Multiple fact set copies
|
Edward Sneithe
I think I have dug myself a whole, crawled in and pulled the dirt back over me. I have been creating custom facts but now I see that I have multiple fact set when I select Tools/Fact Types. This is the list: Custom Extended Hidden Extended (2) Hidden Disabled Extended (3) Hidden Disabled Standard Standard (2) Eclipsed Disabled
It seems to me I have imported several fact set multiple times.
How do I correct this? Just delete the “extra” fact sets marked as disabled leaving me with this? Assuming disabled means that these facts are not used.
Custom
I can change the order by ranking them. |
|
|
|
Try looking in:
C:\ProgramData\Calico Pie\Family Historian\Fact Types Derek Heritage |
|
|
|
Edward, No, do NOT get involved with C:\ProgramData\Calico Pie\Family Historian\Fact Types That should be reserved for FH to access and very rarely needs user access.
You should be able to sort out your Fact Sets in the Tools > Fact Types… dialogues.
You say some Fact Sets are Hidden & Disabled. Do you mean that when you choose such a Fact Set top left no Facts are listed unless you tick Show Hidden and then they are all listed as <eclipsed> & <disabled>?
In that case, use the Fact Sets… dialogue then select and Delete those with the (2) or (3) suffix.
Regards, Mike Tate |
|
|
|
Edward Sneithe
Thank you. I assumed that if all the facts in the (2) or (3) fact sets are disabled then they are not being used for any of my projects. I always intended to use FH tools to correct this and did not anticipate any action against the CalicoPie directory Thanks again.
On Sunday, December 11, 2022 at 05:28:18 AM EST, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:
Edward, No, do NOT get involved with C:\ProgramData\Calico Pie\Family Historian\Fact Types That should be reserved for FH to access and very rarely needs user access.
You should be able to sort out your Fact Sets in the Tools > Fact Types… dialogues.
You say some Fact Sets are Hidden & Disabled. Do you mean that when you choose such a Fact Set top left no Facts are listed unless you tick Show Hidden and then they are all listed as <eclipsed> & <disabled>?
In that case, use the Fact Sets… dialogue then select and Delete those with the (2) or (3) suffix.
Regards, Mike Tate |
|
|
|
Mike's answer didn't help. I had the same problem - did what I suggested to you - deleted what I didn't want. Problem solved.
Derek Heritage |
|
|
|
Derek, Could you please be more specific. Why did my answer not help? Why could not delete the unwanted Fact Sets?
I would like to know so that I can revise my answer in future or CP can be informed of a problem and improve FH.
It should not be necessary to resort to deleting Fact Set files from the C:\ProgramData\Calico Pie\Family Historian\Fact Sets folders. That is highly risky if you are not sure what you are doing and should not be recommended to others without appropriate warnings of the risks.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Derek Heritage
Sent: 12 December 2022 09:41 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
Mike's answer didn't help. I had the same problem - did what I suggested to you - deleted what I didn't want. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Edward Sneithe
Just an update, Mike's answer worked well. I have been working with computers for many years and getting into a directory is not an issue. I would prefer to let FH do what it can. My duplicate fact sets are gone and far easier and quicker than going into the directory structure. Thanks again Mike.
On Monday, December 12, 2022 at 06:17:09 AM EST, Mike Tate <post@...> wrote:
Derek, Could you please be more specific. Why did my answer not help? Why could not delete the unwanted Fact Sets?
I would like to know so that I can revise my answer in future or CP can be informed of a problem and improve FH.
It should not be necessary to resort to deleting Fact Set files from the C:\ProgramData\Calico Pie\Family Historian\Fact Sets folders. That is highly risky if you are not sure what you are doing and should not be recommended to others without appropriate warnings of the risks.
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Derek Heritage
Sent: 12 December 2022 09:41 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
Mike's answer didn't help. I had the same problem - did what I suggested to you - deleted what I didn't want. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Mike,
I have a similar problem, and just yesterday only had a double-up of one fact, today I have three. I don't want to just delete the duplicates as I know I have used at least one of them. Is there a query, or some other method to allow me to see the records that have used each Fact Type? I can then add the correct one, and then delete the others, and then delete them from the Fact Type list.  -- Mark Trevithick from somewhere in the Florida Panhandle... |
|
|
|
John Hanson
Mark There is a standard Query under “Facts and events” then “All Facts”
This lists all the facts that you have used and where Export it and then use a spreadsheet to filter what you want Then you can decide on which is the one to keep
However, Find-a-Grave is really a source not an event The event/fact is the burial and find-a-grave should point to that
Regards John Hanson FSG
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of trevithick
Sent: 26 December 2022 23:06 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
Mike, |
|
|
|
Mark, You can use the Query suggested by John but there is no need to export it to a spreadsheet. That actually makes finding where the facts are used more difficult. Just click on the Fact Type column heading in the Result Set to sort alphabetically and scroll down to the ones starting with Find.
There is a custom Query to download from the FHUG Knowledge Base that will do filtering: https://fhug.org.uk/kb/download/all-facts-filter-by-label/
Double-click any non-empty cell to open the Property Box and show the fact.
Only two of the facts you listed have a Custom Fact Set definition that may need to be deleted. The third entry has no definition and if those facts are deleted then it will automatically vanish.
I agree with John that those items are NOT facts. They are sources that should be cited by Death/Burial facts.
