RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
In cases like this I have changed my wording on an individual record basis to 'had a child with' and if it is truly a case of father unknown rather than father's name not known at this point I make the father's name (First Name) an (Surname) unknown man. I 'create' this person each time rather than reusing a default person. Also have to check This couple did not marry. I also have Legacy set to 'not change what I type' for surnames. (Usually I type surnames in capitals - but not in this case. I also don't select for the report to capitalise surnames - because I've already done it.) Reports then read - Mary SMITH had a child with an unknown man. Their child was . Of course if she happened you have more than one illegitimate child and you know the father was the same person you could change the wording accordingly. Otherwise, add each relationship separately. Cheers, Jan -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf Of ronald ferguson Sent: Sunday, 4 January 2009 11:27:AM To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone Have you tried tried going to the individual's marriage screen, and for the 'marriage' to the unknown person change it to 'partnered' (or whatever suits). Also check the 'this couple did not marry' box. The report output will then read Jane partnered. Like you, I think, I would prefer it to say nothing at all. 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/ _ Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:37:34 -0800 From: seaic2008-...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Nope. The report still says Mary Jones married someone. --- On Sat, 1/3/09, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote: From: Dennis M. Kowallek Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 6:22 PM On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:46:53 -0800 (PST), seaic2008-...@yahoo.com wrote: There is another problem having Legacy automatically insert Someone into reports. I have many old German records in which the female had one or more illegitimate children. When the child is entered for the woman, Legacy automatically makes a marriage and reports state that the female married Someone when in fact the female may never have married. Thus you end up with an inaccurate report. Doesn't checking the This couple did not marry box and/or changing the default wording solve the problem? -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ _ Get Windows Live Messenger on your Mobile http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/msnnkmgl001001ukm/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 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
I know I am replying to this almost a month after it was posted - and I'm sure others have commented on the someone issue. But in checking to see if I had the same problem (I don't by the way - marriage sentences are fine) I did discover another two problems. If I select the option to have source citations listed after each generation, and begun on a new page, the title on some source citation pages picks up the report subject's spouse's name instead of the heading Source Citations. It appears to happen for the first two generations back from the subject (i.e. parents and grandparents). Following generations say Ancestors of Subject Name. This does not happen if I have the citations at the end of the report. Heading on all relevant pages there is Source Citations. Also, regardless of the format options of the report if there is a photo on the Title Page it is covering up part of the report title. Anyone else seeing these problems? I'm using Legacy Deluxe 7.0.0.86. Cheers, Jan -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Saturday, 3 January 2009 8:01:AM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
My way of doing it is Given Name= [GNU] Surname= [SNU] Lloyd In a message dated 1/3/2009 7:18:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, wynth...@yahoo.com writes: I *always* enter a 'name' for a marriage partner- even if I don't know it! A spouse with an unknown name would be entered as: Given Name:_ Surname:~ Then I chnage it when I get the real name. 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
But Jill, does the birth certficate/record give the marriage date information? That's the information that Kirsten is entering without knowing the other half of the marriage. I quite agree that having the name of only one parent may be more common. Elizabeth researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson - Original Message - From: jmglover jmglo...@tpg.com.au To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 8:06 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone God evening, I do research in India, and on many occasions the mother's name isn't given on a birth/baptism record, e.g. snip Birth Date 7 - Mar Birth Year 1831 Baptised Surname Dennison Source Event Birth ** Entry At Vizagapatam, the lady of Capt. Dennison, country sea service, of a son and heir. snip and Birth Date 31 - Oct Birth Year 1811 Source Event Birth **Entry Mrs. Dennison, of a daughter. It happens very frequently that only one parent is named, sometimes the Bapt. record says :- A son to Capt. Dennison and A Native woman. I just thought I'd show you a couple of examples of instances when it's possible that a wife/partner isn't known. Cheers, Jill 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
Jack and Kirsten, I should have said in my original answer that initially I was NOT able to duplicate the problem. My Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is to use the Save/Close Button on any screen in Legacy. When I first tested the problem I automatically used Save on the marriage information screen so the Wording Tab change made by Legacy from married someone (Unknown spouse) to married (known spouse) was saved and the reports read X married Y. Legacy was, therefore trying to sort out the wording based on my addition of a spouse when the marriage screen was presented. My use of the Cancel button told Legacy not to make the change to the Wording Tab it was proposing. I did say that I had not reviewed the Wording Tab, if I had looked at that tab I would have seen that the wording was going to be changed to married instead of married someone. That was the reason why I asked the $64 question. Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Jack Earnshaw wrote: Brian My 2p worth I'd suggest that because of your action at 7 below that the effect is a bug. You had the info correct already and so were OK in doing a cancel from the marriage screen. The wording options should sort themselves out (unless you had overridden them). I don't think it should matter really if you - add spouse - add marriage details Or - add marriage details - add spouse I've sometimes had to do the second method when I've been told the date/place of a person's marriage and then had to go back to my source to get the spouse' name Jack -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf Of Brian/Support Sent: 03 January 2009 15:51 To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone Kirsten, I was able to duplicate this but only when I did the following: 1. I created an ancestor X 2. I added a marriage date and place but no spouse. 3. The Marriage wording tab of the marriage screen then used the default setting X married someone for an unknown spouse. 4. I ran an ancestor report and the X married someone wording was used with no name. 5. I closed the report 6. I added the missing spouse Y 7. When the marriage screen appeared I clicked the cancel button instead of save since the date and place were OK. I did not examine the Wording Tab. If I had looked at the wording tab I would have seen that the wording was now married. 8. Because I cancelled the change to the marriage information the married someone wording was kept on the wording tab. 9. When I ran the ancestor report the wording was X married someone Y. 10. After I edited the marriage and saved it without making any changes to the date/place the marriage wording tab was changed to married and the ancestor report wording became X married Y. Now for the 64$ question. Is that a BUG or user error? Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Kirsten Bowman wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 Legacy User Group guidelines: http
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
I would summarize it this way -- whether or not this is a bug (and by the technical definition of what constitutes a bug, I would say it is not one), this is a behavior that no one would *ever* want or expect, and thus it certainly deserves to be changed in a future revision. Presenting it as user error comes across as somewhat crass, especially given the complicated nature of how the quirk arises. I certainly don't blame the beta testers for missing it because it is rather obscure, but now that it has been identified I think we can acknowledge that it does happen, should probably not happen, and not worry so much about the specifics of how some people enter their data. -Steve On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Brian/Support br...@legacyfamilytree.com wrote: Jack and Kirsten, I should have said in my original answer that initially I was NOT able to duplicate the problem. My Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is to use the Save/Close Button on any screen in Legacy. When I first tested the problem I automatically used Save on the marriage information screen so the Wording Tab change made by Legacy from married someone (Unknown spouse) to married (known spouse) was saved and the reports read X married Y. Legacy was, therefore trying to sort out the wording based on my addition of a spouse when the marriage screen was presented. My use of the Cancel button told Legacy not to make the change to the Wording Tab it was proposing. I did say that I had not reviewed the Wording Tab, if I had looked at that tab I would have seen that the wording was going to be changed to married instead of married someone. That was the reason why I asked the $64 question. Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
Kirsten, I was able to duplicate this but only when I did the following: 1. I created an ancestor X 2. I added a marriage date and place but no spouse. 3. The Marriage wording tab of the marriage screen then used the default setting X married someone for an unknown spouse. 4. I ran an ancestor report and the X married someone wording was used with no name. 5. I closed the report 6. I added the missing spouse Y 7. When the marriage screen appeared I clicked the cancel button instead of save since the date and place were OK. I did not examine the Wording Tab. If I had looked at the wording tab I would have seen that the wording was now married. 8. Because I cancelled the change to the marriage information the married someone wording was kept on the wording tab. 9. When I ran the ancestor report the wording was X married someone Y. 10. After I edited the marriage and saved it without making any changes to the date/place the marriage wording tab was changed to married and the ancestor report wording became X married Y. Now for the 64$ question. Is that a BUG or user error? Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Kirsten Bowman wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Brian My 2p worth I'd suggest that because of your action at 7 below that the effect is a bug. You had the info correct already and so were OK in doing a cancel from the marriage screen. The wording options should sort themselves out (unless you had overridden them). I don't think it should matter really if you - add spouse - add marriage details Or - add marriage details - add spouse I've sometimes had to do the second method when I've been told the date/place of a person's marriage and then had to go back to my source to get the spouse' name Jack -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com] On Behalf Of Brian/Support Sent: 03 January 2009 15:51 To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone Kirsten, I was able to duplicate this but only when I did the following: 1. I created an ancestor X 2. I added a marriage date and place but no spouse. 3. The Marriage wording tab of the marriage screen then used the default setting X married someone for an unknown spouse. 4. I ran an ancestor report and the X married someone wording was used with no name. 5. I closed the report 6. I added the missing spouse Y 7. When the marriage screen appeared I clicked the cancel button instead of save since the date and place were OK. I did not examine the Wording Tab. If I had looked at the wording tab I would have seen that the wording was now married. 8. Because I cancelled the change to the marriage information the married someone wording was kept on the wording tab. 9. When I ran the ancestor report the wording was X married someone Y. 10. After I edited the marriage and saved it without making any changes to the date/place the marriage wording tab was changed to married and the ancestor report wording became X married Y. Now for the 64$ question. Is that a BUG or user error? Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Kirsten Bowman wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 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 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.1/1868 - Release Date: 02/01/2009 13:10 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Brian: Seems like a bug to me. If only one member of a couple is entered along with marriage information, then the inclusion of someone in the report wording would be appropriate. When the second person's name is added later, it seems that name should then simply override or cancel out the someone instead of having it become someone John Jones and/or instead of having to go through the extra steps that you listed. I'm thinking that if a blank name field would trigger addition of the word someone in a report, then adding a name to the field should likewise toggle the someone off. Am I misinterpreting the way the program works? Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of Brian/Support Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:51 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone Kirsten, I was able to duplicate this but only when I did the following: 1. I created an ancestor X 2. I added a marriage date and place but no spouse. 3. The Marriage wording tab of the marriage screen then used the default setting X married someone for an unknown spouse. 4. I ran an ancestor report and the X married someone wording was used with no name. 5. I closed the report 6. I added the missing spouse Y 7. When the marriage screen appeared I clicked the cancel button instead of save since the date and place were OK. I did not examine the Wording Tab. If I had looked at the wording tab I would have seen that the wording was now married. 8. Because I cancelled the change to the marriage information the married someone wording was kept on the wording tab. 9. When I ran the ancestor report the wording was X married someone Y. 10. After I edited the marriage and saved it without making any changes to the date/place the marriage wording tab was changed to married and the ancestor report wording became X married Y. Now for the 64$ question. Is that a BUG or user error? Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Kirsten Bowman wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 11:39:22 -0800, Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net wrote: Seems like a bug to me. If only one member of a couple is entered along with marriage information, then the inclusion of someone in the report wording would be appropriate. When the second person's name is added later, it seems that name should then simply override or cancel out the someone instead of having it become someone John Jones and/or instead of having to go through the extra steps that you listed. I'm thinking that if a blank name field would trigger addition of the word someone in a report, then adding a name to the field should likewise toggle the someone off. Am I misinterpreting the way the program works? But does the program know how the word someone got placed there in the first place? Does it know that it is there because it (the program) put it there? Or is the word someone there because a user put it there? If the latter, should the program automatically correct it? I don't have a horse in this race because I use V6. I just wanted to point out something to consider. -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Ron: True, it isn't straightforward. I think you're saying something very similar to Dennis, so I'll combine a response to both of you there. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of ronald ferguson Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:03 PM To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone Kirsten, Just a thought, but why should the computer/program assume that when a partner is entered it is the same person as the someone who is already there. I prefer to have to tell it the exact relationship. This is not to say that there isn't a bug, rather that it is not a straightforward issue. 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/ _ 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Dennis and Ron: You both brought up excellent points and, not knowing how the program operates, I'm unable to answer except to say that if the word someone is coded into the program to be automatically added to reports when a name field is left blank, then it should be fairly simple to eliminate that code when a name is added. With software as smart as Legacy, I think it could distinguish between a code that generates the word someone in a report and the actual name Someone typed by the user in the name field. As I've said before, it's a small problem and I don't want to make a fuss about it, but I hate it when software automatically creates something silly and unexpected; I make enough silly errors on my own without help from Legacy G. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of Dennis M. Kowallek Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 11:46 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 11:39:22 -0800, Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net wrote: Seems like a bug to me. If only one member of a couple is entered along with marriage information, then the inclusion of someone in the report wording would be appropriate. When the second person's name is added later, it seems that name should then simply override or cancel out the someone instead of having it become someone John Jones and/or instead of having to go through the extra steps that you listed. I'm thinking that if a blank name field would trigger addition of the word someone in a report, then adding a name to the field should likewise toggle the someone off. Am I misinterpreting the way the program works? But does the program know how the word someone got placed there in the first place? Does it know that it is there because it (the program) put it there? Or is the word someone there because a user put it there? If the latter, should the program automatically correct it? I don't have a horse in this race because I use V6. I just wanted to point out something to consider. -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 12:40:06 -0800, Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net wrote: I'm unable to answer except to say that if the word someone is coded into the program to be automatically added to reports when a name field is left blank, then it should be fairly simple to eliminate that code when a name is added. And I don't know exactly how V7 does this since I am on V6. By Brian's description I assumed (maybe wrongly) that Legacy added the word someone to the marriage wording AT THE TIME the marriage record was created. The reports are just picking up what is already there (the phrase X married someone). If this is true, then when the other half of the marriage gets added do you automatically want to drop the someone from that field in the marriage record? If so, then the word someone almost becomes a RESERVED WORD for the program's exclusive use. Like I said, I just wanted to point out a potential (probably very rare) problem. -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
