Geni introduced a language option to names to solve an alphabet problem I understood that there is a long way to go - My name should be pronounced the same independent of what alphabet it is using. Only when including language dependent titles, like in display name it is needed, but that can be solved by a classification. A person is not born as a King og President, - he/she is that only for a time-period.

Jason Scott Wills this is not a viewing problem on Geni, this is about how names are written genealogically. Maybe the vast majority among (American) Geni users prefer using married surnames, but us genealogists do not, we prefer using the surnames at birth as a person's main surname. And I haven't referred to any curators, I have referred to how genelaogists write names, do you understand the difference?

And, Bjørn, I'm not alone thinking this, as all of us genealogists thinks the same, internationally, even the American genealogists. And it has nothing to do with whatever software I, users of Geni, or anyone else use, the genealogists write names the same way no matter what software is used.

Hi Diana,

You know we’ve discussed this, and I disagree with you, as you know. In fact, I consider your own name an excellent example of how to be culturally appropriate, and how Geni’s design, while limited (agree with Remi and Bjorn on that), works well for English and American naming practices and documents.

The Genealogical Proof Standard suggests we document first, name after, based on those documents. And USA documents, and law (social security), show the legal last name to be the name as recorded at the death event. So I’m not going to fight the US law, any more than I would fight the laws of Spain.

I use display name as little as possible, I agree it can mask tree viewing preferences. So luckily, we have at least two surname fields, and one is clearly labeled: birth surname. So that’s the solution (for now). Name preferences take care of the rest.

And for immigrant name changing ancestors, the two fields are ideal, in addition to adding language modules. The US has naturalization documents that ideally show both names (but not necessarily). And in any event, all of us who descend from these immigrants, which is probably most of the US, would like to see both names.

Diana Raquel Sainz y Wilson I would ofcourse use how names at birth are written in Spain when adding Spaniards according to the Spanish rules about how names are given to a child, as I would presume everyone else did to Norwegian children born when the patronymics were used, ofcourse with the exception when the family used a fixed surname.

re: My preference settings are set to see the woman's maiden name, but if someone personally entered it with parenthesis, or it is entered married and maiden and a locked field, it does not matter what my preferences are, it is entered incorrectly.

Agree, that is wrong. I routinely unlock, clear out display names, relock. I lock names because on geni, if we don’t, names have a nasty way of getting rewritten and turning into different people. I don’t lock to impose my naming preferences on others.

Please note: Diana is describing when the display name overrides her viewing preferences to see birth surname only. My view preferences are set to show birth surname surrounded by parentheses (Name), so there is never a need to add punctuation (or not). It’s in the viewing preferences.

Erica Howton and here comes your misconception in view again. Names in a genealogical database (which Geni is) is not written according to any country's laws, it's written according to the Genealogical Standard (which is not the same as the Genealogical Proof Standard). The Genealogical Standard says that names should be written using the names at birth, and in genealogical databases that triumphs whatever any country's laws states, even the American laws. So Lastname = Lastname at birth genealogically. It's about time you understand this. You can disagree with this all you want, but that is still how genealogists write names, even on Geni.

I agree, it’s possible this is not the “Genealogical Standard,”although I’d really want to know what genealogical societies in US have to say about that currently. The professional Jewish archivist / librarian / genealogist I worked for had multiple names in his DOS database, and his registry reports showed multiple names. Sometime I may “ask the genealogist” at AmericanAncestors, although I suspect they’ll say, depends on the software you use. Peer reviewed articles, such as in The American Genealogist, write out a woman’s name with both maiden and married.

In any event, my goal is GPS, not GS. That way I always know where I am. :)

Diana can choose to ignore display names, at https://www.geni.com/account_settings/name_preferences

Jonathan Scott Krengel has got it exactly right.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0-8FY9mkIQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVRwMDxrIE

Mike Stangel ofcourse we can choose our display settings, as the name fields are today, Jonathan may be using the namefields according to the way Geni wants, but that doesn't make him nor you correct. Geni hasn't got it right since the genealogists are not writing names the way Geni wants the names to be written and that is just something you need to acknowledge. We always write the name at birth in the Lastname field, no matter what software we use, and in my opinion it is not wise to do it any other way than what the genealogists do internationally. Just look at the two links I've attached to one of your competitors and see what they recommend.

OMG have you seen the bastardized names on Ancestry trees? Names like “4 gg went to Oklahoma on a sleigh his name I think was John Smith, maybe smithy, I not sure” ?

Remi, you do realize that what you call “lastname” is birth surname, on Geni and MyHeritage, and what Christa Cowen called “maiden name” (since apparently she doesn’t have name changing immigrant men in her tree). It’s just semantics, it seems to me.

In USA forms, maiden name / birth surname are “alternative” names (names you might have also been known as). Of course I don’t agree with that, either.

Elaine, ofcourse I don't write any names in Geni's namefield called Birth Surname that Geni is almost alone among the genealogical softwares to use since a person's lastname at birth is written in the Lastname field when writing names genealogically.

No, I don't want to change 152 million profiles to my way of thinking, I want to change the namefields on Geni to the genealogical way of thinking. Geni is a genealogical site, isn't it?

My settings are
- Birth Surname at the end
- Birth Surname in parantheses
- Show Suffixes
- Show Middle names.

And I don't have a problem at all, I write names genealogically on Geni as I do in every genealogical software I use (as everyone should).

For what it’s worth, Wikitree, for me, is most similar to geni.

Here’s their naming guidance page:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Name_Fields#Last_Name_at_Birth

This page only includes style rules that have been agreed-upon by the community for all of WikiTree. For pre-1700 profiles and some others you also need to consult the more particular rules developed by the project that covers the specific time period and location. See the Name Field Guidelines directory.

It's common for a person's name to change, especially with immigrants.
—-

The Proper First Name and Last Name at Birth fields should be the names they were born with, in their native language.

The Preferred First Name and Current Last Name should be the names they used at the end of their life.
—-

Current Last Name. This field could be called Preferred Last Name, Last Name at Death or Married Name. For living people, it should be whatever they would currently prefer. For non-living people, it should be the last name they were using at the time of their death. If a woman had multiple married names you can include the others in the Other Last Names field.

And they do call themselves genealogists.

Private User

Although I am definitely guilty of sometimes putting a string of last names in the Last Name Field because it helps me. And when that is how it is in their Death Notice, then I do not even feel guilty about it

We’ve been discussing that, here and there, and what fields to use. I’ve been adamant that it’s one name at a time! Not a string! Not a middle name! But you’re quite right, death noticed and obituaries, especially nowadays, do often enough string the names together. And, sometimes women do (essentially) turn a previous married name into a middle name.

Diana has demonstrated, and I think we all agree, how critical it is not to impose our own view preferences onto others in a collaborative tree. So that would suggest using display name for this scenario may not be the right solution, which is what I’d ordinarily think of to recommend. So as long as your usage is document supported, and you’re not in a busy / confusing area, I guess it’s the best idea, for now. Carefully. :)