Posting of Genealogical Workflow Questions

[History_Hunter]

Good point. I wonder if keeping the Indices in the files, but not recording them in the database is the best way (unless they're all I have at the moment). The Index files I used to establish the family tree should likely be kept separate from those that I examined and determined were not relevant. Filing gets very confusing otherwise. Also; after so many years, I have a lot of records from blind alleys. I'd prefer to store them offline until I need them.

[Pam Downes]

Though I know the rule is ' in case of a disaster, keep a separate copy in another building', do you need online and offline indexes? Can't you have two online files - one of the 'good stuff' and the other of the 'dodgy/not proven'?
My database/spreadsheet is full of background colours denoting where the dates have come from - family knowledge, parish records, transcripts from FamilySearch, BMD certificates, GRO Index, etc. Anything I can't 'prove' is currently left blank.

I do think you're over-thinking it a little bit. Though I admit that over the last eighteen years I think I've amended my recording methods about six times. I finally have one I'm happy with, so am gradually transferring everything over to
version 1067.1.3a

What you have to do is (for want of a better word) analyse exactly how you want your main database to work, what you want it to record, etc.
Then, what else would be useful to record and shove that in a second database.
Use two colours in the second set. One for proven stuff, and the other for non-proven.
The advantage to the two colours/online is that you can file stuff alphabetically, which can make it easier to spot possible errors/definitely rule out some of those blind alleys.

Be brave, have a re-think, and if necessary, alter your way of recording data. Even if it means spending several hundred hours doing so. If you're feeling confused now, it's only going to get worse in the future. I dread to think of how many hours I've 'wasted' in the past on my previous recording methods but they have given me a very solid base to work from.

Pam

[Pam Downes]

Pam;
Sorry if I seemed to imply the equivalence of baptisms and births, burials and deaths. The certainly aren't and I only use baptisms and burials to help me in the general time and place to look for the birth and death info.

Your point about the parish registers for births and deaths not being the same as the civil registers is valid. Though, I'm not sure which is more reliable. I suspect that the Parish Registers might often be more accurate, since they are filled out closer to the event.

]
Documents are only as reliable as the information given at the time/what the person filling out the document thought he heard said/how the person filling out the form thought a word should be spelt. (I refer you to the document in which Shakespeare's surname is spelt three different ways.)
In that regard parish registers are no more accurate than BMD certificates or the census. (Check out the way parents have spelt their own children's names in the 1911 England and Wales census.)

As for marriages, one would hope they are the same during the period when both exist. As you note, both books are signed at the event.

I should note that some of my certificates appear to be comprised of a scanned parish entry superposed on a government form.

Obviously not from the UK.

All this said and done, I believe your point is that one should keep both the civil and ecclesiastical records. If it seemed as if I were saying that I get rid of one when I find the other, this is not the case. I will use whichever one I have unless or until I have both. If I have both, I'll look to see which appears to be most correct and use that data in the database (but keep both records in my files).

Yes, you need to keep copies of both documents as they (usually) record different events. e.g. a birth is not a baptism

The real issue is with the Indices, which I treat as a a "circa" date and finding aid until I can get the actual civil and/or ecclesiastical records. Once I have civil records, do the Indices really have any value?

As previously said, they can be handy if you/anyone else wants to check your work. They are also proof of the origin of a document.

Just an interesting point (not about British records) is that my birth certificate was issued by the local police station in Paris, France. It was typed on a plain sheet of inexpensive paper with an attestation signature by a witness. No reference number. This was in the 50's. Seems that Britain is FAR better at recording births than France. Not yet sure how they made sure they had accurate records.

And many people will say that Scottish and Australian civil registration documents are far superior to those of England and Wales because they contain more information. I do know it's a lot harder to search for French BMDs.

Pam

[History_Hunter]

Pam;

I understand what you're saying, but I may not have explained myself well enough.

When I refer to my "online" database, I am speaking of what I currently maintain in Rootsweb. I do maintain a number of "online" spreadsheets for my current research notes, because I find them useful in spotting patterns and holes in my data. What I was proposing to move long-term "offline" storage (that is on CD/DVD) are the spreadsheets for information that resulted from my going down an incorrect path in my research and which have been corrected in my current "online" version. I would still maintain the most current versions of my supporting spreadsheets (aka. research notes) "online" as a justification for what is in currently in my "online" database.

Note that I am not addressing the issue of backup copies above at all. I have somewhere in the neighbourhood of 8TB of net-drive storage and about 4TB local storage. The 4TB is for day-to-day files and the 8 TB consists of 2 4TB netdrives that are mirrored and used for backup. You can imagine what could happen if I start dumping things on them without culling the garbage and organising the remainder.

Over that past 20 or 30 years, I have been forced to move my database from paper to PAF to The Master Genealogist and currently to Rootsweb. Every time this happens (seems about every 5-8 years or so), I need to go back and validate everything all over, since it never seems to import cleanly andfully. This is why I shudder to throw out anything. But; I've come to the point now that I just can't find anything anymore and I need to purge some of it, just to get my head around where to find things.

The physical notes and raw data are as bad or worse. While individually they are perfectly comprehensible, the variety of formats in which I've been forced to store the information is mind-boggling ... CDs,microfiche,film,digital images etc. I have to get a handle on this or it might as well be gone. The physical files no longer fit in my home office.

As you can see, my goal here is to remove redundant material and yet not lose what is essential.

