Family Historian User Group

#### Apologies the wrong query file was attached to this post which I have removed. Please see my entry of Sat,25 Jun 2016 for correct version.####

I think a variation of this topic has been brought up before, but my angle is the best way to identify missing alternate married names. So here goes again:

As background for example: when entering a marriage in TMG, it offers to option to add an Alternate Name, to my knowledge FH does not, it has to be done manually. TMG creates a 'special' event which could be dated (helpful to see when names changed although usually with marriage), and also used in pick lists etc.

TMG Utility (an external prgram that updates the TMG database directly) had an option to "Add Married Names: adds a name event with the husband's primary surname to all married women who do not have an existing name record with a matching surname......."
http://www.johncardinal.com/tmgutil/addmarriednames.htm

So, although an automatic method might be nice, it could also create problems, as not all ladies change their name on marriage, and different cultures do it in different ways. However, it would still be nice to check to see possible missing alternate names. The best I have come up with so far is an individual query along these lines:

For my database this gives a very clear indication of those with missing alternate married names, and if the person has other none marital alternate names that would upset the results, they can be moved after the married alternate names, although I suppose it would be nice to keep them in some chronological order.

I did notice, that even if a married woman did not have an alternate name, she showed up on the Individual Records when filtered on her husbands name, but not the other way around. So FH 'assumes' an alternate name.

Just wondered if anyone else had any methods for checking/fixing/adding alternate names or improving on my query. (I think the previous topics were more about methodology of recording the name changes, rather than finding missing ones).

Jimlad,
I use a diferent method, which is already catered for within FH. (See 3 below)

1. I always use the maiden name for women where known e.g. Ann Shufflebotham. This never changes, no matter how many times she marries/re-marries and I don't need to worry which surname was in use at a particular moment in time.

2. If I don't know her maiden surname, I use 'Nee ??' as a suffix. e.g. Jane, wife of Fred Shufflebotham is shown as Jane /Shufflebotham Nee ??/. Having the husbands surname with Nee suffix serves two purposes
A. It reminds me which Jane is which, usefull when same forename is used by many unknown wives.
B. The Nee suffix reminds me that her real surname/marriage is missing, and will need to be looked for at some point.
C. The Nee suffix can be used as a filter for listing all these unknown wives. Jane will be listed with all the other Shufflebothams when filter applied.

3. When viewing/listing a specific Surname in your database, using the surname as a filter, you have option to show 'Married' names, and this will add all women who have married someone with the same surname, irrespective of their maiden name.

Jim, your posting poses more questions than answers.

The first question is why do you feel the need to have married woman alternate names?
Without an understanding of how you plan to use such data, it is difficult to offer advice.

Secondly, the code you posted is very different from the Query you attached.
So not sure which one you want advice for.

Mike makes some valid comments and explains the Individual Name filter behaviour, which will Include Husbands' Surnames if you tick that Options... setting. It is nothing to do with Alternate names.

Regarding your Attachment Query:

• Column Maiden Surname should really have Heading: Primary Surname.
• Presumably, you intend to have Columns for 1st Alt Surname, 2nd Alt Surname, et seq, with Expression: %INDI.NAME[n]:SURNAME_FIRST% for n=2 onwards.
  Not sure why you use SURNAME_FIRST when all other Columns just use SURNAME?
• The Rows filters will be easier to follow if you use Add unless and Exclude if:
  Add unless =Bool(IsEmpty(%INDI.~SPOU>NAME:SURNAME%) and IsEmpty(%INDI.~SPOU[2]>NAME:SURNAME%) and ...) is true
  Exclude if %INDI.SEX% matches Male
• However, I guess you want to list just the Surname mismatches:
  Add unless =Bool(IsEmpty(%INDI.~SPOU>NAME:SURNAME%) or (%INDI.~SPOU>NAME:SURNAME% = %INDI.NAME[2]:SURNAME%)) is true
  Add unless =Bool(IsEmpty(%INDI.~SPOU[2]>NAME:SURNAME%) or (%INDI.~SPOU[2]>NAME:SURNAME% = %INDI.NAME[3]:SURNAME%)) is true
  et seq for as many Spouses as desired...
  Exclude if %INDI.SEX% matches Male

As per my Attachment Query for up to three spouses:

Afraid this is a quick response as I am in "mobile data free" area of NE Anglesey (rest of Anglesey was fine!) and having to treck to the campsite reception to pick up their Wi-Fi on a laptop with about 10 minutes battery life!

Mike T,

1. 'why do I need to have married women's names' - It's nice to be able to see a chronological (ideally) name change list, especially if that can tie in with other peoples facts such as witness at wedding, probate etc. This is where the TMG Alternate name 'fact' is helpful, but this can easily be replicated in FH. The alternate name list often transfers well in a Gedcom to things like Rootsweb trees.

2. 'code posted different' oops, apologies, wrong attachment (I blame rush due to old laptop battery as above), I have deleted it and attached here instead (with unnessesary last spouse column removed and should be "0_Ind_All_Missing Married Names.fhq"), HOWEVER your suggestions, as ever, are illuminating and I will update my version of "Married Women Names" (which I got from someone else) with yours.

Mike L,

1. agreed but as reply 1 above to Mike T.

2. Yes, at present I use various permutations 'on the fly', but I need to get myself a standard method for the differing 'unknowns' situations.

3. Yes, this is something I use and is very useful.