My personal opinion is that the someone shouldn't be added at all. It should simply read married. The mere fact of a marriage indicates that there was another someone involved. When/if other information is found then it should be entered a another marriage with full details and the original marriage deleted. I don't want *any* assumptions made by a program on what data I enter. --- On Sat, 1/3/09, ronald ferguson ronfe...@msn.com wrote: From: ronald ferguson ronfe...@msn.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone To: legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 8:03 PM Kirsten, Just a thought, but why should the computer/program assume that when a partner is entered it is the same person as the someone who is already there. I prefer to have to tell it the exact relationship. This is not to say that there isn't a bug, rather that it is not a straightforward issue. 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: vik...@rvi.net To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 11:39:22 -0800 Brian: Seems like a bug to me. If only one member of a couple is entered along with marriage information, then the inclusion of someone in the report wording would be appropriate. When the second person's name is added later, it seems that name should then simply override or cancel out the someone instead of having it become someone John Jones and/or instead of having to go through the extra steps that you listed. I'm thinking that if a blank name field would trigger addition of the word someone in a report, then adding a name to the field should likewise toggle the someone off. Am I misinterpreting the way the program works? Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of Brian/Support Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:51 AM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone Kirsten, I was able to duplicate this but only when I did the following: 1. I created an ancestor X 2. I added a marriage date and place but no spouse. 3. The Marriage wording tab of the marriage screen then used the default setting X married someone for an unknown spouse. 4. I ran an ancestor report and the X married someone wording was used with no name. 5. I closed the report 6. I added the missing spouse Y 7. When the marriage screen appeared I clicked the cancel button instead of save since the date and place were OK. I did not examine the Wording Tab. If I had looked at the wording tab I would have seen that the wording was now married. 8. Because I cancelled the change to the marriage information the married someone wording was kept on the wording tab. 9. When I ran the ancestor report the wording was X married someone Y. 10. After I edited the marriage and saved it without making any changes to the date/place the marriage wording tab was changed to married and the ancestor report wording became X married Y. Now for the 64$ question. Is that a BUG or user error? Brian Customer Support Millennia Corporation br...@legacyfamilytree.com http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com We are changing the world of genealogy! When replying to this message, please include all previous correspondence. Thanks. Kirsten Bowman wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 22:00:09 +, ronald ferguson ronfe...@msn.com wrote: I don't think that in v7 this works in a way which is very different to that of v6. In certain circumstances in reports the word someone is inserted I am seem to be getting different results in V6. But it is probably not worth going into here since V6 is dead. I suspect this problem became more evident in V7 ... as you said. -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
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 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:46:53 -0800 (PST), seaic2008-...@yahoo.com wrote: There is another problem having Legacy automatically insert Someone into reports. I have many old German records in which the female had one or more illegitimate children. When the child is entered for the woman, Legacy automatically makes a marriage and reports state that the female married Someone when in fact the female may never have married. Thus you end up with an inaccurate report. Doesn't checking the This couple did not marry box and/or changing the default wording solve the problem? -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
Nope. The report still says Mary Jones married someone. --- On Sat, 1/3/09, Dennis M. Kowallek kowal...@iglou.com wrote: From: Dennis M. Kowallek kowal...@iglou.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 6:22 PM On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:46:53 -0800 (PST), seaic2008-...@yahoo.com wrote: There is another problem having Legacy automatically insert Someone into reports. I have many old German records in which the female had one or more illegitimate children. When the child is entered for the woman, Legacy automatically makes a marriage and reports state that the female married Someone when in fact the female may never have married. Thus you end up with an inaccurate report. Doesn't checking the This couple did not marry box and/or changing the default wording solve the problem? -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ 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 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
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. 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 _ Live Search presents Big Snap II - win John Lewis vouchers http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/117442309/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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
