Jump to content


Photo

Possible to "disappear" a person from Narrative Report?

omit person narrative report leave out not print

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Margthecar

Margthecar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 04 July 2019 - 10:37 AM

I am creating PDFs of the Narrative Report for various family members and we have one Cousin who is very very uncomfortable with the idea of the first two wives of her father (youthful indiscretions ending childless in annulment and divorce), before he settled down into contented marriage and fatherhood with his 3rd wife, Cousin's mother.  All in the family but Cousin think the "secrets" of the first two wives intriguing, and want all the facts included in their Narrative Reports.  I don't want to make Cousin uncomfortable, so is there a way in Rootsmagic 7 to omit all traces of Wives 1 and 2 from the Narrative Report, as if they never existed, but still leave them in the database to be included in non-Cousins' Narrative Reports?  I guess I am asking, can you make a whole person and their facts PRIVATE?



#2 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3670 posts

Posted 04 July 2019 - 12:46 PM

No, you can't make a whole person private, but can sort of accomplish the same thing a different way. Namely, before you generate your report, copy your entire database to a new and temporary database. This is File>Copy, not a Drag and Drop. In the temporary database, delete your cousin's first two wives. Run the reports. Delete the temporary database.

My preferred solution (RM enhancement) for this problem would be the ability in RM to apply groups to every everything. So it wouldn't just be People View and GEDCOM exports and things like that which would supported by groups. It would also be Pedigree View and Family View etc., and also most reports - especially narrative reports. If this solution were in place (and it isn't!), you could just make a group of everybody in your database, delete the two wives from your group, run your report, and you are done.

 

With either solution, you would have to be careful that none of your sources that referenced the two wives become associated with anybody else in your database (especially your cousin). But if such sources were only associated with marriages and divorces with the first two wives and if the first two wives were not in the report, then the sources should not be in the report.

 

I'm sympathetic to your problem. I have a couple of similar situations in my own database. In one case, I simply haven't entered the first wife into my database yet even though I have the data. In the other case, I have entered the data into my database but there hasn't yet been a family reunion where it matters. If that comes about, I will probably make a copy of my database, delete the first wife from the copy, and run the report from there. On the one hand, family history is what it is (or was), not what you wish it is (or was). On the other hand, real people have real feelings for which a certain sensitivity may be appropriate.

 

Jerry

 



#3 Margthecar

Margthecar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6 posts

Posted 04 July 2019 - 08:34 PM

Thanks Jerry, that sounds like a very workable solution so that Cousin's feelings don't get hurt.  I appreciate your detailed instructions.



#4 Don Newcomb

Don Newcomb

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1047 posts

Posted 07 July 2019 - 04:51 PM

This is a good enhancement suggestion. I've been asked to delete some ex-wives from my database. It would be nice to be able to say, "No problem. She's deleted." but in reality she's just "gone stealth."



#5 zhangrau

zhangrau

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1534 posts

Posted 07 July 2019 - 09:24 PM

I've distributed dozens of reports from my database..

 

I've put prominent notes on those reports to advise readers that some confidential info is included, and to avaoid re-publishing that info.

 

I've only once been asked to leave out sensitive data (on a homicide). I didn't leave out any people, just the details and supporting media about the event.

 

I also point out to my readers that I don't create the info, I just collect it. And that nearly 100% of my info comes from publicly available sources.

 

To my way of thinking, intentionally leaving put individuals from the family's story seems a bit weird for a genealogy or family history.

 

But, "Hey," I'm still just "a sample size of one."







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: omit, person, narrative report, leave out, not print