Jump to content
M.A.Waldmann

several names for one city simultaneous

Recommended Posts

Please be patient with my text because I'm not so experienced in english writing and this is my first post.

 

I'm searching for a solution in TMG and can't find anything about it in the Newsgroups:

 

In the Data of my work with about 2.400 family-members are some names of cities, that have been change several times. For example: "Ost-Berlin" and "West-Berlin" are now only "Berlin". Most of these cities have been renamed because of political reasons or wars. (Another example may be a name in Polish, in german and the translation in english.)

 

Now my problem:

I've the old names of the cities and would like to hold the names in the records of my database because they are all written in my sources. How can I hold the actual names of the cities simultaniously to the old names.

For me there was only one thinkable way: the field "LatLong". It's the only characteristic, that never changes for any place. So in my thoughts it would / should / could be possible to write several names for the same "LatLong" characteristic and it would be possible to find the old AND all of the other names in the reports. Such like "Ost-Berlin, today: Berlin" or "Bydgoszcz, german: Bromberg".

Another way could be the input of several identical Events. Each one with a different name of the place/city.

But for me these possibilities are too difficult to survey in the Tag entry screen and any report.

 

Until now I didn't find a possibility to write all names for one City in a usefull way for reports.

 

Please help me to understand and to find a way, because I like to avoid city-names like "Bromberg" (Polish: Bydgoszcz).

 

For now I'm very thankful for your patience with me and my text and I hope there's a solution for my problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

No apologies necessary for your text. Your English is much better than my German.

 

A place is a single entry in the Master Place List (MPL) made up of the ten place fields that are combined together for output based on the one place style associated with that place entry. The place text is not stored with a tag. Instead, the tag actually references a place entry in the MPL. If you change an MPL entry, all tags referencing this place entry will change their output. Many different names for the same location can be stored in the MPL. However, an event tag (such as BIRTH) can only link to one location entry in the MPL. You must choose your own non-standard method to refer to other names a location may have had at different times, or other spellings the location may have in this or other languages.

 

Like many users, I do not link event tags to the MPL entry of the current name for a location if that location was known at the time of the event by a now unused name. I link to the MPL entry of the location as it is spelled and specified in the documentation of the event. As of Version 5.0 TMG introduced date ranges for locations and a comment field. (See Start and End Dates in the TMG Help under Edit Place.) This allows MPL place entries to be recorded as they show in documentation, as well as provides the ability to both specify the date range associated with this name, and a way to identify its current name. If you enter a date range for a location name in the MPL, every time you link an event tag to that MPL entry TMG will be check that the event date is within that location's date range. Every MPL entry also has a comment field. You could enter some text like: "See " to identify the place by the name it is currently known. You could also enter text like: "Previously known as " in the comment field of the MPL entry of the current location name. A List of Places report in TMG will show these date and comment fields and provide the cross reference.

 

I have seen two ways to deal with multiple names for the same location in reports, and there may be others. Perhaps you will discover a method that others may wish to hear about. These two methods are:

  1. unusual use of place fields combined with place styles, and
  2. location "pseudo" people.

Unusual use of place fields

If you do not use every one of the ten place fields for data (for example many users do not use [L10]) you can store the full "current" location name in that one unused location field. (There is a maximum of 99 characters for a location field.) Since Place Styles can define which of the 10 fields will output, whether this field will print can be determined by what place style is used. What you put in that unused field will depend upon how you define the Place Style, and/or how you define your output. For example, an event tag sentence might include text like: "" This method is not greatly non-standard. An advantage of this method is that all ten fields are displayed when you open an event tag linked to that place entry, which reminds you of the current name.

 

Location "pseudo" people

Much more non-standard are location "pseudo" people. TMG is a very general purpose relational database program. Therefore, a TMG "person" entry can be thought of more generically as a "XYZ" entry with a name/label, tags that describe possibly dated information or events about an XYZ, the ability to link (relate) XYZs directly or via events to other XYZs and people, and the ability to generate reports about XYZs. If you can force yourself to ignore that TMG labels the XYZ entry a "person" and that it labels the links to other entries as "children", "parents", and "witnesses", then the possible uses of TMG "person" entries, tags, and relationships is limited only by your own imagination.

