am
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
I like to include these possibilities, complete with hypothesis notes of course,
in reports so others reading the report might say - yes, that is correct, or I
often heard my mum say the same thing etc. and may lead to further discoveries.
Likewise, s
y, 10 August 2011 15:18
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
I do something similar to your method Virginia. I also use the ‘create event’
feature, but I use 3 events for such – Possible Parent, Possible Spouse, and
Possible Child. It allows me to fi
I do as Ron describes, and it works for me. When printing an Individual
Report for the mother, the kids with unproven father's show up as "Jane
(1901-1988) (father: unproven) (mother)" with supersripts for source
citations next to mother and father. It serves my purposes.
Jean
On Wed, Aug 10, 201
So what would you do with Benjamin census records, or William's will? Put them
all under John's name? Or how about you find out Benjamin was William's
brother and the names of William's children, but you still don't know who John
and Benjamin's children were? Or you have only the names of one
Connie,
I would enter (as in your example) John as the primary...and then add
William as an AKA and then Benjamin as an AKA.
This "method" started when I was researching family members with very
"sketchy" information which led to muliple candidates. Having unlinked
individuals simply did not work
To each his own, I suppose, but I would think entering multiple people as AKAs
would only serve to confuse things.
There are several men named Hancock living in the same vicinity in southern
Illinois. I have no idea which one (if any of them) is the father of my
gggrandmother. The only way I'm
d incoming mail is scanned by F-Prot Antivirus ==
-Original Message-
From: Ron Ferguson [mailto:ronfergy@tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 1:48 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
Russ,
Of course it is, but the question
The "Children Settings" can be sourced which means that the link between parent
and child can be sourced. Add a status "Relationship Not Proven" to any of the
three status lists (Child Status, Relationship to Father, Relationship to
Mother) and then add a master source "Relationship Not Proven"
ch.
Syble
Families Researching: Cline/Klein, Daniel, Newton, Witherspoon, Perryman,
Gilbreath, Lindsey, Brown, Foote, Curry, Fleming, Glasscock, Edwards, Waters,
Wheat
From: Jane Sarles
>To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
>Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2011 9:09 PM
>Subject: Re: [Leg
.
Ron Ferguson
http://www.fergys.co.uk
-Original Message-
From: my genealogy email
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:07 AM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
Yet, the "source" of the information is where you got the information and
that i
y, August 09, 2011 6:46 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
Jane,
I include "maybe" (without the quotes) as part of the given name. Then I use
my created event: "Under Investigation", where I note the reasons for
entering this
-
From: Ron Ferguson
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 5:16 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
Jerry,
I am not particularly averse to taking personal knowledge as being accurate,
but one should always remember it is not inevitably true. Take your exam
I like it Virginia. Seems to fit what I am driving at.
Jane
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:46 PM, Virginia Dunham wrote:
> Jane,
>
> I include "maybe" (without the quotes) as part of the given name. Then I
> use my created event: "Under Investigation", where I note the reasons for
> entering this per
Jane,
Sorry, I meant to add that perhaps if have several "choices", you might
enter just one and the other(s) as AKA's...if you have the option checked to
include AKA's in your name list, these would also appear.
Virginia
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Jane Sarles wrote:
> How do you all handle
Jane,
I include "maybe" (without the quotes) as part of the given name. Then I use
my created event: "Under Investigation", where I note the reasons for
entering this person and keep track of all my research.
Then as an added insurance of not sending any reports including this person,
I mark the i
For my $0.02 I only ever link one generation of possible parentage and put the
rest of the information in as notes of that possible person. I then put an
asterisk * in the name so it stands out to me (yes Legacy does give me warning
:-) ) that this is only a possibility although I should have s
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 9:46 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Possible parentage
Well, that's what so great about Legacy - it allows you to develop a lot
of things according to what makes sense to you. For example, we have
been having an annual family reuni
Well, that's what so great about Legacy - it allows you to develop a lot
of things according to what makes sense to you. For example, we have
been having an annual family reunion in Michigan for 61 years straight!
So, on our 50th annual, when I was President of the reunion, I
circulated data sheet
Jane,
I'm with Ron on this. I never link anyone where I don't have substantial
evidence, generally from more than one source, that A's father is B. I use the
Note feature to explain my suspicion, and make very clear it is only a
hypothesis.
When I have several possibilities, I not only use t
If you enter the details for the possible parent (Name, birth, death
etc.) as an unlinked person (Use CTRL-N to do so) then their details,
and the source of that information will be recorded for later if you are
able to prove the connection. I would also, as Sherry suggested create a
To Do for the
When I have a suspect, I link to the possible son and give the name
Maybe father and I keep all notes for and against under this title It
is so easy to edit as it becomes proved or not proved and I know
who and where I have him.
Eliz
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Jane Sarles wrote:
> How
Adding to this, your source should be less than 3 for your surety level, in
some cases a 0. Jerry
Jerry wrote:
>That's one opinion, but if you believe you have a link, but can't prove it,
>your un-linked person might be overlooked completely. But if you decide to
>link the person, your note
That's one opinion, but if you believe you have a link, but can't prove it,
your un-linked person might be overlooked completely. But if you decide to
link the person, your note should be very clear and show up readily. Jerry in
Michigan
Ron Ferguson wrote:
>Jane,
>
>One should never create
I enter them in as unlinked individuals and create a To-Do item to
research it further
Sincerely,
Sherry
Technical Support
Legacy Family Tree
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Ron Ferguson
wrote:
> Jane,
>
> One should never create any link without proof. The best you can do, if you
> wish
Jane,
One should never create any link without proof. The best you can do, if you
wish to include the possibilities, is to put them in a note.
Ron Ferguson
http://www.fergys.co.uk/
From: Jane Sarles
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 7:09 PM
To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: [LegacyUG]
25 matches
Mail list logo