I *always* enter a 'name' for a marriage partner- even if I don't know it! A spouse with an unknown name would be entered as: Given Name:_ Surname:~ Then I chnage it when I get the real name. --- On Sat, 1/3/09, Elizabeth Richardson erich...@worldnet.att.net wrote: From: Elizabeth Richardson erich...@worldnet.att.net Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 10:45 PM 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 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 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Have you tried tried going to the individual's marriage screen, and for the 'marriage' to the unknown person change it to 'partnered' (or whatever suits). Also check the 'this couple did not marry' box. The report output will then read Jane partnered. Like you, I think, I would prefer it to say nothing at all. 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/ _ Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:37:34 -0800 From: seaic2008-...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Nope. The report still says Mary Jones married someone. --- On Sat, 1/3/09, Dennis M. Kowallek wrote: From: Dennis M. Kowallek Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Saturday, January 3, 2009, 6:22 PM On Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:46:53 -0800 (PST), seaic2008-...@yahoo.com wrote: There is another problem having Legacy automatically insert Someone into reports. I have many old German records in which the female had one or more illegitimate children. When the child is entered for the woman, Legacy automatically makes a marriage and reports state that the female married Someone when in fact the female may never have married. Thus you end up with an inaccurate report. Doesn't checking the This couple did not marry box and/or changing the default wording solve the problem? -- Dennis Kowallek http://ltools.kowallekfamily.com/ _ Get Windows Live Messenger on your Mobile http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/msnnkmgl001001ukm/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
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 + 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 _ Live Search presents Big Snap II - win John Lewis vouchers http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/117442309/direct/01/ _ Imagine a life without walls. See the possibilities. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/122465943/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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
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 + 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 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
One works backwards only to a point-say your great grandfather and then you want to add his descendants( your cousins)- then you start working forward so sooner or later everyone might well encounter this bug. --- On Sun, 1/4/09, Elizabeth Richardson erich...@worldnet.att.net wrote: 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 + 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
I believe you are more likely to encounter this bug working backwards. One can more easily learn the name of one parent without learning the names of both parents, especially when getting back several generations, which is when I suspect this problem crops up. When you come forward in time, you are more likely to have the marriage information before learning the names of the children. And, many people never come forward in time unless the information is simply handed to them, and many don't record it even then. I can't even count the number of times I've inquired of someone's research only to be told I don't know about her sister, I'm only researching my own direct line. Elizabeth researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson - Original Message - From: Wynthner wynth...@yahoo.com To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:08 PM Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone One works backwards only to a point-say your great grandfather and then you want to add his descendants( your cousins)- then you start working forward so sooner or later everyone might well encounter this bug. --- On Sun, 1/4/09, Elizabeth Richardson erich...@worldnet.att.net wrote: 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 + 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Elizabeth: It's actually not a problem of entering parents and children in a particular sequence. It comes from adding a person and a marriage date without knowing the spouse's name--which can happen occasionally whether you're working backward or forward. Once the person and marriage date are entered, the unknown spouse (for reporting purposes) becomes someone although that doesn't show on the individual's information screen, of course. Then if you add the spouse's name later, the someone doesn't go away; the word is just added to the name you entered so you get Jane married someone John Doe in reports. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of Elizabeth Richardson Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 5:25 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone I believe you are more likely to encounter this bug working backwards. One can more easily learn the name of one parent without learning the names of both parents, especially when getting back several generations, which is when I suspect this problem crops up. When you come forward in time, you are more likely to have the marriage information before learning the names of the children. And, many people never come forward in time unless the information is simply handed to them, and many don't record it even then. I can't even count the number of times I've inquired of someone's research only to be told I don't know about her sister, I'm only researching my own direct line. Elizabeth researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