 

Since this is an unusual use of the "person" entry in a TMG dataset, for each such "person" I add a tag to that "person" (I use a custom "Created" tag type in the Birth group) to explain why this pseudo person was created. I choose to also have a custom PSEUDO flag with a value that indicates not only that this is a "pseudo" person but also what kind, so I can filter for these non-standard "persons" and easily exclude them from reports. I also set a special background color accent based on this flag to visually distinguish entries and tags associated with pseudo persons.

 

As the "names" of these "people" are likely contrived, a special naming scheme usually needs to be defined. Further, the Sort names can be defined to avoid having these "people" sort among "normal" people. You can manually prepend both their SortGiven and SortSurname with some special character (in the past I used a '+' plus sign). I believe a better alternative is to use the Name Styles feature, and define a special name style for each type of pseudo people. This feature allows you to define prepended special characters as part of the Sort names.

 

I define a Location "pseudo" person to link together multiple "place entries" in the MPL that actually refer to the same location. I use multiple Name-Var tags for this "person" with date ranges to reflect when the location was known by each name. TMG Name indices link all these name variations to this one "person". The primary name for this "person" is the Name-Var that is the “current” name. If an event tag links to an MPL entry that refers to this location, I also link the location "person" as a witness (possibly using a custom Role) using the primary "current" name with a witness sentence of "This location is currently named [W]". If a larger area was identified by a single name for a period of time and then subdivided, the larger area "person" could be the "mother" of the multiple subdivided "daughters" who were created/born at the time of the subdivision.

 

Using Location "pseudo" people is more complex, is more non-standard, and takes some effort to set up. However, I have found it useful for dealing with locations that change their name over time.

 

I hope this gives you ideas,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hallo,

 

zunächst ein herzliches Willkommen im Forum. :)

Und keine Bange, daß hier irgendjemandem "der Kopf abgerissen wird", weil vielleicht das Englisch nicht perfekt ist.... was in Deinem Fall übrigens überhaupt nicht der Fall ist. Ist doch super. :)

 

(To all: Sorry that I at least partly reply to this message in German.)

 

I'm searching for a solution in TMG and can't find anything about it in the Newsgroups:

 

Ich gehe davon aus, daß die deutsche TMG Usergruppe bekannt ist. Wenn nein, man findet sie hier: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/tmgde/

Ferner sind die TMG Tips Seiten von Terry Reigel (viele davon sind auch auf Deutsch verfügbar) überaus hilfreich. Sie sind erreichbar über: http://tmg.reigelridge.com/de/index.htm

Eine Suchfunktion ist selbstverständlich auch verfügbar.

 

In the Data of my work with about 2.400 family-members are some names of cities, that have been change several times. For example: "Ost-Berlin" and "West-Berlin" are now only "Berlin". Most of these cities have been renamed because of political reasons or wars. (Another example may be a name in Polish, in german and the translation in english.)

Now my problem:

I've the old names of the cities and would like to hold the names in the records of my database because they are all written in my sources. How can I hold the actual names of the cities simultaniously to the old names.

 

When one records an event for a person (i.e. Birth) one should use the Place Part fields on that Tag Entry Screen for that specific event to record the original place where the event occurred corresponding to the source / document for that event.

 

And if the name for those different place parts changed over time then why not make use the Memo field to i.e. record something like: "Heutige Ortsbezeichnung: XYZ" or "Heutiger Strassenname: XYZ".

To show the content of the Memo field in a report it might additionally be necessary to modify the default sentence structure used for that tag by adding the "M" variable like . Put that variable in conditional brackets "" so that it is only shown in case there's content in that field.

 

Until now I didn't find a possibility to write all names for one City in a usefull way for reports.

 

Could you please give us an example how that should look like ....... write all names for one city.....?

Are you perhaps thinking of something like: Examplecity (1880), East-Examplecity (1900 - 1920), West-Examplecity (1921 - 1945), Examplecity (since 1946)?

