WikiTree Bio check app, needs some correction

Question

Just found out that Bio chgack app is directing members that ==Notes== is not appropriate.  Only accepts ==research notes== under this level.  Please note that Research notes is in English, and doesn't fit with other languages, as a first item.

Secondly, ==Notes== can include supplemental data that supports the narrative bio but would make the bio rather messy or not easily readable.  Or applies to both languages in a bilingual bio.  

It's all about styles.  Can we get this app corrected so it doesn't direct people to do unnecessary edits on profiles please?

Answer 1

I think BioCheck is correctly following the rules/guidelines here:

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Biographies

There is nothing to prevent you having a === Notes === within the == Biography == section.

Comments

Notes in this instance are not a sub of biography, and as I already said, Research notes is English.  If I'm writing a French bio, it is totally out of place. 

Answer 2

The Bio Check app follows the guidance provided for Biographies which identifies the second level headings Biography, Sources, Research Notes and Acknowledgements. Other headings, such as Notes would be a subsection, or third level heading.

So the app is merely following WikiTree guidance.

It does (or should) recognize Research Notes in other languages, such as "notes de recherche". Let me know if I am missing some.

Comments

The ''Research notes'' are optional.  Research notes are actually quite limited in their definition.  This isn't really about the app except in its current application, it's about the very Style guide.

---

Hi Danielle. BioCheck is quite correctly following current WikiTree policy. The way to propose a change to a style or help page is described at Developing New Rules.

---

Hi, Danielle, it seems you are contradicting yourself.  Now you are saying it not really about the app, but is about the style guide, whereas in your question you are blaming the app for the issue you are having.

As has been stated, Research Notes is the correct level 2 header, notes is incorrect.  If you wish "Notes" to be a header, it needs to be level 3 or even 4.
I don't see "Research Notes" to be limited at all and, as Kay has said, it does not need to be in English so long as it is another language version of "Research Notes" and not simply "notes" (which is incorrect).

---

the app is directing people to change things in its current application, which is how I found out about this.  It does cause problems.  For instance, see Nicolas Marsolet's profile.  Putting ''Research notes'' as a header instead of ''Notes'' is erroneous.  And changing the Notes header from == to === makes it into a sub-header of the English bio, which is inaccurate.  The items below the ==Notes== belong to both languages really.

---

As stated earlier, you are complaining about the Style Guide. If you want that page changed, then you need to request that change.  BioCheck app has stated on it's Help Pages that it is following the Wikitree Help Pages.

---

Danielle, wouldn't you want the Notes to be in both languages on the profile?  In that case you could have 'Notes' as a 3 equal sign header under each section.

Answer 3

I think we are missing Danielle's point. The issue is translation. The word "Notes" appears the same in French or English, but "Research" is spelled differently in French "Recherche". If you combine the words, you could say "Notes de Recherche".

The guidelines were written for English, but we need to be open to differences in languages if we want it to be global.

In collaborative platforms like Wikitree, it's common to find a balance between clarity and inclusivity, considering users who may use different languages. However, if they prefer simplicity and believe "Notes" is sufficient, that choice can be respected.

Too much focus is placed on the guidelines. When it should be, do we need a change? and is so, how the user should address this.

Comments

I don't think that point was missed.  Kay said in her answer that 

It does (or should) recognize Research Notes in other languages, such as "notes de recherche". Let me know if I am missing some.

answered

 

9 hours ago by Kay Knight 

---

The issue is not translation. Kay has said that BioCheck accepts "Notes de recherche" in place of "Research Notes".

The issue instead seems to be that Danielle wants a separate section with a level–2 heading "Notes". The only way to achieve that would be through a policy change proposal.

Edited to note: My comment and Melanie's were almost simultaneous.

Answer 4

I think the problem is in the guidelines.  Notes. should be allowed as a level 2 heading.  It should be allowed either in addition to Research Notes or in place of Research Notes, as determined by the editor or manager.  

As noted in other answers.  == Notes == do not reasonably belong under any of the other headings.

So, how do we get this guideline changed? Who decided it is 'incorrect'?

- Aunt Peggy

Comments

Peggy, please read the answers and comments that were posted before yours. The way to get the guideline changed has been explained at least twice.

However, it seems to me that Linda's solution of bilingual notes with level–3 headings is worth considering instead. It's a lot easier than a policy change proposal that would probably fail anyhow.

Answer 5

"supplemental data that supports the narrative bio but would make the bio rather messy or not easily readable" - I would put those either in footnotes or in a Free Space page with a link in the bio.

Answer 6

I have been staying away from this as I am rather upset by some of the responses received.  Biographies help page gives only 2 required things:  ==Biography== at the beginning and ==Sources== with <references /> under it.

Research notes are optional.

There isn't a requirement to name this ''Research notes'' in concrete.  The page reads lower down: Here is the recommended order for text sections and other elements:

Recommended.  Not mandatory.  

Apps are all very well, but they cannot think.  I have seen this app being used to change existing profiles, all of which were project profiles, with properly researched bios already in place, without any communication whatsoever.  And my attention was drawn to this by another member, who didn't think this was right.

Comments

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Biographies#Optional:_Additional_subsections states

When you have a significant amount of information, you might want to break the section into subsections. These should have "level three" headlines as opposed to the "level two" headlines for the main sections. That is, they should have three equal signs around them instead of two

So there are only four approved sections, and others should be subsections.

This https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Editing_Tips#Subheadings explains the difference between the == two level headings and the === three level subheadings. Per the Biographies help, there are only 4 two level headings, and Research Notes and Acknowledgements are optional.

Further described here https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Recommended_Tags

It is unfortunate that there are people who failed to Communicate before editing.

Apps do not think. People who use apps may not think. The Bio Check app does not change anything (have you tried using it?), it was a person who did this. So don't blame the app for pointing out WikiTree policy, as contained in the help pages, instead reach out to the individuals who should not have changed actively managed or project managed profiles.