In a message dated 7/18/2002 7:53:59 AM Mountain Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Perhaps I'm not understanding something here, but I just went to a > person, at ramdom, and added a marriage to the same person they were > already married to, in fact I added three such marriages. No divorces, > just four marriages to the same person, with the same record numbers, > and it shows up as this person having four spouses, all the same person. > > So what's with this "cannot create that condition from within FO"? Wayne is talking about adding marriage "events". He is talking about linking two people together as a couple more than once. Try this... 1. Highlight a person in your database that has a spouse 2. Click the "Add spouse" button 3. Select "Link to an existing person" 4. Try to select the already linked spouse as a new spouse 5. FO will tell you these people are already married and won't let you link them again. - Bruce http://rootsmate.com

Wayne League wrote: >"Lois Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>I don't think I can drag & drop in version 7.0 but anyway I don't have >>duplicates in my list so I can't merge anyone. >> > >In FO7 you can do the same thing via gedcom export/import, but .... > >.... If you're sure you don't have any duplicates then it is possible >that you have imported via a gedcom file from another genealogy >program, the same situation we have been talking about in a different >thread where the same two people are linked to two completely >different families, both of which contain the very same people with >the very same record numbers. You cannot create that condition from >within FO ... you can only get it from importing from a gedcom made by >a program that allows such a thing. Here is how you can tell if that >condition exists: > Perhaps I'm not understanding something here, but I just went to a person, at ramdom, and added a marriage to the same person they were already married to, in fact I added three such marriages. No divorces, just four marriages to the same person, with the same record numbers, and it shows up as this person having four spouses, all the same person. So what's with this "cannot create that condition from within FO"? >

"Lois Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote: >I don't think I can drag & drop in version 7.0 but anyway I don't have >duplicates in my list so I can't merge anyone. In FO7 you can do the same thing via gedcom export/import, but .... .... If you're sure you don't have any duplicates then it is possible that you have imported via a gedcom file from another genealogy program, the same situation we have been talking about in a different thread where the same two people are linked to two completely different families, both of which contain the very same people with the very same record numbers. You cannot create that condition from within FO ... you can only get it from importing from a gedcom made by a program that allows such a thing. Here is how you can tell if that condition exists: When in the family view, both father and mother will have an 'other spouses' button over their names. Set the program options to show the record numbers on the main screen and notice the record numbers of both spouses. Now click on the other spouses button and choose the other spouse from the list (you should see two spouses, both with the same name). If the other spouse has the same record number as the first spouse, for both partners, then they are indeed the very same persons and you have inherited two separate families for the very same two people. The only way you can remedy this situation is to unlink the spouses and relink them. Be sure to make a note of all the marriage and family events in case you lose them during the unlinking. You might have to reenter those events. Wayne League

I don't think I can drag & drop in version 7.0 but anyway I don't have duplicates in my list so I can't merge anyone. I have one situation where John's wife and children print out twice in the indivdidual summary and then when I print out his wife, HE and the children are listed twice. It almost seems as though I performed the marriage twice! F.O. will let me unlink the John and Mary marriage but I'm afraid I won't have a marriage left, will I? Do I have to delete them and start from scratch or is there a trick that I don't know about? Thanks, Lois >From: Wayne League <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [FO] how to undo? >Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 00:22:25 -0400 > >"Lois Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > For > >instance, under Marriages/Children I have the people listed once and then > >there is the number 2 and the whole thing is listed again. > >Here is how that situation could be created: >If John and Mary are married and have children Susan and James: > >If you drag & drop John and descendants to a new database and then you >d&d John and descendants again to the same database you will have all >four people duplicated in the new database. If you then merge the two >John duplicates but do not merge anyone else, John then will have two >wives and two families, one for each of the two Mary duplicates. And >each of the two Mary wives will have two children named Susan and >James. If you then do an individual summary of John, it will show the >2 Marriages/Children as you describe above. > >The solution is to merge the two Mary duplicates and then merge the >duplicates of the children also. > >Wayne League > > >==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== >Family Origins GenForum - http://genforum.genealogy.com/fo/ >Tech Support Knowledge Base http://www.familyorigins.com/support/ _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com