And if so where would you like to show something like this in a report in order not to blow up the report unnessacarily and to make it somewhat boring for the reader?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine' may be a simplistic answer, but I enter the place name as it was when the record was created, with the current name in parentheses:

 

Ost-Berlin (now Berlin)

 

I don't feel that the changes in the interim are needed. Though I do note them in the place name memo, for my own research purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hallo,

 

zunächst ein herzliches Willkommen im Forum. :)

Und keine Bange, daß hier irgendjemandem "der Kopf abgerissen wird", weil vielleicht das Englisch nicht perfekt ist.... was in Deinem Fall übrigens überhaupt nicht der Fall ist. Ist doch super. :)

 

(To all: Sorry that I at least partly reply to this message in German.)

Ich gehe davon aus, daß die deutsche TMG Usergruppe bekannt ist. Wenn nein, man findet sie hier: http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/tmgde/

Ferner sind die TMG Tips Seiten von Terry Reigel (viele davon sind auch auf Deutsch verfügbar) überaus hilfreich. Sie sind erreichbar über: http://tmg.reigelridge.com/de/index.htm

Eine Suchfunktion ist selbstverständlich auch verfügbar.

When one records an event for a person (i.e. Birth) one should use the Place Part fields on that Tag Entry Screen for that specific event to record the original place where the event occurred corresponding to the source / document for that event.

 

And if the name for those different place parts changed over time then why not make use the Memo field to i.e. record something like: "Heutige Ortsbezeichnung: XYZ" or "Heutiger Strassenname: XYZ".

To show the content of the Memo field in a report it might additionally be necessary to modify the default sentence structure used for that tag by adding the "M" variable like <[M]>. Put that variable in conditional brackets "<" / ">" so that it is only shown in case there's content in that field.

Could you please give us an example how that should look like ....... write all names for one city.....?

Are you perhaps thinking of something like: Examplecity (1880), East-Examplecity (1900 - 1920), West-Examplecity (1921 - 1945), Examplecity (since 1946)?

And if so where would you like to show something like this in a report in order not to blow up the report unnessacarily and to make it somewhat boring for the reader?

 

Thank you for your detailed help and sorry that I haven't answer until now! (I'll try to answer in english although german would be easier for me.)

I think the idea with the memo-field could be a first step to solve my problem. Thank you for that help!

But I'm thinking "one step further": how to create a report with the list of all cities - including the older names too!?

I think about a link to footnote, source (or some thing like this), where the history of a city-name including a link to the coat of arms, a map, a description of the city could be explained. This wouldn't be boring for a reading even for a researcher because it's at the end of a book and only for those how really would like to know more about ist. On the other hand it would be more difficult for a researcher to search in old documents and compare it with new ones to find the city-name of today or another language. Maybe the MPL should use the LatLong-Field as a key to identify a place on earth. That could maybe realize a Link to maps, Coats of arms etc. (i.e. in an exhibition).

 

Sorry, when I couldn't explain everything very clearly, but I try to think very much further.

Thank you for your help and patience!

greetings from Hannover, Germany

Mark A. Waldmann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mine' may be a simplistic answer, but I enter the place name as it was when the record was created, with the current name in parentheses:

 

Ost-Berlin (now Berlin)

 

I don't feel that the changes in the interim are needed. Though I do note them in the place name memo, for my own research purposes.

 

Thank you for your answer.

I thought about your solution, too. But in the family-history there are many cities and landscapes, that changes their names more than one time. And sometimes some of the family-members returned to the "homeland" of the family - but the name has just changed because of political reasons. So for me it is a bit complicated to research every name of the cities every time.

And there isn't a possibility to include the names of a city that is writen in the memo-field in a Report of all cities i.e. in alphabetical order.

 

Thank you for thinking for my problem.

Greetings from Hannover, Germany

Mark A.Waldmann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... I'm thinking "one step further": how to create a report with the list of all cities - including the older names too!?

