That said, I do "keep" multiple databases. I have one "proven" database - in which I have people that their relationship to me has been "proven" (not necessarily to a huge standard - to be in that database I only would want 1 fairly good source - so proven might be the wrong word....) But I keep "research" databases - that is where i have stuff I've gotten from questionable places - online trees, gedcoms from other people, etc. I use these research databases as clues only - and I do not update them. When doing research on someone (say, I want to find the parents of someone) , I will look in the research databases to see what information the other people have - that may give me a clue as to what someone else said. If they have some names, I might try to contact the source of that gedcom or whatever (assuming there were no sources) to see where they got the info - or else I will start doing my research, keeping in mind the information I have gotten from the other people - then see what I find. Sometimes I find that they are (probably) right - sometimes I find that they are wrong. If they were basically right - I either type the info into my own database, or I open up both databases and drag the new person to my database and link them in.
However - keep in mind that I never change my "research" databases - so I don't have the headache of trying to keep several databases up to date. I do have some unlinked people in my "proven" database, so I guess I don't have the relationship proven for them - these are people with the same last name that were a witness for a christening or marriage or something for a relative - people I'm pretty sure are related and know they exist. I do agree that having databases seperate with different lines, and trying to keep them up-to-date is an exercise in frustration and futility - as connections almost always get found. On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Kirsten Bowman <[email protected]> wrote: > Abdul: > > Many (most?) experienced researchers recommend against breaking a tree into > separate databases and I strongly agree. Having multiples means multiple > location lists, surname lists, preferences, definitions, backups, and > potentially multiple trees to manage online if you post. It can become a > real hassle--and then merging becomes a hassle in itself. There are much > better ways to handle your situation. I have one single database of roughly > 10,000 individuals which includes six trees that are completely unrelated > but I still wouldn't break them into separate databases. > > As someone has already posted, you can add strays as unlinked people. It's > easy, then, to see them in View > Tree Finder (click the Refresh button to > update the list). Or if you add unconfirmed individuals to a family group > you can use a tag to identify them and serve as a quick reminder of people > you need to research further. Or you can do the reverse and tag those that > you've definitely proven. > > There are many tricks to help in managing your data, but I'd say that > breaking it into multiple databases is the least desirable. > > Kirsten > > -----Original Message----- > From: Abdul Haqq [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 3:32 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [LegacyUG] Managing Trees > > > Hi, > I have started on my tree for about the last week and already it is > getting cumbersome. Many entries are not confirmed so I see it as a > sketch. > Is it good practice or not to break down the tree into several separate > trees and then merge them only when information is confirmed. Can the > result in any problems? > > > > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > > > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/Etiquette.asp> > > Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > Online technical support: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/Help.asp> > > To unsubscribe: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp<http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp> > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
