Hi Regina, Unfortunately you can only sort the Individual Screen on Rin and Full Name. Sorting those columns is made possible because the code inside the PAF program continuously maintains two indices for every record, one for RIN and one for Full Name. When you sort the RIN column or the Full Name column, the records are instantaneously displayed because a sorted index is already available. Adding an index for every other field would significantly slow down the normal processing of the PAF program and so the programmers opted to not include any more that the two indices. Richard Rands At 07:29 AM 6/28/2005 +0100, Regina Craig wrote: >Hi Richard, and list >Thank you all for being so incredibly helpful! >Another question regarding the "married name" field. >I've started the long haul with typing names in, which >will be very useful when I've finished. >Now, I'm wondering... >On the Individual window, I note that I can >numerically sort the RIN column, can sort >ascending/descending full name column. What's the >chance, and how do I do it to make the Married Name >column sort ascending/descending? >Here's me being hopeful!! > >regards and thanks > >Regina > > > > >--- Richard Rands <rrands@cfmc.com> wrote: > > > At 12:55 PM 6/27/2005 -0400, alanjones10@cox.net > > wrote: > > >What do you do when they have > > > >married/divorced/married/divorced/married/widows/married? > > > > So far in my database the most number of spouse's > > names for one individual > > is 5. My tests show that the Married Name field is > > capable of handling up > > to about 120 characters. > > > > Richard Rands > > > > > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Search > > >http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=PAF-5-USERS > > > > > > >Genealogy website = http://www.geocities.com/regina_craig/ >Updated, fact only website = http://www.gencircles.com/users/regina1/4 > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ >Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with >voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >AVG Anti-Virus Users >Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab.

Melanie; The field that you refer to is "Date Record was made". This is a small, but significant difference. I use this mainly for two kinds of records; censuses and death certificates. For the censuses I enter the actual date that the census was TAKEN by the enumerator. This is (almost always) shown at the top of each page of the censuses. Perhaps it would have been better if I had used the Official date of the census. The actual date is usually a few days to two months following the official date. When I use the age as recorded on the census this date helps me to calculate the actual birth date. I realize that the age SHOULD (itallics intended) be as of the official date of the census (e.g. 15 April 1910 for the 1910 US Census), but people do not always listen to what the enumerator said nor did the enumerator always explain that ages should be as of the offical date of that census. For the death certificates I enter the date when that record was officially entered into the county office where it was first registered. I find that death certificates can contain several dates including date of death, date the physician signed the certificate, date the individual was released to the mortuary and date the record was registered at the county health department. For a marriage record the date entered in this field can be the date that the county clerk received and recorded the Ministers Return. I hope this is of some help. Richard L. Halliday West Linn, Oregon -- A Fair, Green land (polluted mainly by bad politicians and fuzzy minded individuals) Melanie Petersen wrote: > Under the citation detail on the source screen, there is a field for > "Date Citation was made." What exactly does this mean? A publication > date? There is already a space for publication info. > > Thanks, > Melanie

Hi Richard, and list Thank you all for being so incredibly helpful! Another question regarding the "married name" field. I've started the long haul with typing names in, which will be very useful when I've finished. Now, I'm wondering... On the Individual window, I note that I can numerically sort the RIN column, can sort ascending/descending full name column. What's the chance, and how do I do it to make the Married Name column sort ascending/descending? Here's me being hopeful!! regards and thanks Regina --- Richard Rands <rrands@cfmc.com> wrote: > At 12:55 PM 6/27/2005 -0400, alanjones10@cox.net > wrote: > >What do you do when they have > >married/divorced/married/divorced/married/widows/married? > > So far in my database the most number of spouse's > names for one individual > is 5. My tests show that the Married Name field is > capable of handling up > to about 120 characters. > > Richard Rands > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Search > http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=PAF-5-USERS > > Genealogy website = http://www.geocities.com/regina_craig/ Updated, fact only website = http://www.gencircles.com/users/regina1/4 ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Sorry about that. I was having a little problem and tried sending myself a test email. I don't know how I sent it the this list. GREMLINS! Rollei (from Australia)

