Family Historian User Group

Posted: **04 Mar 2023 01:49**

Hello

I have many facts: Birth, Marriage, Census, Death and so on.
Due to several Major problems between FTM and Ancestry syncs -- I moved to RM to rebuild my tree (mostly) from scratch for facts and media. That has gone well. I wanted to get to the point when I was ready to rebuild my sources/citations.
My dilemma is that since I already have most of the facts attached to people and the media attached to the facts, I do not want to duplicate existing facts but I still want to source/cite. I only started using FH7 about a month ago. I began exploring Ancestral sources basically today. I did one test census--- it seem to do a good job (but I will have to look at tweaking few settings. My main question is how (if ) I can utilize Ancestral Sources to update existing facts and source/cite them using Ancestral Sources. Is my only option to Cite/Sources with FH. Hopefully, someone else had seen this scenario before and can offer insight on best approaches.

Thanks Kevin

Posted: **04 Mar 2023 12:52**

Hi Kevin

Hopefully you've watched the Ancestral Source introductory video and perhaps the one on using templated sources too in my You Tube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@ancestralsources)

Ancestral Sources is all about 'source driven' recording. The idea is that you enter the details of your source in Ancestral Sources and from that it generates a source record and all the facts and media too with each linking to the source using citations. From what you've explained it appears that you have recorded your data in the opposite way to this. You have created facts and now want to create the sources and the citations. That isn't really something that AS will be able to help you with - it can't be used to retrospectively add sources to your existing facts. I know a lot of people who use Ancestral Sources have gone back and re-entered their sources because they like the way that AS records information and in those circumstances it does offer to replace facts that it finds that have the same date. But if you're not prepared to go through that process then you're probably better off just creating the sources and the citations in Family Historian because you can use facilities in there such as copying and pasting citations. So you can create a source, create a citation for a fact to link it to the source and then copy and paste that same citation to any other facts that need to be linked to the source.

I hope others who have been in a similar situation to yours will contribute to this discussion thread and relate their experiences too.

Posted: **04 Mar 2023 16:41**

Thanks Nick -- yes I have watch 2-3 of the Ancestral Sources video including the introduction one.

My situation is basically I need to retroactively make sources/citations and decide what is the best to do.
Of course while I am reviewing things I can also review the strength of the sources/citations and media.
Curious what other have done that worked well (as well as what did not work well). And of course, some this is subjective -- and a work better for one may or may not work for others etc.

That said -- I wish I found Ancestral Sources and FH about years ago when I dropped FTM.
Ancestral Sources is a great tool!

Thanks, Kevin

Posted: **04 Mar 2023 16:47**

A couple of years ago when FH7 came out and supported Rich Text, I decided to re-do a lot of rather poor "Text from Source" sources/citations. I used AS to do a lot of it, and created a bunch of Auto Text templates to produce what I wanted or tweaked versions of those already built in. I still come across a few I missed (couldn't face doing). It was something of a grind to work through, but I just got organised with a schedule of things to update and got on with it. It took a month or more of work to re-do a lot of the sources (a few hundred) to include much better looking transcripts in FH, but was worth it in the end.

It would have been nice to be able to simply pick an existing source to load in AS to then generate new transcript from a template, but that was not an option for reasons Nick explained at the time. I did learn a lot about creating autotext templates and bothering Nick with 'it would be really useful to add such&such autotext formula', which he was generally very responsive to.

Basically, it is a pain to go and re-enter the info, but I just bit the bullet and ploughed on.

Posted: **04 Mar 2023 17:42**

Below is what I'm doing, for my main line and my very close collaterals (who know, I may get around to others if I live long enough!) When AS finds an existing fact, it does offer to keep the existing citations when it creates the new fact. I tick this box, double-check everything in FH, and often then end up deleting the existing citation after verifying that my new one from AS is indeed exactly what I want.

It's tedious work but well worth the exercise. Using AS to enter information I've discovered key details I'd missed. The biggest benefit is it creates a complete abstract in text format - I often use these in my blog posts.

Like the OP, I too wish I'd had AS from the beginning, but as I can't go back in time, I am taking full advantage of it now to improve my database.

NickWalker wrote: ↑
04 Mar 2023 12:52
<SNIP>

Ancestral Sources is all about 'source driven' recording. The idea is that you enter the details of your source in Ancestral Sources and from that it generates a source record and all the facts and media too with each linking to the source using citations. From what you've explained it appears that you have recorded your data in the opposite way to this. You have created facts and now want to create the sources and the citations. That isn't really something that AS will be able to help you with - it can't be used to retrospectively add sources to your existing facts. I know a lot of people who use Ancestral Sources have gone back and re-entered their sources because they like the way that AS records information and in those circumstances it does offer to replace facts that it finds that have the same date.
<SNIP>

Posted: **05 Mar 2023 09:24**

I would heartily recommend "Biting the bullet" and re- do your data entry with AS. As will ask whether and how you want to update the existing data.

