* Advice - Wholesale Changes

Questions regarding use of any Version of Family Historian. Please ensure you have set your Version of Family Historian in your Profile. If your question fits in one of these subject-specific sub-forums, please ask it there.
Post Reply
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Hi. I'm currently on FH7 but have been using Fh for about 15 years to track family and have about 600 individuals recorded. I am only self-read in terms of genealogy, but originally I started developing my own database software to keep track of a load of paper notes I inherited. I soon learned that other people had produced better software and the re-inventing the wheel was not necessary. Hence the move to FH. All my effort in the early years was to eliminate a mountain of post-it notes and assorted other records.

I was/am well aware of the importance of recording sources of information. However I did not realize how sources and citations worked, and simply added scans of birth certificates (for example) as media items to individuals' records. So basically information is there, but not in the right place.

It seems to me that I basically need to convert all these media items into sources, and add citations. I currently have no "sources" at all in FH. I am apprehensive about the amount of work involved, and wonder whether it would be best to re-build a new FH project from scratch, or convert all the records on the existing project. I think I would prefer the latter, but am concerned about being able to keep track of which records have been converted and which have not.

Any advice would be appreciated.
Dick Laine
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by tatewise »

Welcome to the FHUG.

The challenge you face is something that users often encounter as they discover the need for organised Source Citations.

You have sensibly identified the two techniques of starting from scratch versus updating your current Project.

I believe that most users opt for the second technique and update the current Project as outlined below.

First, use File > Project Window... and More Tasks... > Copy Project to create a cloned copy of your Project.
Then you have that clone to refer back to from time to time if necessary.

In your master Project, the Records Window has Named Lists of records.
You can add all your Individual records to a Named List and as each record has all its Source Citations created it can be removed from the Named List. Therefore the Named List identifies the work-in-progress records.

Also, in FH V7 there are Research Note records that can be linked to each Individual record to identify what Source Citation research work is outstanding for that person.

A significant decision you must also make is what style of Source Citations to use. The choice is between Generic Sources that FH has supported for many versions and the new Templated Sources introduced in FH V7.

There is advice on the above topics in the FHUG Knowledge Base as listed below:
Planning and Tracking Your Research
Using Named Lists to Track Your Research
Research Notes
Sources and Citations in Version 7 (for New Users)

If you need more detailed advice about how to use those or any other features then please ask again.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 5464
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by ColeValleyGirl »

Whether starting from scratch might be a better option will depend on what else you may need to do, so I'd suggest taking a good look at what else you might want to check before making the decision. A project of 600 people isn't that large, and if you make use of DEAs or Ancestral Sources to streamline the data entry, you might not find it takes as long as you think... The important thing is to know how what 'standards' you want to adopt/what features you want to exploit.

Do you know how many sources you will need to create? And each one may be linked to multiple individuals -- a birth certificate to the individual concerned and both their parents for example. You might find it's less work starting from scratch and less error prone. Especially if you subsequently discover you want to do another set of wholesale changes...
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Wow, that was a quick response, tatewise and ColeValleyGirl.

The idea of using Named Lists exactly fits my bill of keeping track of changes and pushes me firmly towards the idea of converting my existing data. Thank you, Mike.

I think my modest project of 600 individuals is probably not going to expand significantly. Helen, your comments make me painfully aware how "under-cited" my data is. Eg, birth certificates have only been linked to the individual concerned; parental info has not been properly linked back. And should be.
In database terms, a separate table of sources is essential.

What I think I might do, initially, is to take all my files of paper certificates, of various kinds, and have a binge few days of doing nothing but creating FH sources, using FH7 Essential templates. Doing that will familiarise me with the mechanisms involved and get the data up there on FH without affecting any of the other records.

When I've done that, I can then attack the chore of systematically adding citations.

Does that seem a reasonable approach?

Thank you both.

Dick Laine
Dick Laine
User avatar
NickWalker
Megastar
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Jan 2004 17:39
Family Historian: V7
Location: Lancashire, UK
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by NickWalker »

I would urge you to have a look at Ancestral Sources if you haven't already - hundreds of Family Historian users use it to enter the majority of their data. You could do some experimenting with it on a test project or copy of your project. For example if you enter the details of a census household it will generate the source, census facts, occupation facts, births (with estimated year of birth), etc. all linked back to the source which can be a templated source from the essentials collection with most of the template fields automatically filled in for you. It does similar things with birth, death, baptism, burial and marriage too. The fairly new DEA facility built into FH 7 is designed to try to do some of the things that AS does so you should look at that too, but I think currently AS is the greater time saver.

