Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Information

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
    #1

    New Information

    Hi all,
    I have a cousin who has lots of information on one branch of my extended family, including several people I had not found. I trust his research but would rather hold this material until I do my own researching on it. But, at the same time, I would like some of these names in my Family File now. Has anyone done this is a simple way which clearly keeps the "unverified" names and data separate from what I have sourced myself.

    As always, all ideas are appreciated.
    Thanks,
    Frank
    Frank Zwolinski
    Researching: Zwolinski, Zubris, Ward, Wichlacz, Six, Sidney/Sypniewskie, Rickner, Mulligan, McElroy, Maciejewski, Loisy, Lindsay, Konjey, Konieczki, Janick, Ellis, Cornish, Chlebowski, Sass, Soch.
    MacBook Pro, OS X 10.8.5, Reunion 11, FireFox 38.0.5, Safari 6.2.2
    Tags: None
    #2
    Re: New Information

    One simple way Frank would be to use a flag for all the "unverified" entries, then when you are certain about them , simply remove the flag.
    Rupert

    Researching Large; Cuddon; Ford, Gadsdon and Fletcher

    Comment

      #3
      Re: New Information

      Another way would be to enter a note for each entered person, in say , bold and red, saying,
      This entry from so and so and not yet verified, October 2014.

      At least that way you'll always have something prominent showing up when you look up someone. The flag idea may be a little discreet for some.
      Rupert

      Researching Large; Cuddon; Ford, Gadsdon and Fletcher

      Comment

        #4
        Re: New Information

        If the new info is in a GEDCOM, you could open it in a new FamilyFile, named appropriately. Then when you have verified a person, you can move them to your regular FamilyFile.
        Kaye Mushalik
        -Muschalik (Poland), Stroop, Small (Ireland), Fitzsimons/Fitzsimmons (Ireland) Pessara/Pesaora/Pesarro/Pizarro (from Germany)
        -Dorrance, Eberstein, Bell
        -Late2015iMac27"Retina5K, MacOS10.14, iOS12.1, R12, Safari12.0

        Comment

          #5
          Re: New Information

          Thank you Kaye, AND others--great responses.
          Kaye, to be clear, most of the information is on Ancestry, but I will check with my cousin to see if he can send it from his computer program as well.
          Keep 'em coming folks!

          Thanks,
          Frank
          Frank Zwolinski
          Researching: Zwolinski, Zubris, Ward, Wichlacz, Six, Sidney/Sypniewskie, Rickner, Mulligan, McElroy, Maciejewski, Loisy, Lindsay, Konjey, Konieczki, Janick, Ellis, Cornish, Chlebowski, Sass, Soch.
          MacBook Pro, OS X 10.8.5, Reunion 11, FireFox 38.0.5, Safari 6.2.2

          Comment

            #6
            Re: New Information

            Originally posted by kmgenealogy View Post
            If the new info is in a GEDCOM, you could open it in a new FamilyFile, named appropriately. Then when you have verified a person, you can move them to your regular FamilyFile.
            My suggestion would be to enter the "home" name of this tree as "unrelated". Edit>Add unrelated person. I call this a "floater" in my file, not connected to anyone but still recorded. Then, working from that one name build the family around it - the names that you haven't verified but hope to do so. The advantage of this is it keeps the names in your family file, they will appear in a "search" for that surname and they can be "connected" when you are ready. That's how I would do it.

            Comment

              #7
              Re: New Information

              Originally posted by genealogist.lily View Post
              My suggestion would be to enter the "home" name of this tree as "unrelated". Edit>Add unrelated person. I call this a "floater" in my file, not connected to anyone but still recorded. Then, working from that one name build the family around it - the names that you haven't verified but hope to do so. The advantage of this is it keeps the names in your family file, they will appear in a "search" for that surname and they can be "connected" when you are ready. That's how I would do it.
              Hi Lily,
              By "home" name do you mean surename?
              Frank
              Frank Zwolinski
              Researching: Zwolinski, Zubris, Ward, Wichlacz, Six, Sidney/Sypniewskie, Rickner, Mulligan, McElroy, Maciejewski, Loisy, Lindsay, Konjey, Konieczki, Janick, Ellis, Cornish, Chlebowski, Sass, Soch.
              MacBook Pro, OS X 10.8.5, Reunion 11, FireFox 38.0.5, Safari 6.2.2

              Comment

                #8
                Re: New Information

                Originally posted by Frank Zwolinski View Post
                Hi Lily,
                By "home" name do you mean surname?
                Frank
                Hi Frank,
                That wasn't very clear. Sorry! Yes. I meant surname, but I also meant the person central to the names attached to this floating tree. One day, if I find the missing link then I can connect them to my main file. But if not, it would be a simple job to delete the entire floating tree. The big plus for adding unrelated people is that they show up in the index. If you search for that name it will come up with all the data entered as you found it. So they aren't hidden in any way, even though they are not connected to your main family tree. I probably have scores of floating family pods; I think John Doe is related to me, I've connected all the people that belong with him to him - but he and his relations aren't linked to my research

                Comment

                  #9
                  Re: New Information

                  For the stuff I haven't quite verified (like a lot of stuff that's on ancestry.com that I've decided is at least fairly likely, but *I* haven't found sources yet), I enter the info in the top of my tree there. Like if "Mary" is someone I'm sure of, but I'm not 100% on her parents (or more) that I've just come across, I enter the info under a header in Mary's notes (and source what I've found). That way I always know where it's at if I find something, and it's easy to find, but not get confused with names I'm quite sure of. Or, sometimes, if "Mary" is a very well researched person and I know her maiden name, I might add a father (since his last name would be correct) with no first name, and paste the potential info in his note field. I also do a fair amount of "ca Mar1682" like dates (with a statement in the Memo where the guess is from) when the date sounds plausible enough to be useful in researching, but isn't personally confirmed.

                  That said, I have 2 or 3 names that I'm not quite sure of, though there's enough to suggest that a couple above them are indeed accurate, and I have an asterisk (*) after their first name. And then I'll generally add a sentence at the top of the notes in Red explaining what my concern is (with almost 1700 names, I'd never remember otherwise

                  Comment

                  Previous template Next
                  Working...
                  X