Date   

Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Mike Tate
 

Victor,

Yes, date & place of birth on UK Death Certificates only started in 1969.

Yes, census records and all certificates are prone to errors.

But the younger the person the more likely the details will be accurate.

My list is not meant to be definitive, but simply that each Source document must be judged on its merit.

That is often governed by how contemporary the details are with respect to the event they describe.

So for example date & place of birth on a Death certificate may be erroneous (except for children) whereas the death details should be accurate.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 04 February 2020 08:22
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Mike

Only the modern death certificates gave place of birth and date. Perhaps it started from the 1960's. I have just checked a 1969 certificate that gives date and place of birth

Those of the 1950's and earlier don't.

Marriage certificates are prone to errors. For example my fathers first marriage gave his father's Christian name as Thomas when it is George. His bride's father's name is Thomas

Like you say death certificate is more reliable than marriage certificate

I have come across census records as giving a different place of birth in different census years

Regards

Victor

On 03/02/2020 11:29 pm, Mike Tate wrote:

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter

_._,_._,_


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Mike Tate
 

John,

My list was not meant to be definitive, but simply that each Source document must be judged on its merit.

That is often governed by how contemporary the details are with respect to the event they describe.

To say that a Death certificate often has more errors than most other types only applies to the birth or age details.

The other details such as name, date & place of death, and the informant are contemporary with the death and so quite reliable.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of John Hanson
Sent: 04 February 2020 07:39
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Whilst I will agree with Mike on the theory behind his list from having looked at so many certificates over the years there are pitfalls with all certificates

 

I remember helping at the FindMyPast stand at the last WDYTYA Live event and being asked by someone why her husbands entry in the 1939 register was not unlocked.
He had died in 1985 so there was no real reason that I could see other than the data from the certificate did not match the register
Then she suddenly said “Would it matter if I got his date of birth wrong on the death certifacte”!!
So I sent her to go and talk to the GRO about how to change it

I also remember when I went with my mum to register dad’s death in 2001 being asked about his place of birth
So I gave the address – was not what they wanted. They wanted the registration district
The one that it actually was did not appear on her list so had to talk the modern equivalent which could lead someone who didn’t know any better to the wrong person

 

Death certificate in fact often have more errors than most as the person who really knows the answers is the one who can’t answer them – the deceased

Regards
John Hanson - researching the Halstead/Holstead/Alstead names
Researcher, the Halsted Trust - https://www.halsted.org.uk
Research website - https://www.halstedresearch.org.uk

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 23:30
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter

_._,_._,_


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

John Hanson
 

Pauline
One of the first things I look at when doing my advice sessions these days is the number of days between birth and registration – 42 is always a good indicator that the birth date might be wrong
Regards

John

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Pauline Parnell
Sent: 04 February 2020 09:03
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I’ve got a couple of very dodgy certificates. The first is a death certificate where the lodger was the informant and was five years out with the age. That caused a brick wall which was finally resolved by a DNA test. The second is my great-grandfather’s birth certificate. Apparently he was rather proud of the fact that he had more birthdays than the king - his real one, the date on his baptism and the date given on his birth certificate, made up to avoid the fine for late registration.

I have an interesting family 😂


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

ninajenkins19@...
 

When I started family history over 30 years ago I was told to ideally confirm each piece of evidence from 3 sources before trusting it totally. I have always found that excellent advice


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Pauline Parnell
 

I’ve got a couple of very dodgy certificates. The first is a death certificate where the lodger was the informant and was five years out with the age. That caused a brick wall which was finally resolved by a DNA test. The second is my great-grandfather’s birth certificate. Apparently he was rather proud of the fact that he had more birthdays than the king - his real one, the date on his baptism and the date given on his birth certificate, made up to avoid the fine for late registration.
I have an interesting family 😂


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

David De Maine
 

I also agree with John. The information on the certificate or printout is only as good as the information that was given to the informant. And that information may not have been right in the first place.

In the case of my paternal grandmother the information she gave to one of her sons prior to her dying about her previous marriages, date of birth and birth place were completely false.

Also her first marriage certificate was full of inconsistencies for both her and her husband. Mind you she had a lot to hide.

If you are able, you need to verify everything you can on all birth, marriage and death certificates from other sources.  However unfortunately this is not always practical.

Regards

David De Maine

On 04-Feb-20 8:39 PM, John Hanson wrote:

Whilst I will agree with Mike on the theory behind his list from having looked at so many certificates over the years there are pitfalls with all certificates

 

I remember helping at the FindMyPast stand at the last WDYTYA Live event and being asked by someone why her husbands entry in the 1939 register was not unlocked.
He had died in 1985 so there was no real reason that I could see other than the data from the certificate did not match the register
Then she suddenly said “Would it matter if I got his date of birth wrong on the death certifacte”!!
So I sent her to go and talk to the GRO about how to change it

I also remember when I went with my mum to register dad’s death in 2001 being asked about his place of birth
So I gave the address – was not what they wanted. They wanted the registration district
The one that it actually was did not appear on her list so had to talk the modern equivalent which could lead someone who didn’t know any better to the wrong person

