Tentative family link

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

Tentative family link

Richard Nairn
Hi,

In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been
able to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you
would put in the notes?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Tentative family link

Rich Lakey
I use the optional suffix for that and a few other things.  V for verified, X for probable and blank for a pipe dream.  You can make up your own code. I like the optional suffix because it shows in the people view next to the name. I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.
Rich

On 05/16/2018 02:14 PM, Richard Nairn wrote:
Hi,

In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been able to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you would put in the notes?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Tentative family link

Dave Scheipers
An easier system would be to attach tags to the family or the person,
Probable or Pipe Dream. As you move them to verified, take the tag
off. You can color code the tags for easy visual reference in the
lists. This would have the added benefit of not utilizing a person's
field that could actually be useful as you verify the person's info.
Tags are also designed to be easy filter options.

I do not use any system like this. But as I slog through my database,
cleaning and verifying, I find myself having to clean things up from
previous bad decisions. For me, until I add sources and citations, the
info has not been verified.

Just my 2 cents worth, Dave

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I use the optional suffix for that and a few other things.  V for verified,
> X for probable and blank for a pipe dream.  You can make up your own code. I
> like the optional suffix because it shows in the people view next to the
> name. I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.
> Rich
>
> On 05/16/2018 02:14 PM, Richard Nairn wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been able
> to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you would
> put in the notes?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Tentative family link

Rich Lakey
Dave I would agree with you on all but one issue. I use a tag to color code if Grandparent, Cousin etc so have had problems assigning two tags with different colors. I have spent the last year adding sources and citations which then earns a V. But there are so many sources and citations for even one person. Census, city directories, Find a grave (which may have a picture of the stone along with both primary and secondary information, Social Security info etc, etc. I like my code as I can put other information in front of my code in the field if pertinent.  If you run into one of my records in Ancestory you may see 3G4V behind the name. I am sure it drives some crazy. But it helps me keep strait the relationship and my confidence.
Rich 


On 05/16/2018 03:54 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
An easier system would be to attach tags to the family or the person,
Probable or Pipe Dream. As you move them to verified, take the tag
off. You can color code the tags for easy visual reference in the
lists. This would have the added benefit of not utilizing a person's
field that could actually be useful as you verify the person's info.
Tags are also designed to be easy filter options.

I do not use any system like this. But as I slog through my database,
cleaning and verifying, I find myself having to clean things up from
previous bad decisions. For me, until I add sources and citations, the
info has not been verified.

Just my 2 cents worth, Dave

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Rich [hidden email] wrote:
I use the optional suffix for that and a few other things.  V for verified,
X for probable and blank for a pipe dream.  You can make up your own code. I
like the optional suffix because it shows in the people view next to the
name. I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.
Rich

On 05/16/2018 02:14 PM, Richard Nairn wrote:

Hi,

In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been able
to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you would
put in the notes?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

    


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Tentative family link

Dave Scheipers
I agree, we each work a system that makes sense to us. My problem with
putting these codes in fields is that the code makes sense to you but
would be meaningless to anyone else. I have created reports (narweb)
for cousins interested in their trees. These coded fields would be
meaningless to them and there is no way I could spend the time
clearing the info out. I still have not cleaned all my place records
to make use of the dynamic naming capabilities.

I am NOT saying you are doing things 'wrong'. You are doing things
that makes sense to you.  Your system tells you visually what you know
about your relative. I have to check the various parts of a person's
record confirming what I know and what I still need to verify.

One of the great benefits of this forum is the sharing of ideas
because there is NOT one right way to go about doing genealogy or how
we utilize the multifaceted Gramps program. We have had a good
exchange of ideas and in doing so, have given Richard (and others)
things to think about.