Rollei (from Australia) Researching: LITTLE, Hibbard, Labies, Harmegnies, Gilbert, Bickford http://www.rolleilittle.com/ please sign my guestbook

What do you do when they have married/divorced/married/divorced/married/widows/married? > > From: Richard Rands <rrands@cfmc.com> > Date: 2005/06/27 Mon AM 11:12:04 EDT > To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [PAF-5] showing spouse in list > > Hi Jeannie. > Actually, I use the "Married Name" field only for the spouse's full name > and display it on the Individual Screen so that it appears with his or her > spouse. That makes entering the married name superfluous because it shows > up on the same line as their marriage partner. I enter the spouse's name > in Surname, Given name format. So the Married name field in my file for my > wife's record contains "Rands, Richard" and the married name field for my > record contains "Canann, Carol Ann; Brigham, Janet" reflecting that I have > been married twice. For those individuals where I only have a given name > and no surname, I use the comma as a place holder, as in ", Martha". > > One issue that I have not settled on is what, if anything, to enter in the > Married Name field if the individual is known to have never married. I > certainly note this fact in the notes, but I suspect that having that piece > of info visible on the Individual screen may be useful. > > Richard Rands > > > > At 10:00 AM 6/27/2005 -0400, Jeannie wrote: > > >Very good suggestion!!! > >I had been using the 'Married Name' field for only > >the females {i.e. "Jeannie Fleck (Mrs. Daniel)"}; > >but I can see that using it for naming everyone's > >spouse(s) could be highly useful. > >When I put in the married name of someone whom > >I don't have the first name of the spouse, however, > >it looks like this: "Evelyn Howe (Mrs. ? )". PAF also > >complains about the use of the question mark, but I > >tend to ignore it. It gives me a hint as to what name > >to look for in an obituary, for example. > >But here is a question for you: How do you handle > >it when you don't know the spouse's name - or only > >have a first name? > >Thanks, again, for a great suggestion! ... > >-- J.H. Fleck > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Richard Rands" <rrands@cfmc.com> > >To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> > >Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 3:51 AM > >Subject: Re: [PAF-5] showing spouse in list > > > > ... <snip> ... > >| So I solved the problem by doing something that takes > >| time, but has turned out to be very useful. > >| If you look at the Edit Individual screen for someone, > >| you will see a field down in the Other section called > >| Married Name. It turns out that field was added to > >| PAF5 with the intention that users can enter the married > >| name of a female when they are married. I happen to > >| know that it was added at the insistence of someone > >| who at the time had influence with the programming > >| team, but it was never documented, nor was it used for > >| anything other than one person's demand. So the bottom > >| line is that field is unused and has no significance in the > >| database. What makes it interesting to me is that it is a > >| field in the Individual record. > >| So I have appropriated that field for my own personal > >| Spouse's Name field. Granted I cannot change the name > >| of the field in the reports or screens, but I don't consider > >| that a problem. I simply enter manually in that field each > >| individual's spouse's name in [surname, given name] format. > >| I do it for both males and females. When someone has > >| more than one spouse, I list them all separated by > >| semicolons. PAF complains about the semicolon, but I > >| just ignore the complaint. > >| A lot of extra work? Absolutely!!! I have nearly 50,000 > >| names (many are not married, so I don't need to bother > >| with them). But I only do this for the surnames that are > >| very common in my database. I do it when I have free > >| time during my train commute to work, during airplane > >| trips (I travel alot), or when I need some mindless task > >| while listening to a football match (soccer here). I use a > >| special template that includes only the RIN, Sex, Name, > >| and Married Name. I work down the Individual Screen, > >| toggling back and forth between the Family Screen where > >| I fill in the "Spouses Name" field for both the husband and > >| the wife, and then back to the Individual Screen to move > >| to the next entry. I have developed an extremely efficient > >| series of keystrokes that optimize the procedure to make > >| it go fast. I have added the Married Name field as a > >| column in my Individual Screen to have it displayed just > >| like you have suggested. > >| ... <snip> ... > > > > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > >PAF-5-USERS Mailing List > >http://www.ausbdm.org/p5uindex.php > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. > >

