Jump to content


Photo

Add "claimed" to date modifiers


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Don Newcomb

Don Newcomb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1045 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 08:07 AM

Have you ever run into a case where someone claimed an exact birth date that made him/her several years younger than you believe to be correct? I'd like to add "claimed" (or something like it, "stated" maybe?) to the list of qualitative date modifiers to cover situations like this.

#2 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3595 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 09:16 AM

Have you ever run into a case where someone claimed an exact birth date that made him/her several years younger than you believe to be correct? I'd like to add "claimed" (or something like it, "stated" maybe?) to the list of qualitative date modifiers to cover situations like this.


Might it be better to handle such things as fact notes? For example:

John Doe was born on 10 Jun 1847. He claimed when he volunteered for service in the Civil War that he was born on 10 Jun 1843, but the Doe family bible and census records confirm the 1847 date.


The information that is bolded would be the fact note.

Jerry

#3 Nettie

Nettie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1647 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 09:34 AM

I do this with a note in the details which do come into the printed copy of the Narrative report. Claimed does not mean anything to me without the W W W W W. So I agree use a note for details or a research note for details. Have been doing it this way since FO days....

Genealogy:
"I work on genealogy only on days that end in "Y"." [Grin!!!]
from www.GenealogyDaily.com.
"Documentation....The hardest part of genealogy"
"Genealogy is like Hide & Seek: They Hide & I Seek!"
" Genealogists: People helping people.....that's what it's all about!"
from http://www.rootsweb....nry/gentags.htm
Using FO and RM since FO2.0 


#4 Vyger

Vyger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3426 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 03:03 PM

Sorry Don but I would also agree with the explanatory Note approach, even if there were a qualifier such as claimed you would probably want to explain the specifics anyway.

We are all limited by our visions and abilities

Whilst we can borrow from the visions of others we cannot always deliver.

 

User of Family Historian 6.2.7, Rootsmagic 7.6.2, Family Tree Maker 2014 & Legacy 7.5

 

Excel to Gedcom conversion - simple getting started tutorials here

 

Root


#5 Ludlow Bay

Ludlow Bay

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 868 posts

Posted 09 November 2013 - 07:39 PM

Have you ever run into a case where someone claimed an exact birth date that made him/her several years younger than you believe to be correct? I'd like to add "claimed" (or something like it, "stated" maybe?) to the list of qualitative date modifiers to cover situations like this.


I would not find it prudent to think that the person "claimed" anything - unless you have a document in that person's own handwriting. It would be much much more likely that the cause for a differing date was the fault of the person recording the date.

#6 Renee Zamora

Renee Zamora

    Advanced Member

  • Support
  • PipPipPip
  • 8475 posts

Posted 11 November 2013 - 05:52 PM

There are some date qualifiers that you can use as an alternative: Probably, Possibly, Perhaps, Maybe, Say . You can look at others in Help>Contents and search for Date Formats.
Renee
RootsMagic

#7 Penny Blake

Penny Blake

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 12:26 AM

Im afraid I have to agree also with the people who suggest using the notes field.

One of the great things about Rootsmagic is the clear manner in which is uses the notes field on reports and summaries. In the example of Military service the reports would show up as signing up at whatever age and in the notes you would explain that he claimed he was 4 years younger.

Plus, IMO, any record that has notes makes the persons record look that much richer. I think the notes field is what sets apart an internet genealogist from a "proper" genealogist, By "proper" I mean a genealogist who is interested in exploring all records, is prepared to spend many boring days down the records office and isnt just interested in logging onto Ancestry.com and clicking their way to 10,000 new relatives before dinner time. (Sorry, sounds like Im ranting here)

#8 Nettie

Nettie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1647 posts

Posted 12 November 2013 - 09:04 AM

(Sorry, sounds like Im ranting here) You are not ranting in my opinion. Lots of ideas and need sharing. Thanks for the sharing....

Genealogy:
"I work on genealogy only on days that end in "Y"." [Grin!!!]
from www.GenealogyDaily.com.
"Documentation....The hardest part of genealogy"
"Genealogy is like Hide & Seek: They Hide & I Seek!"
" Genealogists: People helping people.....that's what it's all about!"
from http://www.rootsweb....nry/gentags.htm
Using FO and RM since FO2.0 


#9 Don Newcomb

Don Newcomb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1045 posts

Posted 17 November 2013 - 07:38 AM

I would not find it prudent to think that the person "claimed" anything - unless you have a document in that person's own handwriting. It would be much much more likely that the cause for a differing date was the fault of the person recording the date.

Actually, this is exactly the case. I see many cases where people claimed on signed documents to be younger than they really were. My wife's grandfather knocked two years off his age on his naturalization petition (I have his baptism & civil birth registration). I've seen women knock several years off of their passport applications. So, I disagree that there is no reason to have a way to record these claimed birth dates. They can mislead other researchers who might believe them. Probably the best argument against having a "claimed" tag is that there is no way to convey it via a GEDCOM.