jeffpiper 0 Report post Posted October 29, 2006 I have a person, James Ferguson Herdman, whose Birth is recorded as before 30 June 1891. When I enter a marriage with a date of before 30 September 1913 I get the message The age (0) of James Ferguson Herdman (1265) does not meet the expected minimum age for a person in the Groom role for this tag. Proceed anyway. Is this normal behaviour? Using v6.10. I Reindexed, Optimised and VFI but the same. also closed and reopened the programme. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeAnna Burghart 0 Report post Posted October 30, 2006 At the risk of being disgustingly obvious, you're positive you didn't typo the birth year as 1991? I've done that sort of thing ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GenerationGoneBy 0 Report post Posted October 30, 2006 And make sure the birth date is marked primary. I have done that too a number of times. Somehow I enter the birth, but the primary mark gets toggled off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeffpiper 0 Report post Posted October 30, 2006 At the risk of being disgustingly obvious, you're positive you didn't typo the birth year as 1991? I've done that sort of thing ... And make sure the birth date is marked primary. I have done that too a number of times. Somehow I enter the birth, but the primary mark gets toggled off. It's often the disgustingly obvious you miss but not in this case. And the birth is marked as primary. So neither of those. I do notice that on the Marriage and Death tags, both of which are primary and both of which are before dates, that the age column doesn't calculate an approximate age. Screen shot attached Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GenerationGoneBy 0 Report post Posted October 30, 2006 I think it's the before that is throwing it off, though I don't know why it would. Seems like if someone was born before a date that was before the marriage, it would know the person wasn't 0. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DeAnna Burghart 0 Report post Posted October 31, 2006 Could be it's throwing off the calculation based on the circa date window? I don't know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Les Wylde 0 Report post Posted October 31, 2006 Jeff Just a thought, I sometimes get this sort of message when I am updating birth dates (say from one estimated from a census entry to one from the GRO) and the new date is before the old date. You don't have this though and I wonder if it the use of "before" dates, which cause the problem? On this I wondered why you have chosen to use the "before" dates approach since it appears that you have the quarter and year from the GRO. When I have the quarter dates from the GRO I tend to use custom Birth Reg, Marrige Reg and Death-Reg Tags (in their appropriate Tag Groups, with sentences like: The birth of [RF:Child] was registered <at [L]> in the quarter ending < [D].> <[M].> and for marriage with Role Groom: The marriage of [RF:Groom] and [R:Bride] was registered <at [L]> in the quarter ending < [D]> <[M].> I then simply enter the date as say Sep 1866 and the sentence takes account of it being a quarter date. If say my Death Reg Tag is the only date I have for a death, I make it primary and ages seem to be calculated correctly. So although this doesn't answer your problem it may be a possible if complicated way round it. Les Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeffpiper 0 Report post Posted October 31, 2006 JeffJust a thought, I sometimes get this sort of message when I am updating birth dates (say from one estimated from a census entry to one from the GRO) and the new date is before the old date. You don't have this though and I wonder if it the use of "before" dates, which cause the problem? On this I wondered why you have chosen to use the "before" dates approach since it appears that you have the quarter and year from the GRO. When I have the quarter dates from the GRO I tend to use custom Birth Reg, Marrige Reg and Death-Reg Tags (in their appropriate Tag Groups, with sentences like: The birth of [RF:Child] was registered <at [L]> in the quarter ending < [D].> <[M].> and for marriage with Role Groom: The marriage of [RF:Groom] and [R:Bride] was registered <at [L]> in the quarter ending < [D]> <[M].> I then simply enter the date as say Sep 1866 and the sentence takes account of it being a quarter date. If say my Death Reg Tag is the only date I have for a death, I make it primary and ages seem to be calculated correctly. So although this doesn't answer your problem it may be a possible if complicated way round it. Les Hi Les, I began with the GRO Ref tag to record the details but have considered using the custom Reg tags as possibilities. As you say, it doesn't solve the problem but it may make the tags fit in much better in the overall scheme of things. I presume from your comment that the tags are all in different groups rather than all in the Other group? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Les Wylde 0 Report post Posted October 31, 2006 Jeff The Tags are in seperate groups, so Birth Reg in Birth Tag Group, Marriage Reg in Marriage Tag Group and Death Reg in Death Tag Group. Les Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeffpiper 0 Report post Posted November 1, 2006 JeffThe Tags are in seperate groups, so Birth Reg in Birth Tag Group, Marriage Reg in Marriage Tag Group and Death Reg in Death Tag Group. Les Les, Thanks. Just the job of changing them all. Looks like a two way process using TMG Utility. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Les Wylde 0 Report post Posted November 2, 2006 Les,Thanks. Just the job of changing them all. Looks like a two way process using TMG Utility. Jeff I haven't changed all mine yet. I tend to change the older ones as I come across them by changing the Tag type on the Tag Entry Screen(I originally entered them as straightforward Births, Marriages or Deaths) - I'm slowly getting there. Les Share this post Link to post Share on other sites