Valerie: Variant spellings is always a problem. Whether what I do is right or wrong, I enter the surname as it has been most commonly spelled and in the Notes I list the variant spellings. I also give the source and provide the surname (or given name) variation in that record. If you are preparing a TR submission, be sure to use the spelling as it appears on the document. No doubt others have submitted on the families for ordinances and have edited the spelling to conform with what they think it should be. Unless that information is seriously erroneous there is nothing you can do about it. But, you can make your records and database as correct as possible. Good luck. Connie ----- Original Message ----- From: "bladon" <bladon@onetel.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 2:23 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Name variations > Hello > > What is the convention for names which have many variants? > > For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants > within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, > WILBORN etc) > > One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his > marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on > baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others WILBOURNE. > (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same people). > > The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, > and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record > this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note > that they have also been recorded under different variants?) > > Any help appreciated. > > Valerie > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/ > >

At 12:55 PM 6/27/2005 -0400, alanjones10@cox.net wrote: >What do you do when they have >married/divorced/married/divorced/married/widows/married? So far in my database the most number of spouse's names for one individual is 5. My tests show that the Married Name field is capable of handling up to about 120 characters. Richard Rands

Very good suggestion!!! I had been using the 'Married Name' field for only the females {i.e. "Jeannie Fleck (Mrs. Daniel)"}; but I can see that using it for naming everyone's spouse(s) could be highly useful. When I put in the married name of someone whom I don't have the first name of the spouse, however, it looks like this: "Evelyn Howe (Mrs. ? )". PAF also complains about the use of the question mark, but I tend to ignore it. It gives me a hint as to what name to look for in an obituary, for example. But here is a question for you: How do you handle it when you don't know the spouse's name - or only have a first name? Thanks, again, for a great suggestion! ... -- J.H. Fleck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Rands" <rrands@cfmc.com> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 3:51 AM Subject: Re: [PAF-5] showing spouse in list ... <snip> ... | So I solved the problem by doing something that takes | time, but has turned out to be very useful. | If you look at the Edit Individual screen for someone, | you will see a field down in the Other section called | Married Name. It turns out that field was added to | PAF5 with the intention that users can enter the married | name of a female when they are married. I happen to | know that it was added at the insistence of someone | who at the time had influence with the programming | team, but it was never documented, nor was it used for | anything other than one person's demand. So the bottom | line is that field is unused and has no significance in the | database. What makes it interesting to me is that it is a | field in the Individual record. | So I have appropriated that field for my own personal | Spouse's Name field. Granted I cannot change the name | of the field in the reports or screens, but I don't consider | that a problem. I simply enter manually in that field each | individual's spouse's name in [surname, given name] format. | I do it for both males and females. When someone has | more than one spouse, I list them all separated by | semicolons. PAF complains about the semicolon, but I | just ignore the complaint. | A lot of extra work? Absolutely!!! I have nearly 50,000 | names (many are not married, so I don't need to bother | with them). But I only do this for the surnames that are | very common in my database. I do it when I have free | time during my train commute to work, during airplane | trips (I travel alot), or when I need some mindless task | while listening to a football match (soccer here). I use a | special template that includes only the RIN, Sex, Name, | and Married Name. I work down the Individual Screen, | toggling back and forth between the Family Screen where | I fill in the "Spouses Name" field for both the husband and | the wife, and then back to the Individual Screen to move | to the next entry. I have developed an extremely efficient | series of keystrokes that optimize the procedure to make | it go fast. I have added the Married Name field as a | column in my Individual Screen to have it displayed just | like you have suggested. | ... <snip> ...

