I like the idea of a Bridge person that makes it clear what is happening. Thanks
Cary [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 4:29 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Unlikely but well documented lines I agree with Susan. I have done similar "link" or "placeholder" names. I have several of them in my database for three purposes: 1) the "disproven" as you've noted, where you want to report that something is false, 2) the "placeholder" where I know there is a linkage but don't have names/details yet, and 3) a few "unrelated" family lines with same names, where I find it easier to handle it within one family database rather than repeatedly using split-screen, etc. Depending on whom I am publishing something to, I may or may not remove these from the report. And if I wanted to produce a "pure" database (e.g. for putting up on RootsWeb or Ancestry), it would be easy to do. Mike Michael J Method In a message dated 12/29/2006 12:28:06 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would just leave it as notes, personally, and unlink the incorrect information. If you leave the links in there, the notes can disappear, and you will just have added to the propagation of the erroneous information. Or what you might do, to make it even more clear, is create a bridge link person that states in given name "This line has been proven to be untrue." And in the Surname field, put in the false connection's name as "Surname-Given Name-Father of so-and-so". Add this bridge person to the false connection's children list, and make this bridge person the parent of the last proven ancestor. Change the wording on the bridge person's name to reflect the actual situation. It adds a generation, but does it matter at this point since it is unproven? Susan Daily On 12/27/06, Cary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For the people I can prove are historical I have added comments as to what > stories are not true with Myth Events. However, how can I document that I > know of the alleged-but-unlikely-to-exist early ancestors but am entering > them only so that people will know I am aware of the myths but either have > disproved them or very much doubt their truth? I'd like the totally > unproven and unlikely generations to appear in reports in Italics (along > with their Myth events). If I break the link then they don't print at all > and others could think I was unaware of the allegations rather than having > disproved them with a lovely week at the PRO in Kew. > > Cary > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Give the gift of Legacy for the holidays! Order online at http://legacyfamilytree.com/Redirect/Store-Legacy.asp or call 1-800-753-3453. *** Legacy User Group guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ For online technical support, please visit http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp *** Give the gift of Legacy for the holidays! Order online at http://legacyfamilytree.com/Redirect/Store-Legacy.asp or call 1-800-753-3453. *** Legacy User Group guidelines can be found at: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ For online technical support, please visit http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