 

Death certificate in fact often have more errors than most as the person who really knows the answers is the one who can’t answer them – the deceased

Regards
John Hanson - researching the Halstead/Holstead/Alstead names
Researcher, the Halsted Trust - https://www.halsted.org.uk
Research website - https://www.halstedresearch.org.uk

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 23:30
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sou

John & Carol King
 

I agree death certificates can easily be wrong, my husband incorrectly recorded his mother's maiden name, I only found out when doing his tree and we still have not corrected it, although we have been informed that we could


On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 7:39, John Hanson
<john.hanson@...> wrote:

Whilst I will agree with Mike on the theory behind his list from having looked at so many certificates over the years there are pitfalls with all certificates

 

I remember helping at the FindMyPast stand at the last WDYTYA Live event and being asked by someone why her husbands entry in the 1939 register was not unlocked.
He had died in 1985 so there was no real reason that I could see other than the data from the certificate did not match the register
Then she suddenly said “Would it matter if I got his date of birth wrong on the death certifacte”!!
So I sent her to go and talk to the GRO about how to change it

I also remember when I went with my mum to register dad’s death in 2001 being asked about his place of birth
So I gave the address – was not what they wanted. They wanted the registration district
The one that it actually was did not appear on her list so had to talk the modern equivalent which could lead someone who didn’t know any better to the wrong person

 

Death certificate in fact often have more errors than most as the person who really knows the answers is the one who can’t answer them – the deceased

Regards
John Hanson - researching the Halstead/Holstead/Alstead names
Researcher, the Halsted Trust - https://www.halsted.org.uk
Research website - https://www.halstedresearch.org.uk

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 23:30
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

ShaneB
 

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 04:31 PM, ShaneB wrote:
This decreased is shown as having been widowed and having no kids. In fact, he was still married and had five children.
Argh!

"This decreased" should of course be "the deceased".

Auto spell checking isn't always helpful!


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

ShaneB
 

I have a death certificate that shows how questionable the data on a certificate can be. This decreased is shown as having been widowed and having no kids. In fact, he was still married and had five children.

His wife, who also claimed to be widowed in the same year that he had been "widowed", had remarried.

On details on certificates: in Australia, they were issued by the colonies and subsequently by the States and Territories. Consequently, historically at least, they've all been a little different and of varying value. Early South Australian certificates have little more than a name and date!


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Victor Markham
 

Mike

Only the modern death certificates gave place of birth and date. Perhaps it started from the 1960's. I have just checked a 1969 certificate that gives date and place of birth

Those of the 1950's and earlier don't.

Marriage certificates are prone to errors. For example my fathers first marriage gave his father's Christian name as Thomas when it is George. His bride's father's name is Thomas

Like you say death certificate is more reliable than marriage certificate

I have come across census records as giving a different place of birth in different census years

Regards

Victor

On 03/02/2020 11:29 pm, Mike Tate wrote:

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

John Hanson
 

Whilst I will agree with Mike on the theory behind his list from having looked at so many certificates over the years there are pitfalls with all certificates

 

I remember helping at the FindMyPast stand at the last WDYTYA Live event and being asked by someone why her husbands entry in the 1939 register was not unlocked.
He had died in 1985 so there was no real reason that I could see other than the data from the certificate did not match the register
Then she suddenly said “Would it matter if I got his date of birth wrong on the death certifacte”!!
So I sent her to go and talk to the GRO about how to change it

I also remember when I went with my mum to register dad’s death in 2001 being asked about his place of birth
So I gave the address – was not what they wanted. They wanted the registration district
The one that it actually was did not appear on her list so had to talk the modern equivalent which could lead someone who didn’t know any better to the wrong person

 

Death certificate in fact often have more errors than most as the person who really knows the answers is the one who can’t answer them – the deceased

Regards
John Hanson - researching the Halstead/Holstead/Alstead names
Researcher, the Halsted Trust - https://www.halsted.org.uk
Research website - https://www.halstedresearch.org.uk

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 23:30
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Mike Tate
 

Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Victor Markham
 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:
Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: GEDCOM Duplication

Mike Tate
 

Yes, it advises that you import the MyHeritage GEDCOM into FH as a New Project.

If you have Media that needs to migrate into FH then use the MyHeritage Family Tree Builder rather than the Online Family Tree.

See the Knowledge Base for Importing from MyHeritage and follow all its advice:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=how_to:import_from_myheritage

 

Practice using the File > Merge/Compare File command on a copy of your main Project and a subset of MyHeritage data.

The most common mistake users make is forgetting to check EVERY TAB for each type of record in the Merge dialogue.

If you follow the advice carefully then you should avoid any disasters, but if they arise then there is a recovery path using backups.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Geoffrey via Groups.Io
Sent: 03 February 2020 20:44
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

Thank you, Mike.  For the avoidance of doubt, will the procedure in the link you gave avoid or help to avoid the disaster of which you warned?