So rather than your suggested approach of entering the sources and then going back and creating the citations afterwards, the Ancestral Sources method would be for you to select the image of the source (birth certificate, census page, etc.), select (or create) the individuals referred to, enter the data from the source, optionally use the 'auto text' feature to help you to generate a transcript of the source and then, when you save the entry it would generate in your file automatically the source, media record, individuals, facts and citations at the same time.
Nick Walker
Ancestral Sources Developer

https://fhug.org.uk/kb/kb-article/ancestral-sources/
User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 5464
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by ColeValleyGirl »

I agree with Nick. If you use AS, starting from scratch should not be much more work that amending what you already have, and you'll probably have a more consistent result at the end of it.
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by tatewise »

I agree with all the earlier suggestions.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Hi All

I have started on a complete rebuild using Ancestral Sources. Even at this early stage it is impressive how all the information on source documents is being recorded and linked. A very steep learning curve for me, though, especially getting the hang of entering BMD index entries.

Feeling very positive. Thanks everyone for the advice.

Dick
Dick Laine
User avatar
NickWalker
Megastar
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Jan 2004 17:39
Family Historian: V7
Location: Lancashire, UK
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by NickWalker »

That's good to hear Dick. I wouldn't suggest using AS if all you have is a BMD index reference as it just isn't worth it as you have so little information in an index reference. For those I just create the relevant birth/marriage/death fact and link to a single 'BMD Index' (not the actual name) source in FH.
Nick Walker
Ancestral Sources Developer

https://fhug.org.uk/kb/kb-article/ancestral-sources/
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Don't worry, Nick. FH's built-in citations and sources are fine for BMD index entries. Where AS really scores is on birth and marriage certificates where there is a load of other information. I haven't explored it for inputting census information but I can see where it would equally shine there. I have to say that I didn't find it intuitive at first, but once I got the idea of how it worked I was able to move forward.

As a software developer myself I would say that it is software designed for someone who knows what they doing. And once you know what you are doing, it 's a great tool. A couple of minor niggles, but related to usability, not to functionality. Well done.

Dick
Dick Laine
User avatar
NickWalker
Megastar
Posts: 2597
Joined: 02 Jan 2004 17:39
Family Historian: V7
Location: Lancashire, UK
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by NickWalker »

Ancestral Sources greatest strength is census and I think this is where most people start off. I suspect starting with marriages and births is a steeper learning curve and this may be why you found it trickier to get started. Glad you're finding your way with it now.
Nick Walker
Ancestral Sources Developer

https://fhug.org.uk/kb/kb-article/ancestral-sources/
avatar
APerson
Diamond
Posts: 66
Joined: 19 Jan 2022 03:23
Family Historian: V7
Location: New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by APerson »

Another suggestion you should consider (if you haven’t already done so), is to organize your documentation first. An approach that’s worked well for me, is to develop a file system (I use binders with sheet protectors) and organize materials by surname). I then assign a “catalog number” that consists of the first three letters of the surname (or even use the full name) and append a three or four digit numeral to that.

As an example, let’s assume that one of your surnames is “Brown.” To create your “catalog numbers,” you would use BRO001, BRO002 . . . BRO234, BRO235, etc.

If you don’t have a physical copy of the document and you only have an electronic copy, You would append an “e” (for “electronic”) to the number. Example: BROe001, BROe002 . . . BROe234, BROe235, etc.

This will allow you to locate the document again (especially if you have a hard copy) regardless of the manner you choose to cite your sources - just make sure you record you “catalog number” someplace in FH7 when you record your source.
Jeff La Marca
Author of Simple Citations for Genealogical Sources
Now Available from Amazon
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Hi Jeff

Thank you for your tips. From my point of view the whole idea is to keep records on the computer though, and not to maintain paperwork unless absolutely necessary. Virtually all paperwork I acquire is scanned, stored on computer and accessed from there. The only paperwork I keep are those certificates I've paid good money for and am simply too mean to destroy, or bits and pieces themselves of historical interest! As long as I am reasonable careful about naming files informatively, I have never had trouble locating individual items.

