Jump to content


Member Since 01 Dec 2011
Offline Last Active Nov 30 2012 07:40 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Web Tags - Hard to find once added

22 November 2012 - 01:47 PM

I'm not attaching them to sources, which I don't think is necessary for a variety of reasons. I'm attaching them to the person, and they are readily available from the person's edit screen (although it would be nice to have a toolbar button for them, as has already been requested under enhancements).

In Topic: Web Tags - Hard to find once added

22 November 2012 - 01:46 PM

I've not tried attaching them to sources. I attach them to the person and they are readily available from an icon on the edit person screen.

In Topic: Unproven relationships

24 April 2012 - 07:14 PM

What is the process or best way to enter data for individuals who are possible relations? Is it best to keep such persons in a totally different database?
For example, I am trying to determine the relationship of several people of surname, Samuel, who all lived in the same county during a span of some years (1750-1840). There is a lot of data on all of these individuals, but nothing so far indicating their relationship to each other, although their lives are obviously connected!

To be perhaps brutally honest, I've never understood why so many people seem to want to avoid putting these people in their database. Doing so, as unconnected people, doesn't interfere with any feature I use, and has the added benefit of helping you look up, understand and remember who is who. It is especially helpful in situations like you describe, especially if some of the people have the same names. If I suspect John Doe may be the father of Mary Doe, but have no proof, I enter both into the data base and cross reference the two via a Note for each person, but I never, ever connect them as father and daughter until I have solid evidence. If I do have evidence of the names of some of John Doe's children, I enter and connect them to John, but not to my line (Mary).

I can't imagine how I would track who is who if I didn't do this. For example, I may never find a document stating John is Mary's father, but if I have something that "proves" John is Susan's father, and something else that "proves" Susan is Mary's sister, I probably would not realize or forget that would mean John is most likely Mary's father if I didn't have both John and Susan in my database.

As far as I'm concerned, collecting data and keeping it straight is what a database is for.

In Topic: Source citations for "duplicate" documents

22 April 2012 - 03:09 PM

The question I have i'm sure doesn't have a "right" answer, I'm just asking to see what others do.
I'm wondering how you cite documents that are sort of "duplicate?"

For example, suppose in researching a couples marriage, you find a marriage license, an original marriage register entry, and a later marriage register entry(one of those where they're reindexed by surname).

Another example would be finding a death certificate and a death register entry.

In both cases the different documents all come from one source technically would they not? That being the original document.

So, would you cite all these sources? If so, wouldn't that make for some pretty full source citation lists? If not, do you somehow make note that these other records exist in addition to the original or primary record?

I do not cite indexes (or published abstracts) once I've obtained an original document. I cite such sources only as "place holders" until I can obtain the originals. However, in some cases, I've seen original marriage licenses, marriage bonds, and marriage registers (often with slightly different information), and in those cases I would cite all 3 types of original documents.

In Topic: Research Manager

20 April 2012 - 10:00 AM

The research manager is a great improvement for RM5. But, trying to enter data into it by looking for info in the database is honorous. We keep having to close the research manager, look up info in the database, open the research manager to edit, etc etc. This is a huge pain! Those of us who use two monitors can drag the research manager window to the "other" monitor and make entries but can't go back to the other monitor and look for things in the database.

Are you aware that there is a button that automatically transfers a To Do item to a Research Log?

Otherwise, I'm not quite sure what you'd be looking up in the database? A Research Log should be kept concurrent with doing the research. I have chosen to go back on some families to my paper documents, including old paper research logs, and enter them in a sort of retroactive research log, but I don't need to refer to anything in the database to do that.

Although I agree that independent windows for most everything, not just research manager, would be helpful.