Quantcast
Channel: Family Tree Maker software - Family History & Genealogy Message Board
Viewing all 22081 articles
Browse latest View live

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
The old garbage in garbage out issues starts at the source. Yup, I've spent many years dealing with customers over this.

So far the custom fact seems to work. Good thing is I can make them all private at anytime. I'll see what happens over time. I'm not one to suggest putting codes in descriptions fields because of validation and parsing issues. But then again this is just a genealogy program not someone's medicare payment processing program. Use what works but plan for the future.

Thanks!

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
Attached is a .jpg that shows how to filter for partial text. In this case it is the marriage record code Ma, and this filtering will produce a list of all those people who have a marriage record, i.e. Test A. Person and Test D. Person. If your want to combine codes, simple list the codes separated by a space. If you have trouble reading the attachment, let me know and I'll split the .jpg into two halves.

P.S. I'm running FTM 2012, so I'm not familiar with all the bells and whistles in FTM 2017.

Re: Checklists in 2017

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
A lot of people put the cemetery name in the description field of the burial fact. Some claim that adding the cemetery name to a standard four part name (city/township, county, state, USA) can affect mapping. Perhaps, I don't know. What I do know is if the cemetery is added to the description field, it is not a place and therefore does not show up in the Places Workspace. To find all the people buried in a certain cemetery, you have to filter for the burial description.

What I do is add the cemetery name to the four part name, and then use "Resolve This Place Name" command in the Places Workspace to create a detail for the four part name (if the four part name is in the Place Authority list of locations). This is an accepted technique in FTM. As far as I can tell, the detail does not affect any reports, searches, nor filtering. What it does do is create a five part name that appears in the Places Workspace and easily shows all the people buried there.

One caveat: I'm using FTM 2012 and I have no idea if FTM 2017 will hiccup over this.

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
I'll try it out, thanks!

I just discovered a new family cemetery this past weekend.

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
I've had this cemetery name discussion many times in the past, and have saved several .jpgs. I've attached one with this comment. It clearly shows a cemetery treated as a detail to a four part standard name.

Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
I wish to delete all the people from a large tree except for the Home Person. I know that I can "Select All but This Node" in a chart and then delete the selected nodes but I don't know of a way to create a chart for an entire tree with close to 2,000 people on it.

Thanks in advance,
Wilfred Plá

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
Why not just delete the tree and start again?

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
Really - just delete the tree and start a new one. Or keep the old one until you are sure there is nothing there you need, and start a new one.

There is no limit on the number of trees you can have.

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
There's some tedious details that I am trying to avoid discussing in order to prevent this thread from veering off into a bunch of tangents that will only waste my time and the time of other users of this message board.

So, let me approach the issue from a different angle. Is it possible to
1. unlink a shared, static Ancestry tree
2. delete the FTM tree that was linked to the now unlinked Ancestry tree
3. create a new tree on FTM with the same name
4. relink it to the Ancestry tree, and thus
5. refresh the Ancestry tree with the new, renamed, FTM tree data?

What I am trying to do is periodically to replace a private, shared, static Ancestry tree without having to re-invite half a dozen users who currently have View rights to see living people. If the above is possible, I can swap out the static tree every few weeks, with an updated tree, and make the process seamless for the other users.

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
I think the answer to your second "is it possible" question is no, which is presumably why you want to preserve the home person, and hence the link to Ancestry and the ability to re-sync. In fact, I don't think Ancestry now has any concept of a "linked" tree on the A.com side of things, and there's no linkage indicator on the Ancestry tree, so step 1 is neither possible nor required. The linkage status is purely on the FTM side (which is also how you can have multiple FTM trees linked to the same Ancestry tree). Step 2 will therefore obviously remove the link by removing the tree. The problem is that step 4 isn't possible as far as I can see, even if the new tree you created in step 3 has the same name - it won;t have the "linked to Ancestry" status yet. The only way to create a linkage is to upload it to Ancestry (by clicking "Upload to Ancestry" from the link icon, or doing it when you import a tree from another source such as a GEDCOM) which would create a new Ancestry tree and lose your guests, or to download the Ancestry tree which will just create a new FTM tree. Alternatively, you could restore a backed-up FTM tree, but that has to have been linked in the first place. The bottom line is that there isn't any way that I can see of taking an existing FTM tree and newly linking it to an existing Ancestry tree. It's a pity, because given the "passive" nature of the link being on the FTM side, I can't see any technical reason why that's not possible, though linking very different trees would obviously be pretty chaotic!

I know you don't want to go into detail, but could you tell us why you want to clear down and recreate the FTM tree? Are you maintaining the data externally and reimporting it into FTM? That might help someone here to be able suggest a solution to your problem.