 

Yours aye,

Geoffrey

 

From: family-historian@groups.io [mailto:family-historian@groups.io] On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 19:37
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

Hi Geoffrey

FH has a File > Merge/Compare File command, but there are many pitfalls in using it successfully.

There are options for automatically synchronising duplicate records (not just Individuals but also Sources, Media, etc.)

Do NOT try and merge a GEDCOM file exported from MyHeritage directly with your main Project as that spells DISASTER.

There is much advice in the FUG Knowledge Base in the Merge/Compare File section:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=glossary:merge_compare_files

 

I suggest you join the FHUG and review the advice before proceeding, and ask any further questions in the Forum there.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Geoffrey via Groups.Io
Sent: 02 February 2020 10:35
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

I wish to align my FH project with a MyHeritage project that is rather larger.  Please tell me, if I seek to transfer a GEDCOM file, how does FH resolve large numbers of duplications?

 

_._,_._,_


Re: GEDCOM Duplication

Geoffrey <hartwell@...>
 

Thank you, Mike.  For the avoidance of doubt, will the procedure in the link you gave avoid or help to avoid the disaster of which you warned?

 

Yours aye,

Geoffrey

 

From: family-historian@groups.io [mailto:family-historian@groups.io] On Behalf Of Mike Tate
Sent: 03 February 2020 19:37
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

Hi Geoffrey

FH has a File > Merge/Compare File command, but there are many pitfalls in using it successfully.

There are options for automatically synchronising duplicate records (not just Individuals but also Sources, Media, etc.)

Do NOT try and merge a GEDCOM file exported from MyHeritage directly with your main Project as that spells DISASTER.

There is much advice in the FUG Knowledge Base in the Merge/Compare File section:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=glossary:merge_compare_files

 

I suggest you join the FHUG and review the advice before proceeding, and ask any further questions in the Forum there.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Geoffrey via Groups.Io
Sent: 02 February 2020 10:35
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

I wish to align my FH project with a MyHeritage project that is rather larger.  Please tell me, if I seek to transfer a GEDCOM file, how does FH resolve large numbers of duplications?

 


Re: GEDCOM Duplication

Mike Tate
 

Hi Geoffrey

FH has a File > Merge/Compare File command, but there are many pitfalls in using it successfully.

There are options for automatically synchronising duplicate records (not just Individuals but also Sources, Media, etc.)

Do NOT try and merge a GEDCOM file exported from MyHeritage directly with your main Project as that spells DISASTER.

There is much advice in the FUG Knowledge Base in the Merge/Compare File section:

https://www.fhug.org.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=glossary:merge_compare_files

 

I suggest you join the FHUG and review the advice before proceeding, and ask any further questions in the Forum there.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Geoffrey via Groups.Io
Sent: 02 February 2020 10:35
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: [family-historian] GEDCOM Duplication

 

I wish to align my FH project with a MyHeritage project that is rather larger.  Please tell me, if I seek to transfer a GEDCOM file, how does FH resolve large numbers of duplications?

 


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

Mike Tate
 

Hi David,

Your list is quite rational although early Census records may be more contemporary than later Marriage, Death, or Burial records.

In the Sources For yellow citations panel use the black up/down arrows to move the Source records into the desired precedence order.

Also the Assessment for each Source Citation could say how reliable you believe the information to be.

That should be just for the Birth information in this case, and will partly depend on how contemporary the record is.

i.e. a Birth Certificate or Baptism record is most contemporary with the Birth event, but later records less so, with Death or Burial being least contemporary.

 

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of David.potter5 via Groups.Io
Sent: 03 February 2020 15:51
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter


Re: Importance Value of various Birth Sources

uhkh3tsccmz9@beconfidential.com
 

David

"Importance" can mean so many things!

In terms of reliability, the nearer a record of the birth / the closer the relative, the more reliable (less likely to being miss-remembered or deliberately manipulated) it is likely to be:

  • A mother will remember in detail the day after
  • The father may be a bit hazy (even the next day) as to exactly which side of midnight the birth actually took place
  • A bride giving her age/date of birth for her wedding certificate may have reason to up it a bit (if under age) or lower it a bit (if older than the groom)
  • A son recording a death may be unreliable as to birth date due to never really being sure, being upset, wanting to record a particular date
  • A care home manager doing the same might simply repeat what the person told them "I'm 92 you know!" (yeah sure!)

In terms of which record a court might take as truth:

  • The Birth certificate is the official document of record, so other evidence would have to be very persuasive to trump the birth certificate

In term of precision some records give to the day, others may only give to a year, some others (e.g.. UK Census) it would have to be calculated from a claimed age (so how old are you in years the day before your birthday?)

In terms of sorting your sources against a birth fact in FH, I would probably follow your suggestions - unless I was uncertain about the reliability of some of the later records

David


GEDCOM Duplication

Geoffrey <hartwell@...>
 

I wish to align my FH project with a MyHeritage project that is rather larger.  Please tell me, if I seek to transfer a GEDCOM file, how does FH resolve large numbers of duplications?


Importance Value of various Birth Sources

David Potter
 

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter

5041 - 5060 of 5081