"Lois Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote: > For >instance, under Marriages/Children I have the people listed once and then >there is the number 2 and the whole thing is listed again. Here is how that situation could be created: If John and Mary are married and have children Susan and James: If you drag & drop John and descendants to a new database and then you d&d John and descendants again to the same database you will have all four people duplicated in the new database. If you then merge the two John duplicates but do not merge anyone else, John then will have two wives and two families, one for each of the two Mary duplicates. And each of the two Mary wives will have two children named Susan and James. If you then do an individual summary of John, it will show the 2 Marriages/Children as you describe above. The solution is to merge the two Mary duplicates and then merge the duplicates of the children also. Wayne League

"Leona Mastan" <[email protected]> wrote: > Am I misunderstanding something? > FO 8 lets me add several marriage facts for the same couple without >adding additional spouses. Yes, I see I better clear up what I meant when I said what I said! <g> What FO will not let you do is have two different families with two different family groups, each with its own set of children different than the children in the other group and yet the spouses in the two different family groups still the same two people. A case where each spouse is shown to have another spouse and it turns out to be the same spouse. You can indeed show the two spouses to marry, then divorce, then marry again and do it all over still again if they wish, but it will all be shown within the same family group and all the children from the various marriages will be shown together in the same family group and not separated in relation to which marriage period they were born during. FO will not allow you to enter the first case above but it will allow you to import such a situation via a gedcom file. When you import such a situation where the same two spouses have two different family groups and each spouse is shown to have other spouses which are the same ones, the only way to correct that is to unlink the spouses and relink them. As soon as you unlink one spouse, all the spouse links in both families are broken, for FO will not distinguish between more than one family link between the same two people and therefore will delete both links. When you unlink the spouses, all marriage and family events will be lost and will have to be re-entered after the spouses are relinked. (Family links are not the same thing as marriage events). I should not have said marriages when I meant Family Groups. Wayne League

I don't know how I did this but in printing out individual summaries I am finding that I somehow made duplicates that I now can't get rid of. For instance, under Marriages/Children I have the people listed once and then there is the number 2 and the whole thing is listed again. For another person his father and mother come out twice. I think I must have entered them twice, maybe once a while back, and then for some reason entered them again later on again. I don't have duplicate people in my lists because I checked there so have I linked people twice? and if so, how would I go about unlinking them, but keeping the one link that I want. Thanks, Lois using F.O. ver. 7 _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com

Wayne, I am sure I did close it down some of the times, but not every time. I was just speaking with George Elting who reminded me of the memory resident capabilities of Word :). The one thing I was doing also was as I reviewed the book, I would find entries which had NOT been marked so I copied and pasted them into a "NEW" concordance file. I would continue my review, deleteing marks as necessary. Then I would go down to the beginning of the index on screen, highlite to the end, then delete. Once that was done, I would go back to the place I wanrted the index to start and do an INSERT-INDEX and TABLES-AUTOMARK with my newly built concordance file.. After reporting my problem to the board, I found out that all I had to do was place my cursor in the index area towards the left side and press F9. It would update the index but I am not sure at this time if that method is working properly or not. I am beginning to believe my problem was in the method I was first using and not always closing the document. Jim Elting (704) 544-7559 [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: Wayne League [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 2:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [FO] Index Markings in Books "James Elting" <[email protected]> wrote: >However, when I perform the mark index function again (with just my >new entries) some of those people whom I deleted the markings show back up >again as marked. Did you resave the document after you had deleted all the markings? Close down the document or even the whole program and reopen the resaved document? Doing all that should eliminate all the deleted marks. Wayne League ______________________________