Hi Jeannie. Actually, I use the "Married Name" field only for the spouse's full name and display it on the Individual Screen so that it appears with his or her spouse. That makes entering the married name superfluous because it shows up on the same line as their marriage partner. I enter the spouse's name in Surname, Given name format. So the Married name field in my file for my wife's record contains "Rands, Richard" and the married name field for my record contains "Canann, Carol Ann; Brigham, Janet" reflecting that I have been married twice. For those individuals where I only have a given name and no surname, I use the comma as a place holder, as in ", Martha". One issue that I have not settled on is what, if anything, to enter in the Married Name field if the individual is known to have never married. I certainly note this fact in the notes, but I suspect that having that piece of info visible on the Individual screen may be useful. Richard Rands At 10:00 AM 6/27/2005 -0400, Jeannie wrote: >Very good suggestion!!! >I had been using the 'Married Name' field for only >the females {i.e. "Jeannie Fleck (Mrs. Daniel)"}; >but I can see that using it for naming everyone's >spouse(s) could be highly useful. >When I put in the married name of someone whom >I don't have the first name of the spouse, however, >it looks like this: "Evelyn Howe (Mrs. ? )". PAF also >complains about the use of the question mark, but I >tend to ignore it. It gives me a hint as to what name >to look for in an obituary, for example. >But here is a question for you: How do you handle >it when you don't know the spouse's name - or only >have a first name? >Thanks, again, for a great suggestion! ... >-- J.H. Fleck > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Richard Rands" <rrands@cfmc.com> >To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 3:51 AM >Subject: Re: [PAF-5] showing spouse in list > > ... <snip> ... >| So I solved the problem by doing something that takes >| time, but has turned out to be very useful. >| If you look at the Edit Individual screen for someone, >| you will see a field down in the Other section called >| Married Name. It turns out that field was added to >| PAF5 with the intention that users can enter the married >| name of a female when they are married. I happen to >| know that it was added at the insistence of someone >| who at the time had influence with the programming >| team, but it was never documented, nor was it used for >| anything other than one person's demand. So the bottom >| line is that field is unused and has no significance in the >| database. What makes it interesting to me is that it is a >| field in the Individual record. >| So I have appropriated that field for my own personal >| Spouse's Name field. Granted I cannot change the name >| of the field in the reports or screens, but I don't consider >| that a problem. I simply enter manually in that field each >| individual's spouse's name in [surname, given name] format. >| I do it for both males and females. When someone has >| more than one spouse, I list them all separated by >| semicolons. PAF complains about the semicolon, but I >| just ignore the complaint. >| A lot of extra work? Absolutely!!! I have nearly 50,000 >| names (many are not married, so I don't need to bother >| with them). But I only do this for the surnames that are >| very common in my database. I do it when I have free >| time during my train commute to work, during airplane >| trips (I travel alot), or when I need some mindless task >| while listening to a football match (soccer here). I use a >| special template that includes only the RIN, Sex, Name, >| and Married Name. I work down the Individual Screen, >| toggling back and forth between the Family Screen where >| I fill in the "Spouses Name" field for both the husband and >| the wife, and then back to the Individual Screen to move >| to the next entry. I have developed an extremely efficient >| series of keystrokes that optimize the procedure to make >| it go fast. I have added the Married Name field as a >| column in my Individual Screen to have it displayed just >| like you have suggested. >| ... <snip> ... > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >PAF-5-USERS Mailing List >http://www.ausbdm.org/p5uindex.php