And, yes, I do take backup very seriously, and use a gedcom file validator as a hedge against corruption. But paper filing systems are not my scene, I'm afraid.

Dick
Dick Laine
User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 5464
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by ColeValleyGirl »

marlbenn wrote: 18 Aug 2022 15:47 From my point of view the whole idea is to keep records on the computer though, and not to maintain paperwork unless absolutely necessary. Virtually all paperwork I acquire is scanned, stored on computer and accessed from there. The only paperwork I keep are those certificates I've paid good money for and am simply too mean to destroy, or bits and pieces themselves of historical interest! As long as I am reasonable careful about naming files informatively, I have never had trouble locating individual items.
Somebody after my own heart! The only paper I keep are certificates -- and unique documents, and they're scanned as well, so I'm leaning towards destroying the paper copies of the certificates and just keeping the very few unique documents.

And I name the files the same as the media records in FH, and use FH to locate the files if I need to.
avatar
APerson
Diamond
Posts: 66
Joined: 19 Jan 2022 03:23
Family Historian: V7
Location: New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by APerson »

marlbenn wrote: 18 Aug 2022 15:47 Thank you for your tips. From my point of view the whole idea is to keep records on the computer though, and not to maintain paperwork unless absolutely necessary. Virtually all paperwork I acquire is scanned, stored on computer and accessed from there. The only paperwork I keep are those certificates I've paid good money for and am simply too mean to destroy, or bits and pieces themselves of historical interest! As long as I am reasonable careful about naming files informatively, I have never had trouble locating individual items.

And, yes, I do take backup very seriously, and use a gedcom file validator as a hedge against corruption. But paper filing systems are not my scene, I'm afraid.

Hi Dick,

That's great! I do exactly the same thing - I scan EVERYTHING and attach it to my FH7 data. As I've done this stuff forever (or so it seems) - before scanners existed for us mere mortals, I kept paper copies of all of my sources. However, I also have a fairly substantial number of original, one-of-a-kind items and I save all of those in binders as described above or in an acid-free box - with each item also enclose in a plastic sheet protector. My paper documents are among some of my most prized family history materials, so I preserve them. Just the same, nearly all of my materials that I've gathered are simple scanned. I still assign them a catalog number and those also correspond to their scanned file names. I place these (electronic files - jpg, tiff, pdf, etc.) in folders based on surnames, before I attach then in FH7. As I have a gaba-giga-mega-bazzillion or sources, this makes it very easy to locate them again. This has made my life MUCH easier when I've needed specific documents to join lineage societies as I can find specific documents, very easily, in order to submit them for membership purposes.

Of course, I back up my electronic data in the cloud. I can't tell you the massive amounts of grief I had when I finally broke through a brick wall, after decades of research, based upon an extremely poorly typed transcript of a diary. When I tried to find a copy of the original written diary, I learned that it had been destroyed in a fire during the 1960s - UGH! While no one would accept the typed transcript, it fortunately provided enough information that I was able to locate other documentation to back up the information that was in the diary.

Again, I scan EVERYTHING; otherwise, I'd be buried under a sea of paper.
Jeff La Marca
Author of Simple Citations for Genealogical Sources
Now Available from Amazon
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Jeff

I think we're coming at this from different approaches. I am interested not in genealogy itself but rather in in using FH to keep a track of my family. That, to me, falls into two aspects.

Firstly, I want to keep track the last two or three generations, Group 1, say, ( the "living memory" generations), the people I come into contact with from time to time, and their contacts. That is basically just record keeping for posterity.

The second aspect, is the personal interest one of seeing how far back I can trace my direct ancestors. If I can trace back, for example, to greatx6 grandparents, that's a total of 511 direct ancestors, say Group 2, and would be a source of great satisfaction to me. I really do not have the motivation to start investigating all their other descendants. My tree has a pool of about 600 individuals, of which unfortunately only a fraction are from the Group 2.

