* A problem with names

[rocksrock]

My mother's ancestors, Bless Them, gave her a maiden surname which gives great scope for variants from Ministers, Church wardens, Registrars and the like.

So far, for ease I have simply used the Authorised Version and kept a note of the variant. However, now that I am adding Media etc I need to sort it. My proposed rules so far are, assuming England as an example:

Before 1 July 1837: Name as recorded in Baptism Register is the Prime Name. If no Baptism record found, the next recorded Register/whatever gives the Prime Name until an earlier record is found

From 1 July 1837 the Birth certificate name is Prime Name - I know the baptism can happen before birth registration, but not everyone is baptised, whereas by default all have a birth certificate (I know some folks early on weren't registered but so far I know of no such case in my clan)

Where I do not have a birth certificate (e.g. the person is not immediately near my direct line) I use the GRO Index name as Prime, unless the event occurred in a County where a UKBMD transcription of the Local Superintendent Registrar's index is available (e.g. Lancashire, Cheshire etc) in which case the name from that index is used as Prime because it is nearer the original record than a GRO-derived index. So Far, So Good. If the only record is a Census entry, I use the name given there until I later find BMD info.

However, there are inevitably discrepancies between the name as spelled in church registers/BTs/censuses and the same event in the GRO index or the UKBMD Registrar's index. These discrepancies of course appear in Media images etc.

So, what to do? Use the name as imaged for the Media File name; the name as imaged for the Media Record name; and the Prime Name for the Individual Record file; but what about the Source Record: use the Prime Name because that is who it refers to, or use the as-imaged name because the image validates the information in the Source record?

What is considered good practice? Whatever the answer, unless it is Use the Authorised Version, I will end up with parents and children having different variants of the name as their Prime Name which will look odd on diagrams................l?

Input would be gratefully received. Thank you in advance.

RR

[tatewise]

Your initial analysis is absolutely sound.
Use the name nearest to the Birth maiden name as you can get.

You can if you wish put variations in the Alternate Names via the Property Box more (+) ... button.

I would not tediously rename existing Files and Records when you discover a 'better' Primary Name, because they are all linked together anyway.

[rocksrock]

Wow! Thank you, Tatewise, for so quick a reply - brilliant.

I'm glad my analysis stands up to scrutiny - it can be hard to check all around an issue.

With the "extra Names" via the More button, is there a way to attach a Source record to it? or would that be over-the-top?


RR

[tatewise]

Yes, you can add a Souce Citation to any Alternate Name.

With the yellow Sources pane open and the Names & Titles window open, just select the Name and you will see Sources For: show Name[2], or Name[3], etc.

Make sure that Name[?] is selected from the Sources For: droplist and use the Add Citation button as normal.

Alternatively, enable Automatic Source Citations and when any Alternate Name is added it will automatically get a Source Citation.

[rocksrock]

Thank you very much for that - that's me sorted, for the moment at least.

Thanks again

RR

[AdrianBruce]

As for the Source Record, you need to think about how the citations get printed. If your standard name is, say, Pickstock, but the form in the source is Pigstock, then a citation directing someone to look for the marriage of Oscar Pickstock in St Helens's register of 1812 is pretty useless if the text in the register refers to Oskar Pigstock. It might be obvious - or it might not - which the real record is.

I actually use both the title and the short title to cover cases like this. The title uses the spelling from the source and appears in the citations. The short title uses the standard form and appears in the record window because I set it up that way.

[jimlad68]

Whilst all the above comments are valid and "good form", if there is anything unusual, or that I want to draw attention to, I have a custom Fact #About with a before birth date so it appears near the top with brief info/pointers. This is a bit of a duplication, but helps to see the wood for the trees.

[tatewise]

Jim, a Custom Fact like that does NOT need a Date at all to appear near the top of the Facts, providing its Fact Definition sets its Normal Time Frame: to Pre-Birth.

[jimlad68]

thanks for clarifying that Mike, but that's what I meant in my own little way, I just left the option open to use whichever method suited, for myself I am still inclined, but not sure yet, to use an actual date so I can keep control of it, but it can mess up the "estimated age" thing.

[rocksrock]

AdrianBruce: sorry not to reply earlier, was rather snowed under with much less interesting matters.

Today, I've been trying out your suggestion for using the Short Title for the Primary Name, and it seems a very elegant solution that does what I need, so Thank You for that