The de Villiers Pama Numbering System

Don, this discussion seems to be duplicated.

Yes you are right Pam... I have posted in 2 different places in an attempt to attract voters..

Anybody have an idea how twins should be DVP numbered..... I think Manuel Pinto Carlo Ferreira B3-2 and Martha Maria Ferreira B3 are twins...

In the publications they are numbered in the same way as others, I suspect regardless of birth sequence, but usually with "een v. tweeling" in the information. I guess if you know which was born first that would be reflected.

In this case there is no table for this family in SAF v 10 Far-Fouc - the numbers have been generated by the sole manager.

I also use a symbol - http://www.geni.com/photo/view/6000000027617516713?album_type=photo...

I would assume that the first born would have the lower number.
In my family they appear in that sequence, but I suppose because we send them to GISA in that sequence.
Researchers working from church registers would not know what the sequence was

Agree Daan. But in the case where we don't know I suggest weuse the "een van 'n tweeling" with June's image.
I have also used that quite often.

Self-generated numbers in the suffix are a citation problem.

Sharon they are not really a problem if the user makes a note in the "about" notes stating that they have generated the numbers. Sadly people don't do that.

Have a look at my husband's Greenlees family.

Gavin Greenlees went to South Africa with the army around 1830. Our personal table can be seen at http://cjunebarnes.co.uk/Textiles/Family_History_files/greenlees.pdf where he is

D1 Gavin Greenlees Born 01.09.1804, Bapt. 03.09.1804 Ayr Scotland (Extract
Old Parochial Register) Died Tuesday 17.10.1876 Grahamstown, aged 72 South Africa (Source Death Notice) Occupation Librarian and Clerk Married Susannah Scott (Born c 10.1816 Woolwich, England Father James, Mother
Eliza Armstrong) Died 30.08.1891, Grahamstown aged 74 yrs and 10mths

If I wanted to I could add the numbers from that document to the GENi tree notes (my A is NOT the SV/PROG in SA) citing that document - which I could link to the profile. If/when I submit a full tree to GISA their A would be Gavin as the SV/PROG and then their publications could be cited as a source with the number they use as a reference point.

The numbers are not exclusive to GISA - many people use them when writing tables as can be seen in publications such as Familia and Genesis. They are a useful tool just as the other systems are - Ahnentafel, Henry System etc. etc. when writing such tables - one I find the most logical to use.

I choose not to add the reference from my document to the profiles on GENI. If someone else were to reference that document in their research I would expect them to cite their source

On the GENi tree many SA users have added the numbers as published by GISA in their publications and these need to be cited in the notes or through the sources as reference points/sources. If anyone needs a hand on how to do this please get in touch with me.

I do not wish to revisit the debate here as to where/whether etc. the numbers need to be added - but perhaps to explain their function and use a little. I would also like to encourage citing the source on the GENi profiles - something I and a few others are addressing - but progress is slow. Volunteers would be very welcome!

Sorry - link to Gavin - Gavin Greenlees

Learning to cite the correct version of the GISA sources in the About is very important.
Self-generated numbers in the suffix are a personal whim that contradicts World Tree standards

If the GISA sources of these DVPs was freely available we could call for volunteers to pitch in and begin citing the source.

The fact is that they are not..
SAG on CD vol 1 - 17 R3,420.00
SAF on CD SAF v1 (A) - SAF v20 (Kock - Ky) R4,790.00

SAF is not yet complete (ends at Ky) and the only "complete" A-Z available (SAG) has numbers which contradict SAF makes citing DVPs messy and problematic...

Which is why the burden falls on those who do have access - so if anyone who has access and wants to lend a hand I would welcome them with open arms!!!

Just don't do the L to Zs until the SAF version is out, or you'll have to recheck and redo all the contradictions.

There are thousands of numbers in place covering those letters - they will be be sourced as I work on the tree - all information added to the profiles should carry a source - even if they will need correcting at a later date!

Obviously if anyone wishes to be systematic about it the more recent SAF's should be used and references to them will take precedence/over-ride early references.

Agreed. Good luck.

SAF A-K in fact replaced SAG A-K and would reflect the latest results.

Only in case where additional information/children were found, the numbers changed from SAG to SAF - most numbers stayed the same.

Majority of additions in SAF was due to adding additional profiles coveing 1860's to 1930's

When I submit new information to GISA they normally confirm the revised numbers within days. Although not generally available until next edition, these notifications should be added to profiles and IRREGULARITIES. Interrim additions are however available in GISA reading room at Stellenbosch.

My point I was trying to make Daan, is if you want to be able to verify DVPs from A to Z you need to spend R8 210,00

Don, I think we understand that not everyone is in a position to verify these details as they do not have access to those publications. Those who added the profiles and allocated the numbers either used the publications as a source (I know that I have but sadly haven't always added the source) or if they didn't work directly from the books they have used the information 2nd hand from another source (not often given). I guess they may have borrowed the books from a library - which would be possible in this country - I can't speak for South Africa.

So it falls to those who do have access to verify the sources, and if anyone in that position wishes to lend a hand I am happy to co-ordinate a working party! Please contact me by personal message!

