John,
For Gedcom validation I recommed
Genealogica Grafica http://www.genealogicagrafica.nl/
or try Tim's Bonkersits GREAT!
http://www.mccomberfamily.com/2013/02/bonkers-gedcom-sanity-checker.html
These both go much further than Legacy does in validation.
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at
Wow, who knew … Thank you Jay for sharing these wonderful sites.
Barton
From: Jay Wilpolt [mailto:jaywilp...@aol.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 28, 2015 7:24 PM
To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Unknown Persons
John,
For Gedcom validation I recommed
Genealogica
When addressing Mr. Jones or Mr. Smith, I usually say, Excuse me, SUR. Re you
Mister Surname?
On Mar 28, 2015, at 14:00, Robert57P_gmail robert...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone have a good hint that I
can use to remember that surname = last name and given name =
first name?
Legacy User Group
I put in Female or Male.
On Mar 27, 2015 10:25 AM, Don Quigley dwquig...@cox.net wrote:
Some of the recent messages have prompted this more general question I
have about how to enter “names” for unknown persons in Legacy, particularly
for persons with no known given or surname. This situation
I do a slight modification to the below. I use:
[---?--] unknown first name (given name)
[~--?--] unknown last name (surname)
These are usually followed with [[child of xxx]] or [[wife of xxx]] For
example:
[---?--][[child of Uriah Patton]]
Adding the info in double brackets allows me to
Some of the recent messages have prompted this more general question I have
about how to enter names for unknown persons in Legacy, particularly for
persons with no known given or surname. This situation typically arises for
a female with no known surname, for whom I have information about her
Don,
One of the your other respondents said whatever
floats your boat. I both agree with this
sentiment and disagree with such a practice.
An important element in treating unknown names is
that you are consistent within your own data. I
have seen trees where the user used ?, Unknown, Unk, Lnu
Don,
I cant answer the question as to why Legacy does the things it does as far
as name conventions.
But I have a large database of almost 250,000.
The problems come most often because of exchanging gedcoms where importing
and exporting data doesnt always end up in the right place causing
Jay,
We can agree to disagree about your unknown name naming conventions, but
I did wish to respond to some of your date usage.
As both of us maintain somewhat public research sites online, I decided
some time ago that I did not wish to publish dates that I could not
support by some type of
I use the old LNU (last name unknown), which groups them all in the
index in alphabetical order by last name/first name.
Barton
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 01:23 PM, Don Quigley wrote:
Some of the recent messages have prompted this more general question I
have about how to enter “names”
On 2015/03/27 19:23 PM, Don Quigley wrote:
For me, ??? seems to work well, but I’ve often wondered why does Legacy (and
other geneaology sources) warn against the use of a questionmark in a name?
Are
they just referring to the practice of trying to show uncertainty about a
name –
of, it is never part of the surname. There are a
few times when, much later, it was incorporated into the surname, for example,
de la Warre became Delaware, but that is rare.
CE
From: dwquig...@cox.net
To: legacyusergroup@LegacyUsers.com
Subject: [LegacyUG] Unknown Persons
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 10:23
John
I think we are on the same page
some thoughts to add.
*As both of us maintain somewhat public research sites online, I decided
some time ago that I did not wish to publish dates that I could not support
by some type of fact. Yet, as a One Namer, I would find that my family
files
I agree with John about how easily date modifiers get lost. For a start
they don't show in many indexes. So I also put dates in privacy brackets.
However, in Legacy I don't feel the need to put something in the Death
date to trigger that the person has died.
I periodically run the Advanced Set
Jay,
Please see below...
john.
At 06:59 PM 3/27/2015, Jay Wilpolt wrote:
John
I think we are on the same pageÂ
some thoughts to add.
As both of us maintain somewhat public research sites online, I
decided some time ago that I did not wish to publish dates that I could
not support by
Cathy,
1/ Let me say that I include a death date for
people whom I believe to have died out of a
personal preference. We have chatted about this
in the past, and I think my way is safer. For
instance, I get to set people as deceased who
died in the 20th century whom I cannot find
explicit death
16 matches
Mail list logo
