From: Elizabeth Richardson <erich...@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
Date: Sunday, January 4, 2009, 12:43 AM
Ron, my response was in my own work. Because I'm working
a descendancy, I nearly always have a marriage before I have
children (I cannot recall a time when this wasn't true,
but surely I have an unmarried parents somewhere!). My
primary exception is in adding the parents of a newly
acquired spouse, at which time I know both parents.
My response in this thread was really to address your
statement: "I haven't been able to pin it down but
the order in which one adds partners now seems to be more
important than it once was, eg to avoid problems
'marry' the couple before giving them
children!"
Because most people are working backwards, searching
ancestors, most data entry will be from the child to the
parent, rather than having a marriage and adding children.
It appears people are having a problem when they try to add
one parent without knowing both parents, then running a
report to see what things look like. I also rarely run
reports for my own use, but have tried them when problems
arise here, so I don't run into as many problems as
others.
Elizabeth
researching the descendants of William and Sarah
(Patterson) Thompson
----- Original Message ----- From: "ronald
ferguson" <ronfe...@msn.com>
To: <legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:31 PM
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Correction please see below:
Ron Ferguson
_____________________________________________________________________
Now completely revised
http://www.fergys.co.uk
View the Grimshaw Family Tree at:
http://www.fergys.co.uk/Grimshaw/
For The Fergusons of N.W. England See:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/
_____________________________________________________________________
----------------------------------------
> From: ronfe...@msn.com
> To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com
> Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
> Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 23:59:01 +0000
>
>
> Elizabeth,
>
> The procedure which you adopt should not, in my
experience, lead to any problems. In fact it is pretty much
the order in which I also enter data.
>
> I cannot see how the wife is "always" after
the father - I have examples of having a father and not
knowing the mother.
should read "of having a mother and not knowing the
father" (of course)
However, that is an aside, the point being that one should
excercise care when adding a partner to an individual with
children. As far as I can see the sexes of the
parent/partner does not matter.
>
> Others may have found the situation arising under
circumstances different to those I have examined but I have
only reproduced it when there is an unknown partner and a
new partner is being added. As I said, I cannot pin point
the exact conditions.
>
> I have not experienced it in my own work.
>
> Ron Ferguson
>
>
_____________________________________________________________________
>
> Now completely revised
> http://www.fergys.co.uk
> View the Grimshaw Family Tree at:
> http://www.fergys.co.uk/Grimshaw/
> For The Fergusons of N.W. England See:
> http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/fergys/
>
_____________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> From: erich...@worldnet.att.net
>> To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com
>> Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
>> Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:45:09 -0900
>>
>>
>>
>> Ron said:
>>
>> As is known, should an individual have a child and
there is no existing
>> 'marriage' then Legacy creates one, and
unless told otherwise will enter
>> "Joe Bloggs married Unknown/someone" in
reports. However there now seems to
>> be a change in the way that this is treated if a
partner is subsequently
>> added. I haven't been able to pin it down but
the order in which one adds
>> partners now seems to be more important than it
once was, eg to avoid
>> problems 'marry' the couple before giving
them children!
>>
>>
>> Ron, in v7, a very routine procedure for me:
>>
>> 1. I add a wife to a fellow already in my database
>> 2. I add the wife's father
>> 3. I add the wife's mother
>>
>> Never do I go to add new individual without
knowing the relationship ahead
>> of time, so I would never add the wife's
mother and father and then link to
>> an existing child. The wife, by the way, is always
added subsequent to the
>> father. Not knowing how to add more than one
person at a time, one is always
>> subsequent to the other. I just tested several of
my people in an ancestor
>> book report and nowhere does the name
"someone" appear. I'm aware that what
>> we are discussing is the case of knowing the
mother, but not knowing the
>> father, then later learning the name of the
father. Are people creating a
>> new person, or are they changing the name of the
unknown person already
>> linked to the mother?
>>
>> Elizabeth
>> researching the descendants of William and Sarah
(Patterson) Thompson
>>