When I joined eGSSA, I was allowed access to SAG/SAF at the Erfenisstigting library at the Voortrekker Monument. It would be great if GISA can come up with a different funding model to enable wide-access and up-to-date online viewing (Ads on their website, referrals, social-platforms, day/week/monthly subscription fees, etc.). Their current system seems to be somewhat draconian with severely limited access. They need to embrace IT transformation.

Do they ever!

A full set of SAG is available in most libraries even in a small town like Stilbaai.
My consideration for procuring the DVD's of SAG originally and SAF subsequently was an economic one. Sourcing information a number of years ago was costly and travelling to archives was/is costly.
Searching electronically saves a lot of time which was another consideration.
I lend a hand to anybody who requests information andhelp is offered in Geni projects http://www.geni.com/projects/Random-Acts-of-GENI-Kindness-South-Afr....

Private User - I'm hearing that as a volunteer for your team :-)

Daan and I are already working together on this

Good afternoon all

Over the past few days there was an unasked for attack on GISA and its services. Most of the comments displayed the ignorance of those who commented. Here are a few facts:

GISA is an independent organisation controlled by a Board who consists out of the founding members, viz the GSSA, Huguenot Trust, Huguenot Society, Huguenot Museum and the University of Stellenbosch. The LDS and UPEGIS was also founding members but decided to withdraw.

The building we occupy is by the courtesy of the University.

We have three staff members, Nicol Geldenhuis (6/8 post); Pauletta Joubert (full day) and Lorna Olivier (5/8). These people must be paid form the little money we made out of selling CD's and the small fee we ask for entrance.

In the past we had donations from Naspers and Het Jan S Marais Stigting. Unfortunately we cannot ask the same people every year for funding.

During the past six months we realised that we had to replace the microfilm readers. Unfortunately they are outdated and cannot be repaired anymore. This week we bought a new microfilm converter which allows us now to convert a microfilm into a digital format and this then becomes available on the GISA server. This eases the work of many researchers.

Our collections consist out of the books we inherited from the HSRC and genealogies we generously received from authors. We do not own any registers of the DR church.

Thy DR Church are the owners of their baptismal and marriage registers. They had a scanning/digitization agreement with the LDS. They also went into a SLA with GISA, where we receive a copy of every register that was digitized. In return they will not serve the public when it comes the genealogical inquiries as they just don't have the staff for it. In return we will then render this service. Any information from membership rolls, minutes and agendas of church board meetings can be requested at the Church archives here in Stellenbosch.

It is therefore not the place for GISA to make the digital content of other institutions available on our website.

Regarding all the comments about SAF/SAG: We are the only country in the world with a comprehensive genealogy. SA researchers don't realise the value they have in this. The amount of time and money that is necessary to compile these Cd's can never be measured in monetary terms. Any Cd of that kind with the amount of research that went into it will cost much more.

SAG covered the period 1652-1830 and SAF is now covering the 1652-1930 period. Most of the information doubled in volume and much more information is now available.

Instead of the constant complaints from a certain user group I would rather encourage them to start contributing to the collection. Please provide us with your input on any family you think that should be included in SAF. We do not exclude any family group and will welcome all contributions. Please supply us also with the corrections that need to be done - I am sure that you are all too well aware that there is no perfect genealogy. Then we would also like to receive donation whether it is in the form of copies of genealogies, time to help with indexing or financial support.

We would like to support researchers and value their contributions.

Regards

Andrew Kok
Chairman: GISA Board

Andrew - thank you so much for your input - hopefully people will be enlightened and be encouraged to participate in what is a very special and unique resource for South African Genealogy!

Thank you Andrew, I endorse what you say. Collaborating offers much more synergy than uninformed criticism!.
Nicol demonstrated your new facility when I visited on Thursday and I am pleasantly surprised with the ease of scanning through information now. I realise you are only implementing now, but Nicol assured me that needs of researchers get priority in converting information to the new system.
The ease of getting the documents from the indexes on GGSA web and requesting documents to be prepared prior to one's visit also contribute to easier access.
I got the impression that plans are in process to provide the information, of which you are the owners, ultimately on web. I would however miss the pleasant atmosphere of your reading room and the friendly and helpful assistance of all the GISA personnel

Hi Andrew
Your post gives interesting details into your experience of trying to keep the GISA numbering system going. I remember microfilm archiving from my first degree in the 80s; so you have my sympathies if you’re still trying to work from records located in that format.

I would certainly disagree that there has been an attack on the GISA numbers themselves. GISA is an entity selling a product of its own that is separate from Geni, and the debate here has been about their placement in the Geni Suffix Fields (not intended by Geni for this purpose) rather than in the About field.

You seem to be reiterating the points that were made - that the GISA numbering system is a very restricted system, constrained by finances in its ability to maintain updates that can even hope to keep up with the Geni tree, and that the numbers will cause mismerges in the suffix field by contradicting themselves or by having to be made up where they are outdated or don’t exist.

Thanks Andrew for your input, calling the criticism an attack may be a little harsh, criticism can often be constructive, whether uninformed or otherwise… one positive is the explanation you have provided for us..

Constant complaints on the use of the DVP numbers on Geni should be seen in the light that this is a collaborative environment where amateur genealogists are attempting to find the best way to shoe horn a numbering system into a program that does not have a designed in way to accommodate them.