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
After looking at it, adding a default custom fact also has the place so it really is the same as the burial fact. It does make sense to use the standard burial fact with place.

PROBLEMS WITH LINK AND SYNC BETWEEN FTM 2017 AND ANCESTRY TREES

$
0
0
Preparation to merge, link and sync family trees

I started with 2 different family trees on Ancestry.com and 2 related family trees on FTM 2014.1. I will call them Ancestry-1, Ancestry-2, FTM-1 and FTM-2. My computer OS is Windows 7.

I orginally started my trees on FTM 2010 and then upgraded to FTM 2014 and then FTM 2014.1. After almost a year, I subscribed to Ancestry.com, uploaded my original FTM-1 and FTM-2 to Ancestry, creating Ancestry-1 and Ancestry-2 respectively. From then on, I used Ancestry as my primary research site, adding names and sources to my tree. Every so often, I would then use FTM to add the same sources to FTM-1 and FTM-2. I found that this is extra work, but since I know that the FTM and Ancestry trees were not equal, I was afraid to combine them.

After ordering and receiving FTM 2017, I knew it was time to make use of syncing. I then performed the following steps:

1. I created a backup of each of my FTM trees and saved them.
2. I downloaded of each of my Ancestry trees and saved them as .ged files.
3. I then merged Ancestry-1 into FTM-1 and then Ancestry-2 into FTM-2 creating new FTM-1 and FTM-2.
4. I then went through the new FTM-1 and FTM-2 and merged the duplicate persons.
5. I renamed the original trees on Ancestry to Ancestry-1(old tree) and Ancestry-2(old tree).
6. I renamed the new FTM-1 and FTM-2 to the original Ancestry names.
7. I then uploaded the new FTM trees individually to Ancestry by clicking the “Upload and Link to Ancestry from the Current Tree.” I chose sync manually.

Now the problems appear!

1. I found that one of the problems uploading the FTM file to Ancestry concerns the Census reports. 1940 census lists 8 separate copies of the Census source and images, one for each family member on the father’s facts tab, the same on the mother’s tab, while it lists just the separate copies for the mother, father and the child when viewing a childs fact tab on Ancestry. It should only list the person selected and not the sources and images for every other person on that particular census.

2. My aunt (my father’s sister) has 2 sources and images of 1940 US Census in her profile on Ancestry. One copy is for my aunt. The second one lists another aunt, my mother’s sister. If I click on the symbol for the second aunt’s 1940 census, it indicates that she is married to my uncle, who is the husband of the first aunt. These aunts are not related in any way, other than being sisters of my mother or father, but not both.

MACKIEV SOFTWARE IS NOT WORKING PROPERLY. WHEN WILL MACKIEV FIX IT?

Mackiev told me that since my FTM 2017 trees appear to be ok after merging and cleaning up duplicates, it is not their problem. Mackiev is blaming Ancestry.com

I contacted Ancestry support and they first tried to tell me that Mackiev was responsible for making sure that the FamilySync worked properly. I told Ancestry support that I had dealt with Mackiev several times and they were useless and refused to solve the problem. Ancestry has now turned to their technical support for ideas.

Can anyone help me?


MY OBSERVATIONS

As I stated before, I started my trees in FTM 2010 and then at a later date, I subscribed to Ancestry.com and uploaded the FTM tree to Ancestry. Then I would do most of my work on Ancestry and then later enter the same facts into FTM tree.

I feel that the process of entering Facts into the two different softwares needs to be looked at.

It appears that when entering US Census into Ancestry.com tree, the following occurs:

If the original person selected for entry of a fact was the father, then Ancestry also makes fact entry to the mother, and each child shown on the Census image for that family. If the family is husband, wife, and 6 children, then 8 people have that Census fact attached to their name.

When adding the same Census to FTM, the Census is entered to each person individually. The entry for the father or the mother picks up the spouse, and each child. The entry for each child only picks up each parent and the name of the child that is being entered. The final result is that the father and the mother would each have 8 copies of that Census (one for each name) attached to their name, while each individual child would only have 3 copies attached to their name.

When FTM is uploaded/linked/synced to Ancestry, instead of just the one copy of the Census being attached to each particular name, all 3 or all 8, as the case may be, are attached to to the person in the Ancestry tree.

When working with previous version of FTM, only the one correct copy of the Census was entered as a Fact for that particular person.

The same type of duplication occurs for other shared facts: marriages, city directories, etc.

As far as the upload attaching the wrong person to some of the person facts in Ancestry tree, I don’t have any idea why it is happening.

