Family Historian User Group

I have been trying to clean up the sentences that are created when you publish a narrative book. For the standard fact Marriage, there are fields that let you enter the date, place, and address, but not the name of a church. I have gotten around it by putting the name of the church after the date in the sentence.

Example: {individual} married {spouse/her/him} {date}, at Our Lady of Mercy Church {place} {their ages}. <The best man was {role(single)=Best man}. ><{role(single)=bridesmaid} was a bridesmaid. ><{role(plural)=bridesmaid} were bridesmaids. ><The marriage was witnessed by {role=witness}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=minister}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=priest}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=rabbi}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=Justice of the Peace}. >

I was just wondering if anyone has a better way to enter a church name in the marriage field.

I always put the church name in the Address field and add the town in square brackets so that it does not get printed - eg "St Marys Church, [[Bridgwater]]" and "St Marys Church, [[Bristol]]", etc.

The fact sentence (for a Marriage) I have as "<br>{individual} married< {spouse/her/him}> {date}< at {address}> {place} {their ages}. <The best man was {role(single)=Best man}. ><{role(single)=bridesmaid} was a bridesmaid. ><Bridesmaids included {role(plural)=bridesmaid}. ><Witnesses at the marriage included {role=witness}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=minister}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=priest}. ><The ceremony was conducted by {role=rabbi}. >"

The technique described by Brent is in the FHUG Knowledge Base Working with Places and Addresses under Distinct Places and Addresses where it explains how to record church names.

I don't understand how the Example you gave would work in the Standard Fact Set because everybody's sentence would say the marriage took place in the same church! So I guess you were intending to edit every Marriage Sentence box where the church name was needed.

After reading the article Working with Places and Addresses, I am more confused. I have only changed 2 or 3 people's fields to contain the church name for their marriage and they looked fine in the narrative reports. I think it would be better if there was a field to put the name of the church in, that way there would not be any confusion about where the church was located. It would have the church name, street number, and city or town where the marriage took place. I think that would be a good Wish List item.

Can you please explain the problem with putting the church address in the Address field.
That is where it is intended to go for Baptism, Marriage, Burial or other church events.
Then you can use the Standard Fact Set Sentence Template {address} code.
It is unlikely that another field would get created because that would need a change to the GEDCOM specification.

Furthermore, Tools > Work with Data > Addresses... provides a means of editing the address of the same church in all the Address fields in one simple operation.

If you desperately need a dedicated church field then I suggest you use a labelled Note meta-field.
e.g.
Church: St Marys Church, Church Lane, Newtown
That is accessed from the Standard Fact Set Sentence Template using {=GetLabelledText( %FACT.NOTE2%, "Church:" )}
See FHUG Knowledge Base Entering Standard and Custom Fields for Facts Labelled Note Meta-fields.

But not everyone married in a church...I too use the address field and enter the name of the church or the location the marriage took place.

Ossey55 wrote: ↑

29 May 2023 13:54

After reading the article Working with Places and Addresses, I am more confused. I have only changed 2 or 3 people's fields to contain the church name for their marriage and they looked fine in the narrative reports. I think it would be better if there was a field to put the name of the church in, that way there would not be any confusion about where the church was located. It would have the church name, street number, and city or town where the marriage took place. I think that would be a good Wish List item.

Thank you all for your help. Using the Labelled Note Meta-fields is what I was looking for. This just makes a better-sounding sentence to me.

How does it make a better sentence than putting the church in the Address field and using the {address} code?
Please provide an explanation as I don't understand your preference for a labelled Note over the Address field.
What do you use the Address field for?
e.g.
Brent's template:
{individual} married {spouse/her/him} {date}< at {address}> {place} {their ages}.
is simpler than your template:
{individual} married {spouse/her/him} {date}< at {=GetLabelledText( %FACT.NOTE2%, "Church:" )}> {place} {their ages}.
and they both produce identical sentences.

The address field is still used in the Individual Summary Report.

For the Individual Narrative Report, I am using:
Date: Aug 18, 1984
Place: Plainville, Hartford, Connecticut
Address: 19 South Canal Street
Note: Church: in Our Lady of Mercy Church
]]
[[
Address: at 19 South Canal Street
]]

I have to enter the Labelled Note Meta-Fields in the sentence.

This gives me a sentence that reads:
She married Mark Allen Pease Sr. On Aug 18, 1984, in Our Lady of Mercy Church at 19 South Canal Street in Plainville when he was 23 and she was 23.

I like using the Individual Summary Reports for myself, but I am making books for Christmas gifts and would like to get as much information as possible in the books.
I still think it would be a good Wish List item. Then you could just put the church name in an empty field. That may be harder to do than I think.

Why not just put this in the address field (without the quotes)? This is what I do.

"Our Lady of Mercy Church, 19 South Canal Street"

Bill

Brent, Bill and I all suggest the same thing. Put the church name and its address all in the Address field.

For an Occupation fact, the Address field would hold the business name of the company and its address.
It would be unreasonable to expect to have a dedicated Company name field.

How would you record Marriages that were not held in a Church but at a Registry Office or some other wedding venue?
You cannot use the Church metafield because the venue is not a church.
So presumably the full name and address of the venue would go in the Address field.
Why should a church be any different.?

You are correct that it would be harder than you think to add a dedicated Church field.
Also, think about migrating to another product. Standard Address fields migrate via GEDCOM far better than metafields

Why have you used an Address: labelled Note metafield that duplicates the Address field?
Simply use the Sentence Template conditional structure < at {address}> and discard the labelled Note metafield.

I notice that the Narrative Sentence illustrates a fault in the FH sentence construction.
She married Mark Allen Pease Sr. On Aug 18, 1984
The dot after Sr. has caused the word On to be capitalised by mistake.
That should be reported to CP.