As I've read all the replies on this thread, I am thoroughly convinced of three things.
1. The political subdivisions of the United States are nowhere near uniform. Each state does as it pleases (which is what our Constitution stipulates). 2. Address location anywhere in the UK is only understood by someone born there. 3. The state of New York has the most confusing addressing system anywhere in the world. 4. I never understood math. Brian in CA > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Hall [mailto:seh0...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 8:19 AM > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy and County Names > > Brian: > > This is an excellent system I think I'll adopt. I notice Slawson's > "Getting it Right" is silent on this point, but provides examples that > use descriptors such as "City" or "County", especially when the city / > town and county share the same name. I adopted the "four comma" > approach when I switched to Legacy, principally because I got better > verification from the GeoDB. I'm now of the opinion that the GeoDB be > damned, adding "County" or "Township" helps avoid ambiguity. > > I think the four comma approach is still a good alternative, but the > "straw" that pushes me to modify it to an approach similar to yours is > that I find it too common that the "city" is not often known, and in > many cases may be the town or township. > > For example, a record for one of my ancestors may indicate an event > that took place in Muncy, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. Is that > Muncy Borough or Muncy Township? How would you record it if you did > not know? > > The trick in getting this right is knowing each state's govermental > entity hierarchy. Having grown up in New York State, I am used to the > Village inside a Town inside a County system. For example, I grew up > just outside of Shortsville, a small incorporated village in the town > of Manchester, which is located in Ontario County. Despite having a > Shortsville mailing address and attedning the Manchester-Shortsville > school system, I actually lived inside the neighboring town of > Hopewell, within no incorporated village. So, if one were listing > where I spend my childhood, it would be: > > Town of Hopewell, Ontario County, New York, USA > > While I could just say "Hopewell" and leave off town, it would become > ambigous if I were referring to Manchester, the neighboring town where > I went to school, as the Town of Manchester has within it a village > also named Manchester. So, like the Muncy example, clarity come from > listing like this: > > Village of Manchester (or just Manchester), Town of Manchester, > Ontario County, New York, USA > > But here is the $64,000 question.... the "four comma" approach says > city OR town, county, state, country. Is it then overkill to > consistently use a five comma approach? A month ago I might of said > yes, but now I say no. > > What do you think? > > In Massachusetts, where I live now, the system is similar, except > there are no incorporated villages or any incorporated government > below the town level. There are plenty of unincorporated villages and > places, but the lowest level of government is the town. As with New > York, towns are within counties, although some Massachusetts counties > have been disbanded and exist only for historical geographic purposes > (such as Hampden County). I currently live within the Town of > Grafton, located in Worcester County. Thus the listing could be: > > Grafton, Worcester County, Massachusetts, USA > > Beacuse there is nothing lower than Grafton, it is probably not > necessary to say "Town of Grafton". > > But now we have state-by-state variation, and that could get > confusing. While Massachusetts is similar to Pennsylvania in that the > town (MA) or township / borough (PA) is the lowest form of government, > its different from that of NY, where villages are smaller that towns. > So, although obvious, perhaps its better to say: > > Town of Grafton, Worcester County, Massachusetts, USA > > which would align the method with that of New York. > > Thoughts? > > > Scott > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Brian L. Lightfoot > <br...@the-lightfoots.com> wrote: > > > > I'm glad to see that I'm in line with the general consensus here, > namely to include the work "County" after the name of the county. I've > observed that this practice has evolved somewhat over the past decade. > Seems originally somebody thought the nice, clean method of "City, > County, State, (optional Country)" was the prescribed method. But I > immediately saw a problem in that many cities, townships, and counties > all have the same name. For example, the city of Mudville, in Mudville > Township, in Mudville County. When you run across some source that left > out the critical location word and only provided "Mudville, State" or > "Mudville, Mudville, State" (as in Ancestry's 1880 census reports), > then are they talking the city of Mudville or the township of Mudville. > (Note to people across the pond either in the UK or the land down under > --- a township is not the same as a town. It is normally just a > geographic part of a County which is divided up into several > townships.) > > > > The bottom line is that I enter my data in the following fashion. If > it's the city of Mudville, then I write "Mudville, Mudville County, > State". If it is the township of Mudville (which is not necessarily the > same as the city limits), then I write "Mudville Township, Mudville > County, State". The location description may look long but at least I > know specifically what area is being described. > > > > I've gotten lazy and leave out the "USA" part. Figure I don't know of > anybody in the EU that I'll be sending my family file to. > > > > > > Brian in CA > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Kathy Meyer [mailto:kmeyer2...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Sunday, August 01, 2010 11:47 AM > > > To: LegacyUserGroup@LegacyUsers.com > > > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Legacy and County Names > > > > > > I was told at one time that you should always use the word "county" > > > following the actual county name anytime you did not have a city to > > > precede it; otherwise, as you stated, one would assume that it was > the > > > city name, even if you had the leading commas to separate fields. > It > > > was at some sort of conference or class and they said it was > helpful > > > to do that as a habit anyway, just to be very clear. I have not > done > > > that in the past and have not changed my database to reflect that > but > > > I thought it made very good sense. Wouldn't it be nice to simply > have > > > fields that are specifically for city or town, parish, county, > state, > > > country? Then those inadvertent errors would diminish; a lot of > > > people don't even know to put in the commas to designate a missing > > > field. > > > > > > Kathy > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Alan Jones <a...@ajsquared.us> > wrote: > > > > The previous genealogy program I used had you put "Co." after > the > > > > county name so you had place location of > > > > Little Rock, Pulaski Co., Arkansas, USA > > > > > > > > However in the Legacy training and the Geo Database it does not > use > > > or > > > > seam to like the "Co." on the end. Thus output was: Little > Rock, > > > > Pulaski, Arkansas, USA > > > > > > > > When I moved to Legacy I pulled "Co." off of everything as I > found it > > > > trying to follow the convention. Now in some of my reports and > other > > > > things I look back and think it might have been nice to have had > the > > > Co. > > > > for the County. > > > > > > > > So my questions are: > > > > > > > > What is the reasoning Legacy does not put them on? > > > > > > > > Are there reasons not to have the Co. on the end? > > > > > > > > I did note in some reading that if you just have the county name > then > > > > your are supposed to put "Co." or something on the end so people > > > don't > > > > get confused and think it was a City. So why not allow it all > the > > > time. > > > > > > > > Anyone else just force it on? It means you can't use the default > > > lookup > > > > in the Geo Database. It certainly would be something easy to fix > and > > > > add as a feature to Legacy to have it put Co. on county names on > if > > > it > > > > did not cause problems. > > > > > > > > Is there a research/genealogical reason not to do this? > > > > > > > > Anyone else ever run into this question? > > > > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > Alan > > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergr...@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