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
More thoughts - I'm guessing here, but if you're maintaining your tree in a different application and want to use FTM2017 purely as a way to sync with the Ancestry tree, then you would presumably use "Merge..." to import that external data into the already-linked tree. Once you've merged the data and repopulated your FTM tree, you can re-sync with Ancestry to refresh it (though I would worry that it might then unnecessarily re-sync everything, because all the data would have more recent timestamps).
It IS possible to delete everyone except the home person from the charting function - I'd not used that before, but just tried it now. Just go into Publish > Charts and create any chart. Then right-click a person and select "Delete from file" then "All persons in Chart" (or "Selected persons" - it doesn't really matter). When the "Delete selected persons" dialog appears, click the "Select..." button to open the "Filter individuals" window, and you can freely add anyone from the entire tree using "Include all" etc. to the list to be deleted. Confirm, and it'll delete them all. You can't delete the last person in the tree, which I guess is what you've already discovered, but you can get rid of everyone else. Hope that helps.

Re: Delete all except Home Person

$
0
0
[Sorry, edited the above post to reflect what I've just discovered! The forum doesn't seem to update the "last post" date on a thread for just an edit]

Re: Some leaves come up; others that should do not

$
0
0
Yes, my problem is exactly the same as yours. When I make an edit of some kind, things do show. So I understand what you are saying. Just cannot look at the entire family tree view and see the leaves that should be there for sure. Otherwise things seem to be working well other than very slow now and then. I am sure they will do an update or patch or something if many are having the same issue. Thank you for your response and to everyone else who responded. We all will get through this.

Re: Checklists in 2017

$
0
0
Of course you can do whatever you want to do. The Genealogy Police aren't going to raid your house and confiscate your computer.

Here is one last .jpg I hope you find helpful. It is two excerpts from a couple of blogs.

Re: FTM Merge Extremely Slow

$
0
0
Yes!! I have over 30k people in my tree and I've found that not only is the actual merge slow, but often the sources and images aren't being downloaded either :( Very frustrating!

Re: Alternate "share to" database - LDS Family Search Family Tree - Handling of burial location field as of Aug. 2017

$
0
0
Just wanted to make a few comments about the "Places" tool. I also find it very useful, mainly to rationalise places and make them consistent across my tree, since they're often full of mistakes and inconsistencies if they're accepted as-is from Ancestry searches or hints, and the "auto-complete" on Ancestry often isn't available or doesn't always work well. (I think it's worse than it use to be - it doesn't seem to pull up matches until you get to a comma, but previously you only needed to add a few character of an address. Also if you enter a location without a specific address, it lists all the specific street addresses that you've already used, making it difficult to find the right match).

But back to FTM, the Places workspace is useful, but for me it's marred by a few problems (apart from the patchiness of the Bing maps coverage, and the speed of course, which is even worse in FTM2017):

Firstly, although you can organise places to move the non-verified part (such as a cemetery name or specific street address) to the detail, that's not preserved in Ancestry. That's understandable and not a major problem, but if you then edit an address in Ancestry e.g. to change a street number, the detail split is lost in FTM when you sync, so you have to re-normalise it all over again. Worse still, MacKiev sometimes suggest deleting your FTM tree and re-dowloading it from Ancestry if you have linkage problems, but that inevitably loses all your hours of patient address verification (and of course colour coding if you've used it) and you have to do much of it all over again.

Secondly, the master Place Authority is far from perfect, with omissions, errors, inconsistent place hierarchies and inappropriate subdivisions, that make it impossible to use fully or properly in many cases. As a result I end up with many places that should be in the four-part hierarchy having to be moved into the detail, losing much of the benefit. As an example, many of the London boroughs are only shown in their historical counties such as Sussex, Surrey or Kent, so to put them in London, as they have been for ages, I have to add them as non-verified details, so they all end up lumped together under "London". That wouldn't be so bad if I could edit the Place Name authority database file myself to correct the problems, but unfortunately they've password protected it.

Re: Alternate "share to" database - LDS Family Search Family Tree - Handling of burial location field as of Aug. 2017

$
0
0
"Firstly, although you can organise places to move the non-verified part (such as a cemetery name or specific street address) to the detail, that's not preserved in Ancestry."

I've never had a problem with the five-part place name being created in FTM and then synced to my Ancestry tree. Nor have I had a problem with the five-part place name being synced out of my FTM or online tree. Perhaps it was because I was using FTM 2012 (non MacKiev) or maybe because I do virtually all editing in FTM and then sync up to Ancestry. Correction: I used to sync up to my online tree.

I share your frustration with the Place Authority database. Perhaps some day, someone will figure out how to make an FTM 2012 PlaceAuthority.db3 editable. I can only hope.
Viewing all 22081 articles
Browse latest View live