This is not correct. I have, by mistake added two, sometimes three, marriages to the same couple, and had to go back and "delete" the extras. Leona Mastan wrote: > Wayne League <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>FO will not let you enter more than one marriage for the same two > people<<< > > Am I misunderstanding something? > FO 8 lets me add several marriage facts for the same couple without >adding additional spouses. > There is much conflicting info on one of my lines. Since I want to >be able to see all the info at once, I have added several different >marriage facts for the same couple. When I click on "add fact" > >"marriage" , a window opens asking "Which spouse do you want to add this >fact to?" By highlighting the one and only spouse an additional marriage >date, source and note can be added to the couple. > > This is very helpful in my research and later when I have PROVED a >marriage date, I will delete the unwanted marriage facts. > > I sure hope Bruce leaves this feature in Roots Mate. > > > > > >==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== >FAMILY ORIGINS - Ordering, UPDATES, books, FAQ, FREE DEMO, Newsletter, etc. http://formalsoft.com For the 8.03 and 9.02 PATCHES and what they fix, go to: http://formalsoft.com/files.htm > > >

Should be smooth going if you: 1. Install FO v.9 from CD to new computer 2: Download (or copy from old computer) the v.9 "patch" onto a floppy. 3 Run "patch" program on new computer and point to newly-created FO v.9 4 Perform "backup" of database (from File menu) on "old" computer to -->floppy (or CDR/CDRW) 5. Perform "restore" of database (from File menu) on "new" computer from floppy. (If using CDR/CDRW you should first use Windows explorer to "copy" the FO backup file with .zip extension -->from CDR/CDRW--> to a folder on new hard drive ~AND~ right-click the filename, choose properties, uncheck "Read-Only" *THEN* perform Step 5.) 6. Repeat entire process for all FO databases on "old" computer to transfer to "new" one! Hope this helps :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dawn Patterson" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 8:10 PM Subject: [FO] Moving to a new computer, backup to cd's > Hi All, > > I know this has probably been covered before, but I have just got a newer computer and want to move my FO over, I am using v9 with a patch. I also have a cd burner with my both computers. So can someone tell me step my step how to put all my files on a cd in one step. Or will I still have to backup, install v9 on new computer, go online and download the patch, and restore databases? I am not that computer literate, so breaking it down into small steps would be much appreciated. > > Dawn Patterson > Sturgis, MI

Hi All, I know this has probably been covered before, but I have just got a newer computer and want to move my FO over, I am using v9 with a patch. I also have a cd burner with my both computers. So can someone tell me step my step how to put all my files on a cd in one step. Or will I still have to backup, install v9 on new computer, go online and download the patch, and restore databases? I am not that computer literate, so breaking it down into small steps would be much appreciated. Dawn Patterson Sturgis, MI

Wayne League <[email protected]> wrote: >>FO will not let you enter more than one marriage for the same two people<<< Am I misunderstanding something? FO 8 lets me add several marriage facts for the same couple without adding additional spouses. There is much conflicting info on one of my lines. Since I want to be able to see all the info at once, I have added several different marriage facts for the same couple. When I click on "add fact" > "marriage" , a window opens asking "Which spouse do you want to add this fact to?" By highlighting the one and only spouse an additional marriage date, source and note can be added to the couple. This is very helpful in my research and later when I have PROVED a marriage date, I will delete the unwanted marriage facts. I sure hope Bruce leaves this feature in Roots Mate.

Message text written by INTERNET:[email protected] >The remembering to reattach her would be my problem. Maybe a Post-it with a reminder, stuck in the center of my monitor, would help.< Nah, you don't have to be that simple, just create a "to do list" item, and the action to do is to re attach to parents X, create a fake repository called <re attach> . When you run a "to do list" report, just sort by repository and print out the parts with the <re attach> repository. You can then easily go back and fix all that need fixing. No need to print anything until you are ready to do the fixing. Paul Studly Cleveland/Chesterland, OH [email protected]

