Dennis – I’ve re-titled your last post so that others can use the subject – 
perhaps to give you some help on your problem.
(those interested in Peter Astle’s quite different problem may be a little 

I wonder if your problems are due to the size of your database, including 
images etc?
Perhaps Cathy Pinner can recall if other users of Legacy have had as much data 
as you, without having this error?

Regards, Ian  Thomas
Albert Park, Victoria 3206 Australia

From: LegacyUserGroup [] On 
Behalf Of Dennis Murphy
Sent: Wednesday, 7 March 2018 4:11 AM
To: Legacy User Group <>
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Living/Deceased Status of Mothers with children where 
no Father details are entered

Error 3021

This is not the first fight with this Error Number but it's the first one on 
which all the Help menu suggestions fail to solve. The final resort and 
ultimate "import to Gedcom" has not and likely, will not, be attempted due to 
it's source alterations.

I have run the Check & Repair multiple times, even twice in one complete 
Maintenance session. I have rebooted computer, tried again. Not sure if 
reinstalling the Legacy program will work but that may be next.

The error message reads" Location 19152 not found (1009, 81) Error 3021" It 
pops up every time I try to export a portion of my large database to smaller 
Legacy family files. Running File Maintenance on the master or larger database 
produces no errors; it only happens on the attempted extraction of portions of 
the larger file - at least that's when I notice it always.

My questions:
Does "Location 19152" refer to a specific geographical location?
How or where can it be found?
Do the numbers in parentheses refer to individual ID numbers where the location 
is missing?

I have the latest Legacy build but hope for a new update soon to see if that 
will fix the problem. There seems to be a lot of glitches still floating around 
in Version 9 as these error messages pop up quite often. Usually they can be 
fixed by following the suggestions but these LOCATION ones seem to be a bear on 
the loose. Please help: I am open to any and all suggestions

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 1:24 AM, Cathy Pinner 
<<>> wrote:

I've been doing some testing on this and you appear to be right.

I can't see it entered as a bug so I've entered it (I'm a beta tester) and 
noted you as the reporter.

They're not options I've used for a long time. I don't make Gedcoms often and 
lately just for DNA purposes so everyone except me in it is deceased and I've 
mostly just edited out my details.


Peter Astle via LegacyUserGroup wrote:
This is my first message to the user group - so apologies if this query has 
been aired before.

In my database I have a number of females who were living in the mid-late 
1800's, and their living status is set to NO.

In the process of exporting the family file via a Gedcom to view on a website, 
I used the privacy options within Legacy to suppress the details of living 
individuals as follows:-

/Suppress details for deceased spouses of living individuals, change name to 
/Suppress details for deceased children of living individuals, change name to 

After uploading the Gedcom to the website I reviewed the family file details 
that were displayed and I was surprised to see the following pattern.

In most cases, the names and other details of females who were born in the 
1800s and whose living status is NO would be displayed as normal.

However, if the female had a child, but the relevant father details had not 
been entered,  the mother appears as "Deceased" and her actual name and other 
details are suppressed.

The name and details of her /"illegitimate"/ child are not suppressed however 
and appear in full.

It looks rather odd to have an individual's details suppressed and their name  
replaced by "deceased" when they died well before 1900. It appears that Legacy 
has made this decision for me - as the mothers concerned are not the spouses of 
a living individual as under the suppressing option I selected above.

I can understand the need to protect the privacy of people where apparent  and 
actual illegitimacy is concerned, but if that is the intention/design of 
Legacy, should the child's name and details be suppressed too?

I realise as a relatively new user of Legacy I may have misunderstood, or 
overlooked a setting option or a work around for this, so I'd be grateful for 

I was considering entering some details for the "unknown" fathers, perhaps that 
would solve the issue, but I don't think entering people as name "unknown" is 
good practice - is it??




LegacyUserGroup mailing list<>
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe
Archives at:


LegacyUserGroup mailing list
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe
Archives at:

Reply via email to