I started my journey back in 1999 on Sierra's "Generations" which I did like a lot.
Looking for something better, I came across FH (Then on Version 3) and took the plunge.

All my sources then were lumped sources and no images of anything.
Over the years, as new features became available, I have updated the way I record things.

When I re-do the research on a family as new info becomes available (ie 1921 census) I will also backtrack and check all my research on them and if needed, redo the data entry to my current methods.
I currently have over 98,000 individuals and 33, 000 families on my file 85% of whom are in "Pool 1"

I now use "Method 1 "Splitter sources for census, birth , baptism, marriages, deaths and Burials. I did try templated sources, but was not happy with what I got, so went back to Generic sources.
The only sources I don't use AS for are my "Lumped sources for GRO Indexes and the like.

I still have quite a few sources to update to rich text (Over 115,000) and thanks to Nick that is now easier.

Thank you to Nick for such a wonderful product

John

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 02:09**

johnmorrisoniom wrote: ↑
05 Mar 2023 09:24
I would heartily recommend "Biting the bullet" and re- do your data entry with AS. As will ask whether and how you want to update the existing data.

I started my journey back in 1999 on Sierra's "Generations" which I did like a lot.
Looking for something better, I came across FH (Then on Version 3) and took the plunge.

All my sources then were lumped sources and no images of anything.

John

Yes I think this will be my plan to start ...probably summer time.
My main reason for hesitation at this moment is to get desired that I am looking for an will be meaningful to others.
Sort of "Measure twice cut once" type thinking. I want to have slightly better understanding of how best to use AS for my objectives -- I did like the 2-3 test entries I did. I think I may practice on a test project before I begin officially. I appreciate hearing anyone's experiences and what they have learned. Like for example -- my parents (and oldest brother) were in the 1950 census with my cousin (and her Parents) on same page (same building but different floors). The image of course would be the same and each household I would assume have a separate source? Actually, I have a few times when multiple families are on same page. In most cases related both to me and each other.

Kevin

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 08:06**

Yes the recommended method is to create a source for each household so one source for each household on the page. If the household goes over two pages then this would still be one source. I would probably add a comment to the source note to mention they were living next door to another family in my file (to be honest I usually add this to the source text transcription itself as I'm more likely to miss the comment in the note).

Nowadays I just link an image to the source (letting AS deal with naming the file and media record for me) and don't worry about the fact that the image will already be linked to the other family. Disk storage is so plentiful that a few duplicated images amongst the thousands in my project doesn't make any difference at all and it saves me having to rename the existing image to include the name of the second family I'd be linking it to.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 11:14**

I have multiple cases of sharing a census image between two or even three sources and that's handled easily in FH and AS. I think I've avoided any image duplications, but if found it's easy to update the source record to refer to one or other media record and then remove the unwanted media record and image. Due to consistant file naming I generally spot the duplication when downloading. AS also allows use of existing media records rather than new files when recording a source, so it all hangs together well.

The latest source I regret not doing as a proper source is Probate. I just added the text as a note, which was fine. But now I have 60 I want to convert to sources and images, because I want to add to death events due to date and location. AS isn't going to help me here, hey-ho another slog.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 11:20**

ChrisRead wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 11:14
The latest source I regret not doing as a proper source is Probate. I just added the text as a note, which was fine. But now I have 60 I want to convert to sources and images, because I want to add to death events due to date and location. AS isn't going to help me here, hey-ho another slog.

I do still have a long term aim to tackle things like Probate and Memorial Inscriptions in AS. They will need to be tackled a bit differently I think as they commonly include details on lots of different people and can bring in birth dates, death dates, occupations, relationships between people, where they live, etc. I have some ideas as to how I might do this, but it would be quite a lot of work.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 11:50**

I hesitated to suggest they could be incorporated. The ones I've had as you say mostly include death date and where or residence at the time, probate location and anyone who is executor/administrator etc. I add them as 'witness' types to the event too. Often the widow/widower is mentioned. As you say, their occupation is occasionally mentioned. The elements seem to fit in with the existing AS approach to existing types of source entry such as a death with a few qwerks, but all logically as a source.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 12:15**

The main difference is that the existing BMD records are for a specific set of people - individual (and spouse in a marriage) and their parents. The set of people on a will or grave are much more varied so there would need to be a way to add lots of different people to the entry so that's perhaps more similar to a census entry. But for each of those people there need to be the boxes to enter the various facts about them which don't necessarily fit well into a census style grid. Then there is the complication of how these transfer over into autotext templates where there isn't a standard format and the usual {KEYPERSON} {KEYFATHER}, etc. references wouldn't be enough. There is also the probate fact to consider and whether each person mentioned in the will would get a fact or be a witness (and what to do about users of older versions of FH which don't have witnesses). It's complicated.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 12:50**

Yeah, the auto-text would be a bit tricky as there are various forms and styles. While generally similar in some cases, there are subtle variations and outliers.