I posted regarding missing persons from a LDS Ordinance List and from Birthday and Anniversary List. I just checked the LDS Ordinance List -- again -- and it looks like it isn't picking up any of the ordinances completed in 2000, 2001 or 2002 which is leaving out a good number of individuals. Has anyone else had any missing persons on any of these types of lists?? Trudy Lundy

I just ran an LDS Ordinance List and at least one person doesn't show up on it that should. Several months ago I ran a Birthday and Anniversary List and at least one person didn't show up on it that should. I just ran that list again after the LDS Ordinance List had a "missing person". Has anyone had anything like that happen?? I am using FO 10. I will go through one-by-one and check if anyone else is missing on this ordinance list. I asked this list about the Birthday and Anniversary List "missing person" and no one really had an answer. Uncle Newell has been missing from the Birthday and Anniversary List every time I try it. And he does have a birthdate and place. Trudy Lundy

Patricia, Thank you, it worked like a dream. I just rearranged the children so that she was the last child in the list and when the Photo Tree ran out of spaces she was eliminated. Regards, Brianne Kelly-Bly [email protected] [email protected] Webmaster - NJGenWeb - Morris County -----Original Message----- From: P SummersSmith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 3:16 PM To: B. Kelly-Bly; [email protected] Subject: RE: [FO] Photo Tree At 02:25 PM 7/17/02 -0400, B. Kelly-Bly wrote: I doubt if anyone would be upset if she was left out. She died at 5 months. Now the questions is how? About the only way that I can figure out to do that is to unlink her from Don't unlink her, but rearrange the children in the family so she shows up as the last child. Patricia

"James Elting" <[email protected]> wrote: >However, when I perform the mark index function again (with just my >new entries) some of those people whom I deleted the markings show back up >again as marked. Did you resave the document after you had deleted all the markings? Close down the document or even the whole program and reopen the resaved document? Doing all that should eliminate all the deleted marks. Wayne League

I doubt if anyone would be upset if she was left out. She died at 5 months. Now the questions is how? About the only way that I can figure out to do that is to unlink her from the family. Regards, Brianne Kelly-Bly [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Webmaster - NJGenWeb - Morris County http://www.rootsweb.com/~njmorris <http://www.rootsweb.com/~njmorris> > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 1:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FO] Photo Tree > > > In a message dated 7/17/2002 10:16:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > > Now one sibling had > > died as an infant and if she was not included I would be able to show > > everyone that survived. > > Would anybody be offended if you left her out? Would their > disposition change > if you included an explanation as to why? > > Myself, not being hung up on "politically correct" like some, > would go with > the twelve and phooey to those who object! > > Earl B. Akers, Sr. > Puyallup WA > <A HREF="http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~banyantree">The > Banyan Tree</A> > > > ==== FAMILY-ORIGINS-USERS Mailing List ==== > The Genealogical Companion > http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2399/tgc.htm > Browsable Archives: > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/family-origins-users/ >

I thought that you could leave remove the picture, but I tried it and id doesn't work, there is a blank picture frame in it's place. Unlinking the 5 month old baby from her parents for the time it takes to create the tree wouldn't be difficult. Highlight the child Go to the Edit menu Select "Unlink from" - "parents" The remembering to reattach her would be my problem. Maybe a Post-it with a reminder, stuck in the center of my monitor, would help. Alfred D. Eller http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~adelr/ ========================== ----- Original Message ----- From: "B. Kelly-Bly" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 1:25 PM Subject: RE: [FO] Photo Tree > I doubt if anyone would be upset if she was left out. She died at 5 months. > Now the questions is how? > > About the only way that I can figure out to do that is to unlink her from > the family. > > Regards, > Brianne Kelly-Bly

In a message dated 7/17/2002 10:16:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Now one sibling had > died as an infant and if she was not included I would be able to show > everyone that survived. Would anybody be offended if you left her out? Would their disposition change if you included an explanation as to why? Myself, not being hung up on "politically correct" like some, would go with the twelve and phooey to those who object! Earl B. Akers, Sr. Puyallup WA <A HREF="http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~banyantree">The Banyan Tree</A>