I have referred to the other spellings in the note field. I almost missed one census because of the variation in the name from what I had known (my maiden name.) I have one family that was known by the German spelling, but as soon as my ancestor got to this country, in the first deed record, he spelled similarly to the variation that I am used to. What I did was enter the early records with the German spelling, then made a note that the name change occurred with a certain generation. As far as spelling goes, I have one probate record which has my maiden name spelled three different ways when the name was listed at the end of the probate. I took the one that was my maiden name. I always copied the record in the Sources as it was written. Pat At 09:07 PM 6/26/2005, singhals wrote: >bladon wrote: > >>Hello >>What is the convention for names which have many variants? >>For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants >>within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, >>WILBORN etc) >>One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his >>marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on >>baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others >>WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the >>same people). >>The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, >>and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record >>this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note >>that they have also been recorded under different variants?) >>Any help appreciated. >>Valerie > >The Rule I was taught back in the 1970s was, use the most-common >variant. So if there are more records for SMITHEY than for SMITHY, use >SMITHEY. Unfortunately, one of my surnames is Harmison and the most >common variant is Harrison, and I thought "not!" (g) > > Other than that -- > >I guess it depends on what your *real* problem is. > >Since Spelling was a _game_ before Social Security in the US, if it >sounds-like or can be made to sound-like, it's good enough seems to have >been the general attitude. And of course, in Britain, you've got the >various local accents which in some time periods I hear were virtually >unintelligible five hours from home. > >So, if your problem is, how do I show it on the charts, I've opted for >KISS -- I got tired of trying to remember how ol' Lafe spelt his last name >on his marriage bond, or how his brother spelt it on HIS, or how their >sister's husband spelt it in a letter to one of 'em, and I picked the >spelling I preferred for aesthetic reasons and used it throughout. There >IS a note explaining that the record was found under SpellingA or >SpellingD, but *I* can find things. The charts looked better when each >generation had its own spelling and they were certainly educational, but I >couldn't find anything. > >OTOH, if your problem is, how do I match my records against the IIGI -- I >don't see that you've got all that much control over what someone else has >already done. Run all the variants against each couple and take the date >that matches, regardless of how they're shown in your records. As I >understand it, once there's a date in those fields, they'll be ignored >later on. > >Cheryl > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives >http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/

This thread has covered a lot of ideas ranging from "I never change the spelling of a name from what I find. I don't believe in rewriting history." to "use the most-common variant", to "use the earliest usage." I agree that there is no one right way to record surnames, but I do feel rather strongly that whatever we do, we should try not to propagate the problems that arise in trying to search our family history on to the generations that follow. Certainly we must document the name changes in notes as virtually everyone has suggested, but to continue to use the variants in the primary surname fields of our databases and other records without some consideration for how the records sort in lists, indexes, and reports, or how they are located in search engines will be doing a huge disservice to our descendants. It is better to rewrite history than it is to cause history to be lost. One methodology that has not been mentioned so far is the use of soundex codes. Most genealogy programs worth their salt provide the ability to search using soundex. PAF, for example, provides a soundex code calculator in which you can enter a name and see the resulting soundex code. The PAF search function allows the use of "Sounds like" when searching on the name field. Perhaps the most effective way to record variant surnames is to use the most-common variant as the primary surname but always verify that the differing variants generate the exact same soundex code so that they will turn up in searches that use the soundex (sounds like) method. In any case, when you are faced with variant spellings, it should be standard practice to check the soundex codes for each variant and be cognizant of the differences so that you will know when to force soundex searching and know which variants may be included and which ones will not be included. With that said, I propose that an effective method for entering a surname that has variants might be: /WILBRAHAM (WILBRAM)/ where Wilbraham is the most commonly used name but Wilbram is this particular individual's name. The other variants, Wilbourne, Wilburn, Wilborn, etc. would be used inside the parentheses when they apply. When the individual actually was known by Wilbraham, no variant inside parentheses is necessary. This methodology will cause all the individual records for that line to sort together in lists, indexes and reports. The actual variant is clearly visible when looking at any lists, indexes, or reports. Future family history searchers will not be confounded by the haphazard use of variant spellings, and using "sounds like" in the selection function in PAF will turn up all variants when generating reports, GEDCOM files, and Web sites. The soundex code for all of the variants in this example is W416. The soundex code is not without problems. If name variations start with different letters, then it gets more interesting. But most of these challenges can be solved by using a search criteria with boolean logic such as "sounds like Avery" OR "sounds like Havery". Whatever we decide to do about variant names, it is a good idea to consider how we can make the job of the genealogists of the future easier than ours. Richard Rands SV-CGG At 11:23 PM 6/26/2005 +0100, bladon wrote: >Hello > >What is the convention for names which have many variants? > >For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants >within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, >WILBORN etc) > >One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his >marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on >baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others >WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same >people). > >The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, >and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record >this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note >that they have also been recorded under different variants?) > >Any help appreciated. > >Valerie > > >==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== >PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives >http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/

