What if the father was married to another woman at the time the biological mother conceived the child? I would like to use the broken line, but I don't know how to get there.
↧
Re: How to show an illegitimate child on descendants chart
↧
Re: How to show an illegitimate child on descendants chart
Who cares who is married to whom and when.
They are the parents of this child or more.
Just show them as friends and let be.
They are the parents of this child or more.
Just show them as friends and let be.
↧
↧
Re: How to show an illegitimate child on descendants chart
I'd like to show the father who never acknowledged his son at least as not appearing to be a bigamist. Maybe it doesn't matter, but there are descendants of the man and his wife who are still living and on Ancestry. If DNA is enough to sentence a person to death, I guess it's sufficient to claim paternity. Thanks.
↧
Re: Media: 1 or more not complete - process error
It's worth remembering that the "Media: 1 or more not complete - process error" after sync might not be a problem with your offline media, but may be simply due to a temporary error at Ancestry.
This error suddenly appeared for me a few weeks back, and nothing I could do seemed to resolve it. Investigating the sync logs suggested it was an internal Ancestry error while trying to retrieve a source media item. Some considerable time later (maybe a week or more?) it just went away of its own accord, presumably after Ancestry fixed the issue at their end.
So by all means check for missing media, mangled file extensions etc., but if you wait the "process error" might just fix itself anyway.
This error suddenly appeared for me a few weeks back, and nothing I could do seemed to resolve it. Investigating the sync logs suggested it was an internal Ancestry error while trying to retrieve a source media item. Some considerable time later (maybe a week or more?) it just went away of its own accord, presumably after Ancestry fixed the issue at their end.
So by all means check for missing media, mangled file extensions etc., but if you wait the "process error" might just fix itself anyway.
↧
Re: How to show an illegitimate child on descendants chart
We ALL have "Black Sheep" in our families.
No family is perfect!
No family is perfect!
↧
↧
Re: An improbable match mystery, help please
Paul
You have posted on the board devoted to the use of the desktop genealogical software product, Family Tree Maker.
Your post would have a better chance of success on a board for DNA.
You have posted on the board devoted to the use of the desktop genealogical software product, Family Tree Maker.
Your post would have a better chance of success on a board for DNA.
↧
Help Opening FTMB file
Hello everyone,
I received an FTMB file from a family member that is not the most technically inclined. I need a way to open it, or convert it into a usable file. I have been unable to find a working FTM program that can read them.
Any help is greatly appreciated!
I received an FTMB file from a family member that is not the most technically inclined. I need a way to open it, or convert it into a usable file. I have been unable to find a working FTM program that can read them.
Any help is greatly appreciated!
↧
Re: Help Opening FTMB file
The FTMB is a backup type of file and one must use the "File, Restore" method.
What version of FTM do you have?
What version of FTM do you have?
↧
An improbable match mystery, help please
Hi everyone,
This is not a story of a surprise match (e.g. an unexpected half sibling or cousin). My sister found a DNA match that seems to be connected to all four of our grandparents families. That seems highly unlikely, and I thought I would post to this forum to see if anyone else has found something similar or had thoughts on possible causes. First, some details: three of my grandparents families are from southern Italy, so it is physically possible there could have been multiple intermarriages, but my paternal grandfather is Polish. Two of the connections are indirect (a common match of a common match is related to a known cousin). This person who is so connected to us comes up as a fourth cousin for my sister and distant cousin for myself. I summarize the connections in the table below:
M - me
S - sister
MM - mystery match
2Ca - second cousin on my paternal grandfather’s side (Polish)
2Cb - second cousin on my maternal grandmother’s side
2Cc - second cousin on my maternal grandfather’s side
3C - third cousin on my paternal grandmother’s side
A - unknown person
B - unknown person
C unknown person
X - match
O - no match
M S MM 2Ca 2Cb 2Cc 3C A B C
M X X X X X X X O O O
S X X X X X X X O O O
MM X X X X X O O X O O
2Ca X X X X O O O O O O
2Cb X X X O X O O O O O
2Cc X X O O O X O O X O
3C X X O O O O X O O X
A O O X O O O O X X X
B O O O O O X O X X O
C O O O O O O X X O X
Questions:
How likely is this scenario? My sister and I have about 140 matches which are fourth cousins or closer and thousands of more distant matches. So our matches of matches would number in the millions, which may make this situation more likely.
Is it possible that MM is not a real person’s DNA, but fake data uploaded to test Ancestry’s algorithms or pad match lists?
Thank you for any comments,
Paul
This is not a story of a surprise match (e.g. an unexpected half sibling or cousin). My sister found a DNA match that seems to be connected to all four of our grandparents families. That seems highly unlikely, and I thought I would post to this forum to see if anyone else has found something similar or had thoughts on possible causes. First, some details: three of my grandparents families are from southern Italy, so it is physically possible there could have been multiple intermarriages, but my paternal grandfather is Polish. Two of the connections are indirect (a common match of a common match is related to a known cousin). This person who is so connected to us comes up as a fourth cousin for my sister and distant cousin for myself. I summarize the connections in the table below:
M - me
S - sister
MM - mystery match
2Ca - second cousin on my paternal grandfather’s side (Polish)
2Cb - second cousin on my maternal grandmother’s side
2Cc - second cousin on my maternal grandfather’s side
3C - third cousin on my paternal grandmother’s side
A - unknown person
B - unknown person
C unknown person
X - match
O - no match
M S MM 2Ca 2Cb 2Cc 3C A B C
M X X X X X X X O O O
S X X X X X X X O O O
MM X X X X X O O X O O
2Ca X X X X O O O O O O
2Cb X X X O X O O O O O
2Cc X X O O O X O O X O
3C X X O O O O X O O X
A O O X O O O O X X X
B O O O O O X O X X O
C O O O O O O X X O X
Questions:
How likely is this scenario? My sister and I have about 140 matches which are fourth cousins or closer and thousands of more distant matches. So our matches of matches would number in the millions, which may make this situation more likely.