I think about a link to footnote, source (or some thing like this), where the history of a city-name including a link to the coat of arms, a map, a description of the city could be explained...

greetings from Hannover, Germany

Mark A. Waldmann

I don't know of a way in TMG to do this other than the pseudo location person method I mentioned (although maybe I am just not creative enough to think of a different way). A pseudo location person for each city could have custom tags for the history of the city-name, exhibits of the coat of arms and maps, a tag for a description of the city, Name-Var tags assigned date ranges for the historical names of the location, and any of these tags could have source citations. You could link any tag for "normal" people to this pseudo person by making the pseudo person a Witness to that tag, possibly by defining a custom role of "Location". A custom sentence for that role might be just the two exclusion marks "--" to prevent a sentence in the text of the report, but the Witness memo might be "For further information about this location, see the separate report for Berlin". That would cause the memo to print as a footnote/endnote since it is not included in the sentence. You could have as many of these pseudo location people for as many cities as you wish. If you define a custom flag (perhaps named PSEUDO) with different values (perhaps N=normal, L=location) then you could produce reports that filtered on that flag and include or exclude such pseudo location people from the report. For example you could produce a report that was nothing but these pseudo location people for an appendix to some other report.

 

Hope this gives you ideas as you think "one step further",

Edited by mjh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your detailed help and sorry that I haven't answer until now! (I'll try to answer in english although german would be easier for me.)

I think the idea with the memo-field could be a first step to solve my problem. Thank you for that help!

 

Hi, Mark - you're welcome. :)

 

But I'm thinking "one step further": how to create a report with the list of all cities - including the older names too!?

I think about a link to footnote, source (or some thing like this), where the history of a city-name including a link to the coat of arms, a map, a description of the city could be explained. This wouldn't be boring for a reading even for a researcher because it's at the end of a book and only for those how really would like to know more about ist. On the other hand it would be more difficult for a researcher to search in old documents and compare it with new ones to find the city-name of today or another language. Maybe the MPL should use the LatLong-Field as a key to identify a place on earth. That could maybe realize a Link to maps, Coats of arms etc. (i.e. in an exhibition).

 

Please additionally see PM (Personal Message) sent directly to you in German. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please be patient with my text because I'm not so experienced in english writing and this is my first post.

 

I'm searching for a solution in TMG and can't find anything about it in the Newsgroups:

 

In the Data of my work with about 2.400 family-members are some names of cities, that have been change several times. For example: "Ost-Berlin" and "West-Berlin" are now only "Berlin". Most of these cities have been renamed because of political reasons or wars. (Another example may be a name in Polish, in german and the translation in english.)

[Further text deleted]

 

Here is an idea you might use. This would not satisfy your ultimate objective but may come close enough.

 

First, for each event use the place consistently by either the current name or the original name. The latter may be preferred because the name may change yet again and later readers of your work may prefer that.

 

Second, insert an asterisk or other symbol at the end of the city, state or country name if there are other names by which that place is known.

 

Third, for those places with that symbol, insert, in the place record, a comment field identifying the other names of the place, perhaps identifying the date range that name was in effect.

 

Fourth, for an appendix of your document, make one or more "list of places" reports filtered on fields containing that symbol, each report sorted by the field having one of those symbols, and include in the output the comments field.

 

In order to have the reports look nice in the final publication you might produce each report in Microsoft Excel format, then import that as a table into a Microsoft Word document. Printing either form (Excel or Word) could make it possible for the text in the comments column to wrap and make it more readable.

 

As introduction to your document you might point out the significance of the symbol and refer to the appendices.

 

In the event that you opt to produce an internet site using John Cardinal's program Second Site, you wil find that a place index is produced and this should serve a purpose similar to that of the proposed appendix.

 

I an sure that we would be most interested in learning about the technique you finally choose.

 

Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But I'm thinking "one step further": how to create a report with the list of all cities - including the older names too!?

I think about a link to footnote, source (or some thing like this), where the history of a city-name including a link to the coat of arms, a map, a description of the city could be explained. This wouldn't be boring for a reading even for a researcher because it's at the end of a book and only for those who really would like to know more about it. On the other hand it would be more difficult for a researcher to search in old documents and compare it with new ones to find the city-name of today or another language.

 

Mark,

 

The Master Place Index in Second Site will give you this kind of list! In the Place list, SS also places a blue "i" for information when there is a memo for a place. It is a hypertext link to the Place memo. You can also attach exhibits and the little camera shows up.

 

Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark,

 

Jan made an excellent suggestion that will work for linking locations in Second Site to some master location. However you seem to want footnotes/endnotes linked to a place-name in a narrative to refer to a separate narrative about the location and all its place-names.

