What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date at all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. Betty

Census are historically wrong about birth data. Some census takers ask how old the person is, some ask (as they should) how old at the next birthday. And, almost always, the person being asked is not the person in question but a member of the family. So, when census is the ONLY source I have, I enter Abt 1792 Then, later, if I get better info, I change the date. Jim Belanger NH State Representative [email protected] Town Moderator; Hollis, NH Sent from my iPad > On Feb 24, 2015, at 7:57 AM, Betty Stokes via <[email protected]> wrote: > > What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years > apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for > the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date at > all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, > this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. > > > > Betty > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

> So, when census is the ONLY source I have, I enter > Abt 1792 > Then, later, if I get better info, I change the date. I totally agree. I think that "abt 1792" reads much better and in a sense is really more correct than "1791/1792". I use "estimated" rather than "about" when there is even more uncertainty than what is provided in the census. Jerry

As I see it you are trying to enter both dates. RM only accepts one, but will accept a range of dates such as 1792 or 1793. Enter them as 1792-1793 and indicate the sources in the Birth Note box. I would go back and double check the census records to be sure they are the same person. Checking the household members might help there, where even numbers for ages could match. If thed info was from a census that used age ranges then that would explain the range used on Birth dates.. Jon On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Betty Stokes via < [email protected]> wrote: > What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years > apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for > the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date > at > all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, > this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. > > > > Betty > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: > http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- -- *Jon P Czarowitz*, NHC, GF, GGF, IGC Hempel Genealogist since 1986 Retired International Genealogist for http://www.clancunninghamintl.org RootsMagic 7 http://www.rootsmagic.com CUNNINGHAMS TOGETHER - CUNNINGHAMS WORLDWIDE!

I enter one birth fact with one birth date. I include a birth fact note which describes and explains any uncertainties and discrepancies. The birthdate I enter is the one I consider to be mostly likely to be correct. If the only source for the birth date is several census entries, I usually (but not always) choose the earliest census in which the person appears. I'm certainly aware that merely because a person was 2 years old in the 1850 it doesn't mean that they were born in 1848, even if the 2 year old age for the 1850 census was correct. Absent any information about the day within the year when they were born, their birthday in 1850 could have been before or after the census enumeration. But I just don't like the way a report reads if they were born in 1847/48. It is enlightening to discover the occasional family that was enumerated twice in the same census year, sometimes only a few weeks apart. The ages of the family members can be widely divergent between the two enumerations. So I don't think it's worth really stressing about whether somebody was born in 1847 vs. in 1848 when there really is no way ever to know. And even the persons themselves might not know. I have seen military pension applications where the soldier knows that they were born on July 17 (for example), but where the soldier nevertheless is not quite sure of the year in which he was born. Jerry -----Original Message----- From: Betty Stokes via Sent: Tue, February 24, 2015 7:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [RMagic] Compare What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date at all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. Betty =================================== RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I like this idea of putting est or abt. I dropped abt several years ago. Wish I had read these census considerations before! I like the 1900 census if available as it has month and year usually. Also sometimes I've looked at the enumeration sheets. Always good ideas on the list! Thanks, team Jinny Angelis > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:41:41 -0500 > Subject: Re: [RMagic] Compare > From: [email protected] > > I enter one birth fact with one birth date. I include a birth fact note > which describes and explains any uncertainties and discrepancies. > > The birthdate I enter is the one I consider to be mostly likely to be > correct. If the only source for the birth date is several census entries, I > usually (but not always) choose the earliest census in which the person > appears. > > I'm certainly aware that merely because a person was 2 years old in the 1850 > it doesn't mean that they were born in 1848, even if the 2 year old age for > the 1850 census was correct. Absent any information about the day within the > year when they were born, their birthday in 1850 could have been before or > after the census enumeration. But I just don't like the way a report reads > if they were born in 1847/48. > > It is enlightening to discover the occasional family that was enumerated > twice in the same census year, sometimes only a few weeks apart. The ages of > the family members can be widely divergent between the two enumerations. So > I don't think it's worth really stressing about whether somebody was born in > 1847 vs. in 1848 when there really is no way ever to know. And even the > persons themselves might not know. I have seen military pension applications > where the soldier knows that they were born on July 17 (for example), but > where the soldier nevertheless is not quite sure of the year in which he was > born. > > Jerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Betty Stokes via > Sent: Tue, February 24, 2015 7:57 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [RMagic] Compare > > What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years > apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for > the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date at > all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, > this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. > > > > Betty > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: > http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Even the 1900 census birth month and year can be problematic. I have found quite a few cases where it looks like the census enumerator came up with the year of birth based on the person’s stated age rather than on a birth year provided by the person. Again, depending on whether the person’s birthday was before or after the census enumeration, the result can be a birth year that is off by one. Jerry From: Jinny Angelis Sent: Tue, February 24, 2015 4:28 PM To: Jerry Bryan ; rootsmagic users Subject: RE: [RMagic] Compare I like this idea of putting est or abt. I dropped abt several years ago. Wish I had read these census considerations before! I like the 1900 census if available as it has month and year usually. Also sometimes I've looked at the enumeration sheets. Always good ideas on the list! Thanks, team Jinny Angelis > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 15:41:41 -0500 > Subject: Re: [RMagic] Compare > From: [email protected] > > I enter one birth fact with one birth date. I include a birth fact note > which describes and explains any uncertainties and discrepancies. > > The birthdate I enter is the one I consider to be mostly likely to be > correct. If the only source for the birth date is several census entries, I > usually (but not always) choose the earliest census in which the person > appears. > > I'm certainly aware that merely because a person was 2 years old in the 1850 > it doesn't mean that they were born in 1848, even if the 2 year old age for > the 1850 census was correct. Absent any information about the day within the > year when they were born, their birthday in 1850 could have been before or > after the census enumeration. But I just don't like the way a report reads > if they were born in 1847/48. > > It is enlightening to discover the occasional family that was enumerated > twice in the same census year, sometimes only a few weeks apart. The ages of > the family members can be widely divergent between the two enumerations. So > I don't think it's worth really stressing about whether somebody was born in > 1847 vs. in 1848 when there really is no way ever to know. And even the > persons themselves might not know. I have seen military pension applications > where the soldier knows that they were born on July 17 (for example), but > where the soldier nevertheless is not quite sure of the year in which he was > born. > > Jerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Betty Stokes via > Sent: Tue, February 24, 2015 7:57 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [RMagic] Compare > > What do RM users enter when they find 2 census with the birthdate 2 years > apart? I entered this as 1792/93 instead of having 2 separate entries for > the date. If I have 2 separate entries, sometimes it doesn't show a date at > all. And as I discovered yesterday when I tried to "Compare" 2 databases, > this date ended up being March 1792 which is not what I meant. > > > > Betty > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: > http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > =================================== > RM list Archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/ROOTSMAGIC-USERS/ > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/search?path=ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > WISH LIST: http://www.rootsmagic.com/forums/ BLOG: http://blog.rootsmagic.com/ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message