Thena, I do hate complicated messed up families, I have some myself, so you have my sympathies!
Thank you for the table it is so much easier to see what is going on when set down like that rather than in words. Following this table I constructed the family, with, perhaps, one difference: I actually named the unknown partners "First Unknown" and "Second Unknown", mainly so that I could identify the two separate unknown fathers. I then unlinked all the marriages using the *mother* as the base person in every case. I am not saying it won't work using the father just that I didn't and it may be different. After all the unlinking you will see that the mother still has 3 (now) "unknown" partners as the kids are still linked, *Delete* (not unlink) these "marriage links". Now I reconstructed the families in *the order in which they were created* - as per your table - noting whether the families were not married and/or didn't have children as I went along. I also added the appropriate child as I went along. This resulted in families with all the 1/2 kids intact. Then I deleted the "First Unknown" and the result was exactly as you described. On adding the name "First Unknown" then for *all* families the 1/2 kids were correct. This also applies, as one would expect to the "Second Unknown" Finally, I deleted the given name "First" just leaving the surname as "Unknown" for the first unknown and all families were still correct. Similarly for the "Second Unknown" I can understand why this happens and I am not certain it is a bug, but it does seem that where there are two unknown partners then both of them must specifically have a name - even both are the same eg. "Unknown". I hope this helps. Ron Ferguson _____________________________________________________________________ New Tutorial: Embed a Blogger RSS feed on your webpage 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: tsjone...@verizon.net > To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com > Subject: [LegacyUG] half siblings do not show in all family views > Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 11:57:35 -0400 > > Hello, > > Not all of the half-siblings appear in children's lists of the mother's 5 > Family Views. I have selected to "show 1/2 kids." This is a complicated > family and I hope I am clear about this. > > (I am using version 7.0.0.109, on Windows Vista.) > > The mother had three children, all different fathers. She was married twice > (no children), and had children from 3 relationships. I have the name of one > of those fathers. Originally I did not have the children assigned to correct > fathers; I had assigned them to the two husbands. > > When I found more information on their parentage, I fixed the family like > this: > > I unlinked all children. I added another husband (the known relationship), > and edited the marriage to show they were not married. Now I had 3 named > males, linked as spouses/relationships to the mother. So far so good. > > Then I added back the children, in order of birth. For the 1st and 3rd > children, I selected that child and added the mother only (link to existing > person). For the second child, I used the family view that showed his mother > and father, and added the son (link to existing person). > > When I bring up the mother's Spouse list and select either of the entries > for "unknown", one of the children - one of the 2 daughters - disappears > from the children list. > > 1. Husband1 - no children family view shows all 3 children > 2. unknown - child 1 family view shows his child, and > child 2 > 3. Husband2 - no children family view shows all 3 children > 4. named relationship - child 2 family view shows all 3 children > 5. unknown - child 3 family view shows his child, and > child 2 > > I have gone into each "marriage" and checked "had no children" (for the > spouses) and "this couple did not marry" (for the relationships). This > didn't make any difference in which children show for the unknowns. > > I ran file maintenance - check/repair. > > If I click on one of the "disappearing" children (1 or 3) so she is in the > female box, and then view her siblings, I should see > > this person > 1/2 brother > 1/2 sister > > Instead, the 1/2 sister does not have the "1/2" before her name. However, if > I deselect "show half brothers and sisters" then both siblings disappear (as > they should.) > > How can I get the missing 1/2 sibling to show when the family view includes > one of the unknown relationships? > > --Thena > > _________________________________________________________________ Access your other email accounts and manage all your email from one place. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/167688463/direct/01/ Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