Dave

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dave I would agree with you on all but one issue. I use a tag to color code
> if Grandparent, Cousin etc so have had problems assigning two tags with
> different colors. I have spent the last year adding sources and citations
> which then earns a V. But there are so many sources and citations for even
> one person. Census, city directories, Find a grave (which may have a picture
> of the stone along with both primary and secondary information, Social
> Security info etc, etc. I like my code as I can put other information in
> front of my code in the field if pertinent.  If you run into one of my
> records in Ancestory you may see 3G4V behind the name. I am sure it drives
> some crazy. But it helps me keep strait the relationship and my confidence.
> Rich
>
> On 05/16/2018 03:54 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>
> An easier system would be to attach tags to the family or the person,
> Probable or Pipe Dream. As you move them to verified, take the tag
> off. You can color code the tags for easy visual reference in the
> lists. This would have the added benefit of not utilizing a person's
> field that could actually be useful as you verify the person's info.
> Tags are also designed to be easy filter options.
>
> I do not use any system like this. But as I slog through my database,
> cleaning and verifying, I find myself having to clean things up from
> previous bad decisions. For me, until I add sources and citations, the
> info has not been verified.
>
> Just my 2 cents worth, Dave
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I use the optional suffix for that and a few other things.  V for verified,
> X for probable and blank for a pipe dream.  You can make up your own code. I
> like the optional suffix because it shows in the people view next to the
> name. I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.
> Rich
>
> On 05/16/2018 02:14 PM, Richard Nairn wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been able
> to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you would
> put in the notes?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Tentative family link

paul womack
In reply to this post by Rich Lakey
Rich wrote:
> I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.

With respect to whom? Most people (in a well developed tree) are "all of the above"
with respect to *someone*.

  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: Tentative family link

Richard Nairn
In reply to this post by Dave Scheipers
Thanks all - I hadn't really noticed that tag functionality before. It
definitely gives me some of the functionality that I was looking for. I
have added tags for my tentative link, currently researching branches
(so I know where I left off). I might use both, some of the charts and
such don't support the tag coloring...



On 2018-05-16 04:18 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:

> I agree, we each work a system that makes sense to us. My problem with
> putting these codes in fields is that the code makes sense to you but
> would be meaningless to anyone else. I have created reports (narweb)
> for cousins interested in their trees. These coded fields would be
> meaningless to them and there is no way I could spend the time
> clearing the info out. I still have not cleaned all my place records
> to make use of the dynamic naming capabilities.
>
> I am NOT saying you are doing things 'wrong'. You are doing things
> that makes sense to you.  Your system tells you visually what you know
> about your relative. I have to check the various parts of a person's
> record confirming what I know and what I still need to verify.
>
> One of the great benefits of this forum is the sharing of ideas
> because there is NOT one right way to go about doing genealogy or how
> we utilize the multifaceted Gramps program. We have had a good
> exchange of ideas and in doing so, have given Richard (and others)
> things to think about.
>
> Dave
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Dave I would agree with you on all but one issue. I use a tag to color code
>> if Grandparent, Cousin etc so have had problems assigning two tags with
>> different colors. I have spent the last year adding sources and citations
>> which then earns a V. But there are so many sources and citations for even
>> one person. Census, city directories, Find a grave (which may have a picture
>> of the stone along with both primary and secondary information, Social
>> Security info etc, etc. I like my code as I can put other information in
>> front of my code in the field if pertinent.  If you run into one of my
>> records in Ancestory you may see 3G4V behind the name. I am sure it drives
>> some crazy. But it helps me keep strait the relationship and my confidence.
>> Rich
>>
>> On 05/16/2018 03:54 PM, Dave Scheipers wrote:
>>
>> An easier system would be to attach tags to the family or the person,
>> Probable or Pipe Dream. As you move them to verified, take the tag
>> off. You can color code the tags for easy visual reference in the
>> lists. This would have the added benefit of not utilizing a person's
>> field that could actually be useful as you verify the person's info.
>> Tags are also designed to be easy filter options.
>>
>> I do not use any system like this. But as I slog through my database,
>> cleaning and verifying, I find myself having to clean things up from
>> previous bad decisions. For me, until I add sources and citations, the
>> info has not been verified.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents worth, Dave
>>
>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:25 PM, Rich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I use the optional suffix for that and a few other things.  V for verified,
>> X for probable and blank for a pipe dream.  You can make up your own code. I
>> like the optional suffix because it shows in the people view next to the
>> name. I also have a code for aunt/uncle, grandparent or cousin.
>> Rich
>>
>> On 05/16/2018 02:14 PM, Richard Nairn wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In my research I've found a suggested family link that I haven't been able
>> to confirm. Is there anyway to denote that or is that something you would
>> put in the notes?
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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