So I deliberately limit how wide I cast my net. I also like to think that when I add an individual to my tree, that I am at least 99% certain that the entry is correct. Unfortunately, that probably means that I already have at least half a dozen significant errors already, and everything I build on those individuals could be a delusion.

To me, quality takes absolute preference over quantity. In terms of numbers, this means that my modest six hundred is unlikely to increase significantly. However, what I do wish to do is rather to increase my confidence in the data I already have, and that is my main drive at the moment, to increase the 99%. I cannot see myself ever having a paper management problem where I have to assign three-digit serial number to documents!
Dick Laine
avatar
APerson
Diamond
Posts: 66
Joined: 19 Jan 2022 03:23
Family Historian: V7
Location: New Jersey, USA
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by APerson »

Dick,

I think we’re actually coming from the same place. My own research concerns similar paths - I’m concerned with direct line ancestry and allied descendant lines; however, unless I have a very specific reason for doing so, I don’t take a deep dive into identifying every descendant of every furthest distance ancestor (although that might be the goal of, let’s say, a family reunion type group).

Absolutely NO ONE is entered into my database unless I can confirm they belong there and I’ve never synced my data with any one else’s. Like you, 99% of the people in my FH database are confirmed as valid entries. While my database is larger than yours (a few thousand), I’ve done this for about 50 years. I also document everything that supports the inclusion of each individual. I’m always astonished (and extremely wary) of those who have 10s of thousands of individuals in their databases, including countless unrelated individuals who are simply merged in from someone else’s GEDCOM. As far as I’m concerned, if there are limited (or no) citations, and facts/events are not supported by some type of evidence, the family history cannot be trusted.

My overwhelming concern has always been to fully document every individual to justify their inclusion in my tree. I will, however, temporarily add a new individual as I’m researching that person for the first time but, again, I notate that.

I’m sorry if you got the impression I do otherwise. As far as a three-digit numbering system is concerned - that was only a suggestion as one can never know how many sources one may find. After five decades of research, I’ve never run out of numbers. In one case, however, I have a direct line ancestor (who, I might add, I only recently found) who had a very common name. This prevented me from adding him to my database other than to include his name. His son (also a direct line ancestor) had a very unusual given name and I could only identify his father’s name through his death certificate. Well . . . just a few years ago (4 or 5?), I found a newspaper clipping that permitted me to finally connect him to his father. What I found was rather shocking and horrific - I’ll spare those juicy details for now. HOWEVER, after I confirmed that connection, I’ve since found about two hundred newspaper articles about this notorious direct line ancestor. Even now, I’m still finding more and struggling to find his parents.

Please note that my suggestion to find a cataloging system is just that, a suggestion. I do not keep paper copies of everything; currently, the vast number of materials are electronic copies only but I have found it very useful (for me) to still catalog them.

One last thing, I published my family history back in 1995 - it is now very outdated as I’ve learned so much more (indeed, the Internet as we now know it was in its infancy at that time). I don’t remember how many individuals were listed in that but I believe it included between 600 and 800 names. The publisher, who only published family histories and had published 100s of them - he had a wall filled with those he had published - told me that it was the most complete and well/documented he had seen. (I’m not trying to brag; he did tell me that. I’m only mentioning it because I’m so neurotic about documenting my family history.) While it’s outdated, that’s only because I have uncovered so much more information and pushed through several, extremely difficult, brick walls. The quality of my research and the validity of my citations in that book remain highly accurate today. Of course, I have made, and continue to make, lots of mistakes - manual data entry lends itself well to errors. One of the things I like about FH7 is that I’ve been able to correct many errors I’ve made over the years.

Anyway, I really think we’re on the same page and support your approach.
Jeff La Marca
Author of Simple Citations for Genealogical Sources
Now Available from Amazon
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

I agree, Jeff. Hence my wholesale changes. I have my supporting evidence, but hadn't been recording it in the most suitable way. Onwards and upwards!
Dick Laine
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Thank you everyone for your help and advice. Rather than make wholesale corrections I have started on the task of completely rebuilding my tree on FH. The re-checking involved would seem to me to to have a side-effect of perhaps reducing any errors.

