Talk:Jacob Johnson (father of Andrew Johnson)

message: Apart from being the father of a US president, how is Jacob Johnson notable? -- Chuq 02:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Would either of those be notable if he wasn't also a former president's father?  I guess my question is, what disambiguator name should we use (since other people with this name exist - see Jacob Johnson (disambiguation)).  Jacob Johnson (father of President), doesn't really look right.  Neither does Jacob Johnson (Raleigh citizen) or Jacob Johnson (rescuer) -- Chuq 12:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I appreciate the concern about whether or not this page should exist, but I'd like to highlight a few examples of why it might remain.
* Jacob Johnson was the father of president Andrew Johnson. Yes, fame isn't inherited, but one doesn't just need to be famous to be on Wikipedia. In this case, knowledge about Jacob Johnson can inform our understanding of Andrew Johnson. I would also note that there's a Wikipedia category for "Fathers of Presidents of the United States," and one may safely assume that most of these men were not themselves famous.
* Jacob Johnson is one of the earlier residents of Raleigh, North Carolina. There's not exactly a ton of information about the city's early residents, and Jacob's connection to Andrew Johnson makes his life marginally more accessible to historians.
* This is a well-researched article with a good number of contributions. This does not detract from Wikipedia.
For these reasons, I am respectfully removing the Proposed Deletion info box.
Mike Helms (talk) 12:46, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Deletion

message: Scientific data that have not undergone peer review are not considered WP:Reliable sources.  There is no telling whether the self-reported data are authentic, either in terms of the reported genealogy or the haplotyping. Agricolae (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Good for you.  I am sure you have put a lot of work into this, but Wikipedia is not the place to publish your personal (or group) research findings - that is called Original Research, and is explicitly forbidden, and one should not use it for advocacy.  Please see WP:NOR, WP:FORUM, WP:SOAPBOX.  If the findings are of importance, then you shouldn't have any problem getting them published.  This is an important step because it means someone else, an editor, thinks what you have found is both accurate and important.  Self-published material is not considered reliable on Wikipedia, because there has been no such vetting of the material.  This is even worse, because your description suggests FTDNA did not think your synthesis was worthy of preserving, and as you say, it is now no longer available.  It doesn't matter how credible or accurate you think the results are, and it doesn't matter the expertise you claim (which, I note, does not include genetics).  Everyone thinks their own conclusions are correct, and anyone can claim expertise.  One of the fundamental features of Wikipedia (though some consider it a flaw) is that it does not give weight to the expertise of editors.  Wikipedia bases its conclusions on published, vetted, and preferentially secondary sources.  You are presenting as fact your personal interpretation of scientific data that has been self reported.  THat is not the material of which Wikipedia articles are built.  Agricolae (talk) 16:48, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

text: This is why I am not a big fan of putting extensive genealogy in Wikipedia biographies.  Some of what has been published in genealogical publications, particularly older ones, is demonstrably wrong, but it takes the Original Research to demonstrate it as such, and that is prohibited.  It only creates a connundrum.  If you are absolutely convinced that the published placement from the genealogical article is incorrect, don't include it in the article, or at least don't put so much emphasis on it. Agricolae (talk) 19:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: DNA results

message: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/23297/jacob-johnson 38.42.2.144 (talk) 23:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The citation to his gravestone information