But Kirsten, I don't see how this can be. I don't understand how you can know when a person married without knowing to whom, nor, if by some fluke you should have this information, why you would make an actual entry without getting that to whom. That's the sort of stuff I would put in research notes and/or a to do. My other comments have been in response to others posting to this thread. Elizabeth researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson - Original Message - From: Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:33 PM Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Someone Elizabeth: It's actually not a problem of entering parents and children in a particular sequence. It comes from adding a person and a marriage date without knowing the spouse's name--which can happen occasionally whether you're working backward or forward. Once the person and marriage date are entered, the unknown spouse (for reporting purposes) becomes someone although that doesn't show on the individual's information screen, of course. Then if you add the spouse's name later, the someone doesn't go away; the word is just added to the name you entered so you get Jane married someone John Doe in reports. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of Elizabeth Richardson Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 5:25 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone I believe you are more likely to encounter this bug working backwards. One can more easily learn the name of one parent without learning the names of both parents, especially when getting back several generations, which is when I suspect this problem crops up. When you come forward in time, you are more likely to have the marriage information before learning the names of the children. And, many people never come forward in time unless the information is simply handed to them, and many don't record it even then. I can't even count the number of times I've inquired of someone's research only to be told I don't know about her sister, I'm only researching my own direct line. Elizabeth researching the descendants of William and Sarah (Patterson) Thompson 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 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
God evening, I do research in India, and on many occasions the mother's name isn't given on a birth/baptism record, e.g. snip Birth Date 7 - Mar Birth Year 1831 Baptised Surname Dennison Source Event Birth ** Entry At Vizagapatam, the lady of Capt. Dennison, country sea service, of a son and heir. snip and Birth Date 31 - Oct Birth Year 1811 Source Event Birth **Entry Mrs. Dennison, of a daughter. It happens very frequently that only one parent is named, sometimes the Bapt. record says :- A son to Capt. Dennison and A Native woman. I just thought I'd show you a couple of examples of instances when it's possible that a wife/partner isn't known. Cheers, Jill 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Keith, This, or at least something very much like it, was discussed at length in the last couple of months, and I would have to look up all the details myself. You will find them in the Archives. 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/ _ Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 16:01:26 -0500 From: geosc...@gmail.com To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 _ Are you a PC? Upload your PC story and show the world http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/122465942/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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
Kirsten, Will give that a try - had the female name (Julia) and Children- then was told the father's name - so I added it. When I did the report - there was the someone. - BUT THIS IS A BUG! SHOULD NOT HAPPEN! Thanks Keith On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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
Re: [LegacyUG] Someone
How many husbands does the program say Julia has? I suspect at least 2, the newly added person and the 'unknown' person who needs to be unlinked. Rich in LA CA --- On Fri, 1/2/09, GeoSci geosc...@gmail.com wrote: From: GeoSci geosc...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Friday, January 2, 2009, 5:00 PM Kirsten, Will give that a try - had the female name (Julia) and Children- then was told the father's name - so I added it. When I did the report - there was the someone. - BUT THIS IS A BUG! SHOULD NOT HAPPEN! Thanks Keith On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Kirsten Bowman vik...@rvi.net wrote: Keith: As Ron responded, this was discussed on the list but not really resolved. In my case, I had entered a woman's name and marriage date but no husband's name. When I later found and entered his name it appeared in Descendant Book Reports just like your Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. It appears that once the someone is triggered, entering a name later just added it to the field but didn't override the someone. I don't know whether you've perhaps done the same thing, but I had to delete the marriage date, location, and the husband's name and then add the husband again *before* re-entering the marriage information. That cleared the someone. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of GeoSci Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 1:01 PM To: Legacy User Group Subject: [LegacyUG] Someone Ancestor Book Report - Why is the word someone being inserted into ever marriage - it makes no sense!?! Julia married someone Nelson Taylor. Looked for wording option but could not find anything there. Any ideas? (Using latest update) Thanks, Keith -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 -- Surnames: McKain, Horn, Riale, Ulrich, Erisman, Leiphart, Reed and Henry Website: http://home.comcast.net/~geosci64 EMail: geosc...@gmail.com McCain-McKane-O'Kane DNA Group 1 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 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
RE: [LegacyUG] Someone
Rich: This wasn't the case in my situation (an unknown husband). There was only one marriage--to someone John Jones or whoever he was. And Keith is right; it's definitely a bug but it's been a while and I don't remember whether I reported it or not. It's a fairly unusual data entry sequence for me, so it's not a big deal. Kirsten -Original Message- From: k...@legacyfamilytree.com [mailto:k...@legacyfamilytree.com]on Behalf Of RICHARD SCHULTHIES Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 7:42 PM To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone How many husbands does the program say Julia has? I suspect at least 2, the newly added person and the 'unknown' person who needs to be unlinked. Rich in LA CA --- On Fri, 1/2/09, GeoSci geosc...@gmail.com wrote: From: GeoSci geosc...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Someone To: LegacyUserGroup@legacyfamilytree.com Date: Friday, January 2, 2009, 5:00 PM Kirsten, Will give that a try - had the female name (Julia) and Children- then was told the father's name - so I added it. When I did the report - there was the someone. - BUT THIS IS A BUG! SHOULD NOT HAPPEN! Thanks Keith 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