Hello What is the convention for names which have many variants? For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, WILBORN etc) One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same people). The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note that they have also been recorded under different variants?) Any help appreciated. Valerie

bladon wrote: > Hello > > What is the convention for names which have many variants? > > For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, WILBORN etc) > > One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same people). > > The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note that they have also been recorded under different variants?) > > Any help appreciated. > > Valerie The Rule I was taught back in the 1970s was, use the most-common variant. So if there are more records for SMITHEY than for SMITHY, use SMITHEY. Unfortunately, one of my surnames is Harmison and the most common variant is Harrison, and I thought "not!" (g) Other than that -- I guess it depends on what your *real* problem is. Since Spelling was a _game_ before Social Security in the US, if it sounds-like or can be made to sound-like, it's good enough seems to have been the general attitude. And of course, in Britain, you've got the various local accents which in some time periods I hear were virtually unintelligible five hours from home. So, if your problem is, how do I show it on the charts, I've opted for KISS -- I got tired of trying to remember how ol' Lafe spelt his last name on his marriage bond, or how his brother spelt it on HIS, or how their sister's husband spelt it in a letter to one of 'em, and I picked the spelling I preferred for aesthetic reasons and used it throughout. There IS a note explaining that the record was found under SpellingA or SpellingD, but *I* can find things. The charts looked better when each generation had its own spelling and they were certainly educational, but I couldn't find anything. OTOH, if your problem is, how do I match my records against the IIGI -- I don't see that you've got all that much control over what someone else has already done. Run all the variants against each couple and take the date that matches, regardless of how they're shown in your records. As I understand it, once there's a date in those fields, they'll be ignored later on. Cheryl

I never change the spelling of a name from what I find. I don't believe in rewriting history. If the person/owner wanted to change the spelling, so be it. I often have children in one family with a different spelling of their surname and the notes of my research are clear as what spelling is in the source. From some of the Emails I get from other persons, with terrible spelling and the lack of capital letters, I would hate to use their records, in anything I am proud of? Ross GH Cotton, Burlington ON CAN 905)639-2929 Genealogy of the COTTON surname is my Enigma. I haven't sent an attachment if the details are not mentioned above. Check out my Genealogy Web Page at www.skylinc.net/~rgcotton GOONS member responsible for tracking the family name COTTON, #1437 Coordinator for Cotton DNA testing Project, Worldwide ----- Original Message ----- From: bladon To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 6:23 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Name variations Hello What is the convention for names which have many variants? For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, WILBORN etc) One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same people). The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note that they have also been recorded under different variants?) Any help appreciated. Valerie ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/

