Jump to content
cghjr

Redundant ancestors

Recommended Posts

This is my second post on this problem only because I assumed it would definitely be fixed in the first new version which came along. I grew up on Roots software, then Ultimate Family tree. I always keep PAF and Family Tree Maker on my computer. All of these take care of the problem in their ancestry reports. I have several ancestors who are repeated as many as three and four times in my reports. I have pages and pages of memoes which get duplicated each time I run them. PAF lets you select no repeat, a partial repeat, or a full repeat of these individuals. The closest TMG gets to that is to enter a "see above" by the person's name each time it repeats. It would be nice if it would give the number Ie: see person 62. It will not do even that in the ancestor journal, which looks to me like a glorified Ahnentahfal. I'm not slamming the report because I really like it. It just really bugs me to not be able to use such a quality report and have to use the simple ancestor report in PAF instead. I do that to keep from deleting out all those extra copies and then having the numbering system all messed up, which in turn ruins the index.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charles,

I support your push to get this feature added to TMG. I empathise with the amount of extra data that is generated for those in the ancestral lines, which are generally the most researched and documented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fully support the request for a fix to the redundant ancestors problem and to the related issue of married cousins in descendant journal reports.

 

At present there does not seem to be any way of controling the output of a Journal when it includes married cousins. Their descendants are shown twice. In a large "name" database, this can lead to much useless duplication and confusion.

 

The "follow surname only" option is not the solution in most cases, because surname spellings often change from one generation to another (and even if this was not a problem, if the cousins are related on the paternal side, i.e., they are children of two brothers, the female cousin would bear the same surname as her spouse, and her descendants would be included in any case!).

 

I am sure there are many ways of implementing this control, but my prefefence would go to a "follow male lines only" option in which chlidren of married cousins would be continued only on the male side, with a cross-reference to that continuation in the detail concerning the female cousin. This would go a long way in improving the presentation of large descendencies with many intermarriages.

 

Louis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for the fix! I have several families that seemed determined to marry into each other. This option would be a great enhancement.

 

Tim

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

×