Is it possible that MM is not a real person’s DNA, but fake data uploaded to test Ancestry’s algorithms or pad match lists?
Thank you for any comments,
Paul
↧
↧
Re: Help Opening FTMB file
RootsMagic Essentials (free from Rootsmagic) will open it and allow you to access the contents. Note that RME does not fully support some of the FTM specific fields but it should be good enough.
The FTMB is really just an ordinary zip compressed file and can be opened (add .zip to the filename) to show the .ftm data file and all the media files.
The FTMB is really just an ordinary zip compressed file and can be opened (add .zip to the filename) to show the .ftm data file and all the media files.
↧
Re: Help Opening FTMB file
Thank you so much! That worked like a champ. I cannot thank you enough.
↧
Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
Is there anyway to alter the default to ‘married’ on reports without going into each individual marriage (via person) ?
I am sure most of our couples on our trees will have married
I am sure most of our couples on our trees will have married
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
I'm not aware of a place where you can change the default "met" wording which is used for a spouse with no marriage fact and a relationship other than "spouse". Even if you could I don't think that would be a good idea, because it would wrongly imply a marriage even when there was no evidence for one. So I think unfortunately you will have to amend each couple to set the relationship to "spouse" and/or add a marriage fact.
But I'm puzzled as to why you're seeing "met" anyway. By default FTM adds a spouse with relationship "spouse", which will show as "married" in the report. Similarly Ancestry defaults a new spouse to type "spouse" although you can change it before confirming. If you change the relationship to anything else such as "unknown" then yes it would show as "met", but once you add a marriage fact between the couple it will override the spouse relationship setting and show "married".
So, unless you have altered the default wording on the marriage fact, using FTM's "Edit>Manage Facts > Properties>Fact sentence" to say "met" instead of "married", it suggests your spouses have somehow been entered with one of the non-spouse relationships and also don't have a marriage fact entered. Is it possible you imported your tree from another program, which perhaps uses a different default or convention for spouse relationships?
[edit: the above applies to FTM2017 with the latest update (v23.1) so it's possible it's different in earlier versions.]
But I'm puzzled as to why you're seeing "met" anyway. By default FTM adds a spouse with relationship "spouse", which will show as "married" in the report. Similarly Ancestry defaults a new spouse to type "spouse" although you can change it before confirming. If you change the relationship to anything else such as "unknown" then yes it would show as "met", but once you add a marriage fact between the couple it will override the spouse relationship setting and show "married".
So, unless you have altered the default wording on the marriage fact, using FTM's "Edit>Manage Facts > Properties>Fact sentence" to say "met" instead of "married", it suggests your spouses have somehow been entered with one of the non-spouse relationships and also don't have a marriage fact entered. Is it possible you imported your tree from another program, which perhaps uses a different default or convention for spouse relationships?
[edit: the above applies to FTM2017 with the latest update (v23.1) so it's possible it's different in earlier versions.]
↧
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
Thank you for your reply. The problem is it says ‘met’ for the marriage date. Which of course isn’t really correct, unless of course they met each other and married the same day. It is certainly showing Met on reports I have just sent out. It is possible that it is saying ‘met’ On marriages where the actual date isn’t shown. Which of course would make sense I will have to try and ‘add’ a false date and see
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
You can verify that the default is "married" or change it by opening the marriage fact properties dialog for any marriage fact. You can set the defaults for marriage facts here including the fact sentence used for ALL marriage facts in the current tree. Verify it says married.
{person} married {spouse} {onDate} {inPlace} {(description)}.
{person} married {spouse} {onDate} {inPlace} {(description)}.
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
Thank you I will check that out when I get home
↧
Re: Media: 1 or more not complete - process error
This is FTM 2012, but FTM 2017 is nearly the same. "All media" is selected in the upper left corner.
Right click inside the collection to get the pop-up. Also, "Find Missing Media" can be found in the Media drop-down as shown.
Right click inside the collection to get the pop-up. Also, "Find Missing Media" can be found in the Media drop-down as shown.
↧
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
I had a similar issue recently and found that there were quite a few couples where the relationship status had somehow changed to Unknown. Run the Marriage Report (in Relationship Reports) and this will show if there are any Unknown relationships. If so, you will have to go into each individual and change the status to Spouse. Because it is a shared fact, changing one will change them both.
(I have a pdf of the method I used to correct this problem using Filters but I don't seem to be able to upload it here. The instructions are for the Mac version of FTM2017 but it will be a similar process for the Windows version)
(I have a pdf of the method I used to correct this problem using Filters but I don't seem to be able to upload it here. The instructions are for the Mac version of FTM2017 but it will be a similar process for the Windows version)
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
Thank you I am using a Mac hopefully I will be home later and be able to check. I suppose it the word ‘Met’ is used on a report the I could use the find and replace in it as well. One thing I don’t need to send reports very often.
↧
Re: Word ‘met’ Instead of ‘married’
the ‘met’ is not a Fact - it is based on the Status in the Relationship so I don’t think you can do the Find & Replace but worth a try. If you would like the pdf I created, I can upload it to Google Drive then you can download it.
↧