Worse case, if you figured out how and what inputs would be needed, so at least all the relevant events and sources etc. got created, that would be a start. A simple generic auto-text could be made and let the user edit it, or simple manually type it in.

Not a trivial addition to AS, but still worth letting it brew in the subconscious for a while to see what ideas come up. You have enough other things to be updating and adding I'm sure.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 13:30**

NickWalker wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 08:06
Nowadays I just link an image to the source (letting AS deal with naming the file and media record for me) and don't worry about the fact that the image will already be linked to the other family. Disk storage is so plentiful...

Over the past year or so I came up with a Media naming convention -- to remain consistent with over 10K esiting media items --- I will probably keep that consistent with what I have been doing. Coming from FTM/Ancestry the media was usually name something totally useless. So example of media for Census under my naming convention would look like "[CENSUS] 1950 Boston MA - Smith and Jones" (husband and wife surnames usually or the head of household depending) Even with over 100 Census records for a Decade / town I have not found a case with same two surnames -- and would add additional if/when needed. For death I might do something like this for the media "[DEATH] (21 Sep 2009) Livonia L. Emerson Richardson (1846-1909).jpg"
However, AS ability to do the naming based on the source is a great help for those who have not developed a naming convention or prefer AS's.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 13:46**

NickWalker wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 12:15
... The set of people on a will or grave are much more varied so there would need to be a way to add lots of different people to the entry so that's perhaps more similar to a census entry. ... There is also the probate fact to consider and whether each person mentioned in the will would get a fact or be a witness (and what to do about users of older versions of FH which don't have witnesses). It's complicated.

I can't help thinking that, yes, it is complicated! For instance, I guess it depends on how (and if) you want to record beneficiaries - especially given that some "beneficiaries" are only potential "beneficiaries" when the will is written (e.g. they only inherit if... Or they're dead by the time the will is probated).

You've probably already thought of this but I wonder if a more do-able objective would be to record Probate Calendar entries only? They're more restricted in their format (at least, they are in England & Wales

) plus I have lots of Probate Calendar entries for which I don't have - and have no intention of getting - the will itself. Whereas it must be pretty unusual to get a will without going via some sort of record of the probate event.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 14:42**

kevync1985 wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 13:30

NickWalker wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 08:06
Nowadays I just link an image to the source (letting AS deal with naming the file and media record for me) and don't worry about the fact that the image will already be linked to the other family. Disk storage is so plentiful...
Over the past year or so I came up with a Media naming convention -- to remain consistent with over 10K esiting media items --- I will probably keep that consistent with what I have been doing. Coming from FTM/Ancestry the media was usually name something totally useless. So example of media for Census under my naming convention would look like "[CENSUS] 1950 Boston MA - Smith and Jones" (husband and wife surnames usually or the head of household depending) Even with over 100 Census records for a Decade / town I have not found a case with same two surnames -- and would add additional if/when needed. For death I might do something like this for the media "[DEATH] (21 Sep 2009) Livonia L. Emerson Richardson (1846-1909).jpg"
However, AS ability to do the naming based on the source is a great help for those who have not developed a naming convention or prefer AS's.

This sounds like a sensible system that you've developed. Just to point out though that the naming conventions are very flexible in AS - the title templates can be formatted in various different ways and keyword codes included (and even quite complex functions if required) to match most requirements. I think the only part of your examples it would struggle with are the 'life dates' for Emerson Richardson although if you used the 'Other Information' field and entered the person's name and life dates it would work fine. You could use Other Info field to enter the two surnames for your census entry too.

Posted: **08 Mar 2023 21:05**

NickWalker wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 14:42

kevync1985 wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 13:30

NickWalker wrote: ↑
08 Mar 2023 08:06

This sounds like a sensible system that you've developed. Just to point out though that the naming conventions are very flexible in AS - the title templates can be formatted in various different ways and keyword codes included (and even quite complex functions if required) to match most requirements. I think the only part of your examples it would struggle with are the 'life dates' for Emerson Richardson although if you used the 'Other Information' field and entered the person's name and life dates it would work fine. You could use Other Info field to enter the two surnames for your census entry too.
Thank! that is very helpful and something I will have to review

Family Historian User Group

Using Ancestral Sources

Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources

Re: Using Ancestral Sources