Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

John W. Kitz
Hi,

Could one or more of the more seasoned (amateur) genealogists and users of
Gramps please advise me on the following?

As I'm gathering more data for my family tree and adding it to Gramps, I
would like to be able to separate yet retain the data of 'possibles', by
which I mean individuals for whom I gathered initial data that is still
contradicting to a degree that I don't want to add it to my existing family
tree, but would like to use Gramps to store it until such time that the data
gathered is sufficient, in terms of volume and reliability, to incorporate
it into my existing family tree.

Are there any strategies that others employ for this and if so which are
they?

To address this I have now configured more than one family tree, i.e. one
for relatives who were born and lived in the country in which I reside
(since to date they have been the easiest to find data for) and so far one
other for the 'possibles' who lived abroad and for whom it appears to be
more difficult to find non contradicting information.

Given the above is it possible to move data from one family tree to another
within the same Gramps installation, without having to reenter that data
manually?

Regards, Jk.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

Harvey Nimmo
On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 17:42 +0100, John W. Kitz wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Could one or more of the more seasoned (amateur) genealogists and
> users of
> Gramps please advise me on the following?
>
> As I'm gathering more data for my family tree and adding it to
> Gramps, I
> would like to be able to separate yet retain the data of 'possibles',
> by
> which I mean individuals for whom I gathered initial data that is
> still
> contradicting to a degree that I don't want to add it to my existing
> family
> tree, but would like to use Gramps to store it until such time that
> the data
> gathered is sufficient, in terms of volume and reliability, to
> incorporate
> it into my existing family tree.
>
> Are there any strategies that others employ for this and if so which
> are
> they?
>
> To address this I have now configured more than one family tree, i.e.
> one
> for relatives who were born and lived in the country in which I
> reside
> (since to date they have been the easiest to find data for) and so
> far one
> other for the 'possibles' who lived abroad and for whom it appears to
> be
> more difficult to find non contradicting information.
>
> Given the above is it possible to move data from one family tree to
> another
> within the same Gramps installation, without having to reenter that
> data
> manually?
>
> Regards, Jk.

You have two possibilities, either of which are relatively easy to
manage. I use both.

1) you collect the data for 'disconnected' individuals in isolated sub-
branch(es) within a family tree until you are satisfied you know where
one or more of them are connected to your main tree/branch. You can
then connect them at the appropriate point and, if necessary, merge any
duplicate people.

2) you collect the data for 'disconnected' people in separate tree(s).
You then have to export each tree and then import them into the main
tree and follow up with 1) above (because after importing them they are
isolated branches).

Cheers
Harvey


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

paul womack
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz
John W. Kitz wrote:

>
> To address this I have now configured more than one family tree, i.e. one
> for relatives who were born and lived in the country in which I reside
> (since to date they have been the easiest to find data for) and so far one
> other for the 'possibles' who lived abroad and for whom it appears to be
> more difficult to find non contradicting information.
>
> Given the above is it possible to move data from one family tree to another
> within the same Gramps installation, without having to reenter that data
> manually?

Gramps is (frankly) appalling at merging and even moving data from one DB
to another.

It is, however, perfectly good at knowing who's in a connected tree and who isn't.

(Person filter->Relationship Filters->People related to <Person>)

So I would simply add your possibles to your one-and-only DB,
and create "in my tree" and a derived "not in my tree"
person filter.

  BugBear

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

Harvey Nimmo
> Gramps is (frankly) appalling at merging and even moving data from
> one DB
> to another.

I must say, this is simply NOT my experience. Not surprisingly, you
have to be alert about what you are doing. ;-)
Obviously, when you import one tree into another, it remains a separate
branch in the 'receiving', because the 'receiving' tree cannot know
which persons are to be merged, so you will have to do the merging by
hand after the import (with the aid of the excellent tools available!).

Obviously, comparing the vital data of people in different trees can be
tedious, since the search for duplicates doesn't support such an
adventure. But when duplicate candidates are found within a single
family tree, the merge is extremely straightforward. Obviously, if
there are several duplicate people common to both branches, you should
be aware of it before you start the merging process, because you will
have to do a merge of them all individually.

Cheers
Harvey

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

paul womack
Harvey Nimmo wrote:

>> Gramps is (frankly) appalling at merging and even moving data from
>> one DB
>> to another.
>
> I must say, this is simply NOT my experience. Not surprisingly, you
> have to be alert about what you are doing. ;-)
> Obviously, when you import one tree into another, it remains a separate
> branch in the 'receiving', because the 'receiving' tree cannot know
> which persons are to be merged, so you will have to do the merging by
> hand after the import (with the aid of the excellent tools available!).
>
> Obviously, comparing the vital data of people in different trees can be
> tedious, since the search for duplicates doesn't support such an
> adventure. But when duplicate candidates are found within a single
> family tree, the merge is extremely straightforward. Obviously, if
> there are several duplicate people common to both branches, you should
> be aware of it before you start the merging process, because you will
> have to do a merge of them all individually.

How do merge all the redundant Places, Sources and repositories in the two sets of data?

   BugBear

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

Harvey Nimmo
On Thu, 2017-01-19 at 11:22 +0000, paul womack wrote:

> Harvey Nimmo wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Gramps is (frankly) appalling at merging and even moving data
> > > from
> > > one DB
> > > to another.
> >
> > I must say, this is simply NOT my experience. Not surprisingly, you
> > have to be alert about what you are doing. ;-)
> > Obviously, when you import one tree into another, it remains a
> > separate
> > branch in the 'receiving', because the 'receiving' tree cannot know
> > which persons are to be merged, so you will have to do the merging
> > by
> > hand after the import (with the aid of the excellent tools
> > available!).
> >
> > Obviously, comparing the vital data of people in different trees
> > can be
> > tedious, since the search for duplicates doesn't support such an
> > adventure. But when duplicate candidates are found within a single
> > family tree, the merge is extremely straightforward. Obviously, if
> > there are several duplicate people common to both branches, you
> > should
> > be aware of it before you start the merging process, because you
> > will
> > have to do a merge of them all individually.
>
> How do merge all the redundant Places, Sources and repositories in
> the two sets of data?
>
>    BugBear

Of course, Places, Sources and Repos may have to be merged as well. But
what do you expect? Do you want gramps to make all your mistakes for
you? Isn't it better if gramps provides good support for you to make
your own judgements. I find gramps does that very well, and, as always
there is room for improvement, e.g. when one merge is done gramps could
provide a list of further potential merges, resulting from that. I also
work with ancestry and wikitree and I can assure you, merging of trees
there is an order of magnitude less well supported than with gramps.

Cheers
Harvey





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Strategy to work on possible candidates for one's family tree.

rcarlson
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz

No doubt there are many ways of doing this. When I am doing my research, I transcribe the source data from film or archive into a spreadsheet (it could be a database). I accept that some data will be irrelevant, but when I’m in information gathering mode that doesn’t matter. More often than not, if the family name is relevant, I will transcribe the data. The columns I have in my spreadsheet  are:

Entry number

Date of entry

Family name

Event year

Repository

Source

Information gathered

Relevant (yes/no/ ?) - ? means possibly or uncertain; no means defintely not

In gramps (yes/no)

 

This makes it is easy for me to look at data for a family that is not in gramps using spreadsheet filters. The year field helps narrow down the scope. I look at this data on one screen while looking at my gramps data in another. This way I keep my Gramps data tidy and I don’t have the overhead of typing potentially irrelevant data into Gramps


I review regularly the information that is uncertain to see if things have changed.


Richard

 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org