Valerie, There is no one correct way to handle these situations. You have two issues, one is your records and one is temple ordinances. For your records you can do whatever you like. You could pick the most common spelling and list the others as AKA's. You could use the spelling the person seemed to use most predominantly during their life, the spelling found on the earliest record (birth or baptism), or any other system you decide. Remember, there is nothing infallible about ANY written record. Many early records were recorded by a clerk or minister who was simply writing down what he heard from someone who could not read or write. As you so correctly describe, the same person may have multiple "official" sources for their name during their lifetime that may or may not agree. If someone used a particular spelling when they were married, on land records, voter registrations, social security, and everything else, but their birth record was different, which name is "correct"? I use the preponderance of evidence rule. As to the temple issue, the Church has clearly stated that ordinances are not to be repeated due to minor differences in names or dates. The importance is in uniquely identifying the person. It is only your responsibility to do work for those unique individuals without ordinances. You of course should make it as easy as possible for those who follow you to not duplicate work, by using copious and explicit notes to explain name variations. Just remember that other researchers have the same responsibility to also check for alternate spellings. As long as you are not contributing to the duplicate problem by resubmitting names, that is the best you can do. Gary Templeman ----- Original Message ----- From: "bladon" <bladon@onetel.net> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 3:23 PM Subject: [PAF-5] Name variations > Hello > > What is the convention for names which have many variants? > > For example, I have one family name which uses the following variants within the same generations (WILBRAHAM, WILBRAM, WILBOURNE, WILBURN, WILBORN etc) > > One ancestor was baptised as WILBOURNE, then was called WILBRAHAM on his marriage. His children were a mixture of WILBOURNE and WILBRAHAM on baptism, and on some census were called WILBRAHAM and on others WILBOURNE. (I've done extensive research and they are definitely the same people). > > The confusion between the names has led to duplication in ordinance work, and I am not sure how to deal with future submissions or how to record this family on PAF. (Do I choose one main name to use then make a note that they have also been recorded under different variants?) > > Any help appreciated. > > Valerie > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List Archives > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/PAF-5-USERS/ >

John, The usual problem with this symptom (in MS Word) is that you simply need to ensure that you are viewing the document in "Print Layout Mode" (under the View menu option). However, I would recommend you get (download) one of the abundant free PDF create software products that is around - just type pdf create into a search engine to find one - they effectively create a virtual printer which when selected (does not require the 'print-to-file' box to be ticked) creates a pdf file which is much more universally transferable than a rtf file. Regards, Stewart -----Original Message----- From: john burns [mailto:johnburns@telus.net] Sent: 25 June 2005 22:46 To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com Subject: [PAF-5] Print to file I want to send, by e mail, a one page pedigree chart. I thought I would be able to print it to file and then send it as an attachment but print to file just produces a vertical list that is quite useless rather than a chart. Can it be done? John ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List http://www.ausbdm.org/p5uindex.php

Hello all Thank you so much! I had noticed the "married name" and was hoping I could link that. From your responses, I now realise that it's a resounding NO! It now appears that I'm going to be doing a lot of manual typing to put the names in. I was trying to "short cut" the manual typing! Thank you again. regards Regina ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Since some people seem so attached to the RIN numbers, isn't it possible to just assign the RIN as the custom ID? Sharon

Amazing Print layout mode works Stewart. I'll have to try that free PDF. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stewart Millar" <sm999@tiscali.co.uk> To: <PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2005 3:39 PM Subject: RE: [PAF-5] Print to file > John, > > The usual problem with this symptom (in MS Word) is that you simply need to > ensure that you are viewing the document in "Print Layout Mode" (under the > View menu option). > > However, I would recommend you get (download) one of the abundant free PDF > create software products that is around - just type pdf create into a search > engine to find one - they effectively create a virtual printer which when > selected (does not require the 'print-to-file' box to be ticked) creates a > pdf file which is much more universally transferable than a rtf file. > > Regards, > > Stewart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: john burns [mailto:johnburns@telus.net] > Sent: 25 June 2005 22:46 > To: PAF-5-USERS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: [PAF-5] Print to file > > I want to send, by e mail, a one page pedigree chart. I thought I would be > able to print it to file and then send it as an attachment but print to file > just produces a vertical list that is quite useless rather than a chart. Can > it be done? > John > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > PAF-5-USERS Mailing List > http://www.ausbdm.org/p5uindex.php > > > > > ==== PAF-5-USERS Mailing List ==== > AVG Anti-Virus Users > Disable the 'Certify outgoing messages' option via the E-mail Scanner tab. > >