 

I don't know of a way in TMG to do this other than the pseudo location person method I mentioned...A custom sentence for that "Location" role might be just the two exclusion marks "--" to prevent a sentence in the text of the report, but the Witness memo might be "For further information about this location, see the separate report for Berlin". That would cause the memo to print as a footnote/endnote since it is not included in the sentence....

I think my proposal for location "pseudo" people will accomplish this, but my method for producing the footnote/endnote described above is not correct. That method produces a footnote/endnote in the narrative of the location pseudo person, not in the main narrative.

 

I think the following will do what you want. For example, if a Hans Schmidt was born in Ost-Berlin and you want a footnote/endnote in his Birth tag sentence to refer to your discussion of Berlin, you could do that with the following custom sentence in the BIRTH tag of Hans. You would put the old place-name (Ost-Berlin) as the location for the tag, and would link the location pseudo person (Berlin) as a Witness using the custom role of "Location". Now modify the sentence in the BIRTH tag for Hans to have an embedded citation:

[P] was born [L][CIT:]For details about [L] see the report on [R+:Location].[:CIT]

 

You could add this Witness and embedded citation to any tag sentence where you wanted this reference. While the embedded citation can be added to a "local" version of the tag, roles must first be defined as possible in the "global" definition of a tag type.

 

Hope this gives you ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone!

Sorry, that too much time has passed since my last posting. But I'm new on TMG since may 2006 and not too quick in trying every idea from professionals you've brought to my topic. But I'm very happy about SO many different and very good ideas. I'll try everyone to find a solution. Only for now: Thank you all.

Greetings from Hannover, Germany

Mark A. Waldmann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several good "work around" methods have been proposed here in response to Mark's original question and this is not really a response to Mark's question, but an addition to the TMG wish list! It's great he's thinking ahead, because this is a problem in TMG all of us have! Although the normal genealogist methodology is to enter the place name as it was given at the time of the tag/event, the name will change over time, even now! We need, at least, some way to refer to the current administrative breakout for the place too. Two place names (and maybe more) should be linkable to each place, both for footnote purposes in reports and also for search purposes.

 

TMG links to several place search sites and at least one companion program for place searches--Map My Family Tree, Multimap, MapQuest, USGS, etc. All of these look up the name of a place by its current name and current administrative breakdown; not that old one! So, to make use of these, we also need a way of linking the current administrative breakdown to the place! The simplest solution, entering the old and new name in a parenthesis relationship in TMG, causes these sites to be unalbe to locate the place at all!

 

I'd like to suggest TMG fix this problem of linking multiple place names for one place. The solution would be to add a link from one MPL entry to another MPL entry with the current place name and to allow at least the first entry for the place in a report, to link with a footnote giving the current administrative name of the place. Then, if like Mark, we wanted to put an historical appendix in our book describing the place, we could reference it in that footnote too.

 

And, while they're fixing place problems, TMG might also look at the idea of adding further administrative place fields; rather than limiting us to City, County, State, Country. For example, in the U.S., we need a place to put the "township" name other than "City, township" in the city field. For Germany (and other countries too) there needs to be a place to put the "region/regirungsbezirk" name other than "County, region" in the County field. It is not uncommon for other countries to have another administrative breakout, such as the German Region or the China's Prefecture, between County and State or another administrative breakout, such as a District, between City and County! This is especially true when looking at historical administrations.

 

Please consider this not just a response to Mark's original question; but also an addition to the TMG wish list!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And, while they're fixing place problems, TMG might also look at the idea of adding further administrative place fields; rather than limiting us to City, County, State, Country. For example, in the U.S., we need a place to put the "township" name other than "City, township" in the city field. For Germany (and other countries too) there needs to be a place to put the "region/regirungsbezirk" name other than "County, region" in the County field.

You can do that now. Place styles were developed to allow users to create any set of place fields they need, and as many different sets as they like. They allow you to change the labels on the fields, and to assemble the data entered in those fields any way you like when output to reports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm well aware that you can add fields to the places. I phrased that comment poorly.