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Funk
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 03:04 AM, John Hanson wrote:
That may be true for the way you work, however some of us have reasons for non-standard facts. I. for example, want a line in my narrative report that reads 'John Doe has a Find-a-Grave memorial number of 1234567'. Also keep in mind that many of us come from a time and from software before there was any real distinction between Events and Attributes. If you want to keep track of something and have it easily view in the standard edit screen, then you created a Fact for it. It was until I started started messing around with FH that there was really any distinction between Events and Attributes. |
|
|
|
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
Kenneth, I take your point about different ways of working and the many uses of custom ‘Facts’. However, John wasn’t contrasting Events and Attributes but Facts and Sources, and pointing out that the conventional way of recording Find-a-Grave would be as a Source.
Were you starting from scratch with FH, you could achieve your narrative sentence by adding a note to the Burial fact of 'John Doe has a Find-a-Grave memorial number of 1234567' and citing Find-a-Grave as a source. (I am not suggesting you redo anything, just pointing out for the benefit of others how to achieve the same thing without a custom fact).
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Kenneth Funk
Sent: 27 December 2022 12:55 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 03:04 AM, John Hanson wrote:
That may be true for the way you work, however some of us have reasons for non-standard facts. I. for example, want a line in my narrative report that reads 'John Doe has a Find-a-Grave memorial number of 1234567'. Also keep in mind that many of us come from a time and from software before there was any real distinction between Events and Attributes. If you want to keep track of something and have it easily view in the standard edit screen, then you created a Fact for it. It was until I started started messing around with FH that there was really any distinction between Events and Attributes. |
|
|
|
Arthur K
I agree with all the comments which say that Find A Grave should be treated as a source, but I disagree strongly with the suggestion that it is a source for a burial. In some cases it might be, if the contributor is working from a burial register, but in most cases I have seen Find A Grave records the existence of a memorial and nothing more. Memorials sometimes mention people who were buried elsewhere (one of my ancestors is commemorated on two entirely separate stones in the same cemetery), so unless a stone specifically says that someone is buried below it, it shouldn't be assumed that it marks their final resting place. (And sometimes stones are moved....)
To help to maintain the distinction over exactly what is being recorded, and to make sure that my "facts" don't go beyond what the sources support, I have a custom Memorial event, and as a source I use the memorial itself (or if lumping, the churchyard, cemetery etc), or else a transcription such as Find A Grave or a FHS publication. It's actually not so different to have a specific Find A Grave fact; I wouldn't do it myself, but if it guards against treating Find A Grave as a source for a burial, it may be a good thing. |
|
|
|
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
If it isn’t a source for a Burial (which I agree it may be) then it’s likely to be a source for a death? But each instance will have to be assessed on its own merits. If the Memorial just records the name and nothing else, for example, it’s not a Source for anything except the name (and perhaps by inference that the individual is dead – if it’s the ‘right’ individual); in that case I’d just record it in the Death Fact note until/unless I had Burial info. (Actually, I probably wouldn’t record it at all, but we all work differently.)
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Arthur K
Sent: 27 December 2022 13:58 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
I agree with all the comments which say that Find A Grave should be treated as a source, but I disagree strongly with the suggestion that it is a source for a burial. In some cases it might be, if the contributor is working from a burial register, but in most cases I have seen Find A Grave records the existence of a memorial and nothing more. Memorials sometimes mention people who were buried elsewhere (one of my ancestors is commemorated on two entirely separate stones in the same cemetery), so unless a stone specifically says that someone is buried below it, it shouldn't be assumed that it marks their final resting place. (And sometimes stones are moved....) |
|
|
|
colevalleygirl@colevalleygirl.co.uk
Typing too fast!
If it isn’t a source for a Burial (which I agree it may NOT be)
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of colevalleygirl@...
Sent: 27 December 2022 14:04 To: family-historian@groups.io Subject: Re: [family-historian] Multiple fact set copies
If it isn’t a source for a Burial (which I agree it may be) then it’s likely to be a source for a death? But each instance will have to be assessed on its own merits. If the Memorial just records the name and nothing else, for example, it’s not a Source for anything except the name (and perhaps by inference that the individual is dead – if it’s the ‘right’ individual); in that case I’d just record it in the Death Fact note until/unless I had Burial info. (Actually, I probably wouldn’t record it at all, but we all work differently.)
From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Arthur K
I agree with all the comments which say that Find A Grave should be treated as a source, but I disagree strongly with the suggestion that it is a source for a burial. In some cases it might be, if the contributor is working from a burial register, but in most cases I have seen Find A Grave records the existence of a memorial and nothing more. Memorials sometimes mention people who were buried elsewhere (one of my ancestors is commemorated on two entirely separate stones in the same cemetery), so unless a stone specifically says that someone is buried below it, it shouldn't be assumed that it marks their final resting place. (And sometimes stones are moved....) |
|
|
|
Brent Tapscott
I am with Arthur on this!. I also have a custom Memorial fact and use this for cemetery related burial "facts" unless I have a specific Burial record.
I have quite a few gravestone inscriptions (including some where I have taken the photograph myself) that reference somebody who is not actually buried "underneath" the stone - WW1 and WW2 military deaths being prime examples. The Source record (be it one of my photo's, a Find a Grave reference or ....) is always entitled "Smith, John B & children - Memorial Inscription" or similar. |
|
|