This whole exercise has prompted me think a lot about the consequence of errors, and in particular the consequences of mis-identifying individuals. When I add an individual to my tree I like to to think I am 99% certain I've got the right person. (And for the record I don't believe anyone can achieve 100%; there is always a finite risk of error). A mis-identified individual invalidates all individuals above them in the tree, and at best compromises all the individuals below.

So I set up a computer simulation to explore the effects of mis-identification errors. The computer generates a random family tree with about ten generations. Randomly it selects 1% of individuals to be deemed incorrect and then counts the number of individuals compromised by these errors. It does this some ten thousand times and averages the results. A kind of Monte Carlo analysis.

The results were quite clear and consistent. An accuracy rate of, only, 99% in identifying individuals in a tree will result in about 8.8% of the entire tree being compromised.

A salutary lesson in the importance of checking facts.
Dick Laine
User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 5464
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by ColeValleyGirl »

It's good to see something I instinctively believe backed up with maths...
User avatar
AdrianBruce
Megastar
Posts: 2090
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 21:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire
Contact:

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by AdrianBruce »

I second what Helen says about that analysis - even though I can't remember what Monte Carlo analyses were (no, leave me in blissful ignorance please!)
Adrian
User avatar
Mark1834
Megastar
Posts: 2458
Joined: 27 Oct 2017 19:33
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire, UK

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by Mark1834 »

Interesting - I find myself in the odd position of completely agreeing with the Dick's conclusion about the need for robustness while at the same time having reservations about the model. I know it is not to be taken too seriously, but it does raise some interesting points.

In general, the further we go back in time, the greater the potential for mis-identification due to the diminishing number of reliable records. However, the fraction of the total tree impacted by that error depends very strongly on what type of project you have. Is it entirely pedigree, every descendent of every ancestor over several generations, or somewhere in between? I suspect that most FH projects will be the latter (in my case less than 10% of the individuals are direct ancestors), and the impact of errors in aunts, uncles and cousins becomes proportionately less.

Remember that for a fully populated pedigree tree, the total database size doubles for each generation added. For a 10-generation pedigree, more than 95% of the individuals will be born in the 17th and 18th centuries, assuming 30 years per generation.

In practice, most of us are probably more diligent about ascribing someone to be a direct ancestor than a second cousin many times removed, as the consequences of error are much greater. Always remember that the on-line entry for one of your ancestors you have just found may be author's distant cousin, so always confirm identification with your own research before you add them to your tree!

Personally, I take any hobbyist-researched relationships prior to the early 19th century with an extremely large pinch of salt, as I feel that these are virtually impossible to document to the required confidence for the average population who were not landed aristocracy or members of groups such as Quakers and Jews with exceptional standards of record keeping.
Mark Draper
avatar
marlbenn
Silver
Posts: 9
Joined: 16 Aug 2022 10:13
Family Historian: V7

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by marlbenn »

Hi Mark. You are quite right to have reservations about the model. Any such model tends to be a "one size fits all" approach. Although I did experiment with different sizes and shapes of tree, and found that that made virtually no difference to the final result. But I make no claim to accuracy; I just present an observation.

Incidentally you point to greater uncertainty in information from earlier than the early 19th century. There is uncertainty in data from recent times. How often do we now encounter "confidentiality" and "data protection" in accessing recent data. Here in the UK the Office of National Statistics deliberately introduces errors to published census information in order to deliberately prevent the identification of individuals.

My little bit of statistical stirring claims to be no more than a primitive effort to get a handle on the scale of the issue. It is impossible for anyone to quantify confidence or to distinguish between 99% and 99.5% certainty. In any case the accuracy of identification made of an individual is not subject to chance. It is predetermined when the identification is made, and it is either right or it is wrong.

My aim was simply to get a feel for the consequence of error.
Dick Laine
User avatar
Mark1834
Megastar
Posts: 2458
Joined: 27 Oct 2017 19:33
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire, UK

Re: Advice - Wholesale Changes

Post by Mark1834 »

I had a play with modelling my own tree, assuming a random 1% error rate for births after 1812 and 10% for earlier records. How many individuals should be excluded from the tree (those with the error, all their ancestors, and anybody else descended wholly from these two groups)? It’s not difficult using a plugin, but I quickly decided it was a project better suited for a dark and cold winter evening... :)
Mark Draper
Post Reply