 

Even though you can add places to the place list, it requires you to rearrange the City, County, State, Country set up. And, unfortunately, that setup is used by other programs as it is, so that if you put the "region" in the State field and move State and Country down one field, you mess up other things in the program. And if you move all the fields up one instead of back one, ditto results. So, you don't want to do that, because you then can't use the TMG program to its fullest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your text.

 

It is greatful idea to put the topic in the TMG-wishlist. As I wrote some time ago: for me the only unchangeble identifier for a city is the position in longitude and latitude on the Earth. To link to this identification every Name or Title, that everyone need for his individual work should IMHO be a way to think about. So I can imagine, that there will be a MPL with a key "Long/Lat", one primary Data-entry (that one you found in your individual sources / documents / etc.) and (like in the exhibitions) as many other entries that you would like to link with this position on the surface of the earth. The only problem would be to find the exact indentification of every needed position.

In a further step it could be possible to enter Images or other documents in the exhibition of every single city-name.

 

For me there are two questions about the rearranging of fields:

If I rearrange any fields in my TMG, how can I export / import data with other People without the risk of losing information or import data in wrong fields.

And

In my individual work on the ancestors for me and my partner, there are some changes in TMG that I need everytime, some are only for one project and other changes are only to try anything in great data-sets (for example: like a footnote-report about the exhibitions with all images). How can I control to use the right configuraion of "field-changes" for the right project at the right time if I changes teh field-constellation?

 

Sorry, but I'm not SO experienced in english-writing, but I hope I could give you the possibility to understand my "way-of-thoughts"

 

That you and greeting from germany

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark,

You seem to be asking about my reference to creating a new place style.

 

You certainly can create a customized place style and for a long time, I used a custom German place style for all my German ancestors. In my custom place style, fields were defined as 1=detail, 2=city, 3=county, 4=regirungsbezirk, 5=state, and 6=country. That is, I moved all the place fields up to add a field for regirungsbezirk in between County and State. I moved the fields forward, rather than back, because TMG help suggested the "State" and "Country" fields should not be changed since reports expect them where they are in fields 5 & 6. This worked very well for my purposes on the screen. To make this change, follow these instructions: Create a New Place Style:

1. ONLY POSSIBLE IN ADVANCED MODE (file, preferences, data entry).

2. Click Tools, Master Style List, Places, style type = places.

3. In filter box change “all data sets” to “all unlocked data sets” or a “specific dataset name”.

4. Click Add.

5. Type a new style name.

6. Right click on a field to add a new field type.

7. Example = right click “county” field.

8. Click “Modify labels of this type”.

9. Edit labels box appears.

10. Click add.

11. In box at bottom, type in a new field name, eg: regirungsbezirk.

12. Click add again and “regirungsbezirk” appears on list of labels above.

13. Click Ok.

14. On Edit Place Style Screen, click dropdown arrow next to County field,

15. Scroll down to “regirungsbezirk” and click.

16. In Output template box, replace <[County],> with <[Regirungsbezirk],> if this is not automatically done already.

17. Repeat this proceedure with the city, detail, and address fields, changing them to respectively: Kreis, town/village, detail, then Click Ok & Close.

 

BUT, I stopped using this custom field structure because I found not only were the State and Country expected to be in fields 5 and 6, but many other programs also expect City and County to be in fields 3 & 4!

 

For example, the search programs attached to TMG for mapping, would not accept my German place names--such as Issiagu, Kreis Hof, Oberfranken, Bayern, Germany--because the search programs look for the "city" in the TMG defined City field and this custom place style was placing the "city" in what TMG defined as the "detail" field and the "county" in the field TMG defined as "city."

 

Now, instead, I type all my German places into the place fields as TMG defined them, using commas to separate the extra administrative places. In my example, now,

3 City = Issigau,

4 County = Hof, Oberfranken

5 State = Bayern,

6 Country=Germany.

Now, the external search programs recognize this place name!

 

Therefore, I think you are correct to believe if you rearrange the fields and create a custom place style that redefines the place fields, you will have some cleaning up to do when you import from or export to other programs. Other programs, like the search programs, probably will assume TMG output stays with the City, County, State, Country breakout for place fields 3,4,5,and 6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×