Sigh...

[Pam Downes]

Um, I notice that you mainly seem to store stuff on online storage places (PAF, Master Genealogist, etc).
Why don't you use a FH programme (e.g.Family Historian), and leave it unattached to anything online. (Though you might be one of those people who let other people see their tree. I only share my stuff with my cousins.) You shouldn't then need to keep changing. I don't know what options you have in the Rootsweb database but you should have a space for 'source citation' or something similar where you enter information such as 'birth registration, x quarter year, place reference number' or 'baptism, date, church, page and entry numbers in the register', etc.
Then it's up to you as to whether you keep a separate spreadsheet with any of those details on it. (My spreadsheet consists of name, year of birth because I have several people with the same name, spouse, then either date of birth or quarter/year in which birth was registered - all mine are in the UK which helps; date of baptism, date or quarter/year of marriage; date or quarter/year of death; date of burial. Then I have columns for each of the census which have a capital O in them if I have a copy of the image; 1939 census; followed by columns for education, military, and wills to remind me to check those sources. If I have done, I type 'yes' in the box. Suddenly realised I also need to add 'workhouse/Poor Law' or something along those lines. Only had a couple of those, but one provided me with two previously unknown children (this is before civil registration).

It sounds as if you have waaaaaaaay more stuff than I've got (though I have got lots not actually written in the way I now want it to be written) but honestly, if I were you I'd bite the bullet and just work my way through all the bumpf, piece by piece.
First of all, decide exactly what details you are going to record and where. Start a spreadsheet like mine, adding in immigation/emigration, naturalisation, etc. You don't have to put dates in, but you could enter C for certificate and PR for parish register.
Start with person A, pretend that you're beginning from scratch but because you already have most of the documents and references you'll need it won't take you so long to enter stuff. As you check something in your main database, tick it off the spreadsheet. Be methodical. I was a bit haphazard with some stuff I recorded earlier this year and as I can't remember exactly which image I saved, I've got to go back through about sixty years of a parish register.
Once you know you have everything recorded satisfactorily, you can then start on your 'odd bits' index. That shouldn't take so long - quick comparison if necessary to stuff already entered then either delete or save for further investigation.
Yes, it's going to take time, but the alternative is that you'll either learn to live with the current mess or just bin it.

You also need to take into consideration that in the years since you began family history many more records are
now available online so you might be able to fill in a few gaps along the way.

Pam

[History_Hunter]

Pam;

I made a typo. Sorry. I use RootsMagic. All the programs I use can be set up to store things only on ones own computer. I store absolutely nothing on a website or cloud storage for privacy reasons and I avoid using links that can get "disconnected" (even locally). This is part of the reason I have so much local storage space.

I'll have a close look at what you do with your spreadsheets. I can always learn something.

You're correct about essentially working my way through it as if starting from scratch. I think that's the only way I can be sure that I haven't missed something important. In addition to ticking off evidence as I use it, I'll set up a file structure and drop the evidence item in the correct folder in the structure as I go. That way, what's left is likely to be duplicates, extra information or trash. Once I have extracted the extra information, entered and filed it, the rest is highly likely to be trash.

As the years have gone by, I've revisited the microfilm/microfiche info on certain people and "freshened it up" as the web-based images have become available. It stands to reason that I likely have quite a bit of duplicate evidence items as a result.

Odd you should mention about filling in gaps. This weekend past I was essentially working through my tree again using the free access to findmypast and adding any new or better quality evidence to my files. Had some nice surprises.

Thank you so much for your help. Sounds like I've got it now. I just need to set up my spreadsheets, filing structure and then work my way through it, checking and filing as I go. It really ought not to be too bad. I've got the information. Just...pray that they don't declare my genealogy program obsolete before I'm done. :>)

[Pam Downes]

Pam;

I made a typo. Sorry. I use RootsMagic. All the programs I use can be set up to store things only on ones own computer. I store absolutely nothing on a website or cloud storage for privacy reasons and I avoid using links that can get "disconnected" (even locally). This is part of the reason I have so much local storage space.

Bad person. Saying 'Rootsweb' got me thoroughly confused so I ended thinking all the programmes you'd used were web-based rather than ones you could use independently on your computer.

I'll have a close look at what you do with your spreadsheets. I can always learn something.

I'm not saying my spreadsheet is the way to do things, but sometimes knowing how someone else does things helps to clear the fog in your brain.

You're correct about essentially working my way through it as if starting from scratch. I think that's the only way I can be sure that I haven't missed something important. In addition to ticking off evidence as I use it, I'll set up a file structure and drop the evidence item in the correct folder in the structure as I go. That way, what's left is likely to be duplicates, extra information or trash. Once I have extracted the extra information, entered and filed it, the rest is highly likely to be trash.

I'm finally beginning to write up all my family history (so far I've just about completed one grandfather and his father using my latest - and final! - system as I'm to dumb to use a proper FH program) and as I do I am going to re-check everything, even down to checking I've typed things like the census reference numbers correctly.

As the years have gone by, I've revisited the microfilm/microfiche info on certain people and "freshened it up" as the web-based images have become available. It stands to reason that I likely have quite a bit of duplicate evidence items as a result.

I've got a 'cure' for that, too. I have a surname folder for each of my four grandparents. Then I have subfolders for BMD certificates, one for each of the census and the 1939 Register, one each for baptisms, marriage 'certificates' from parish registers, one for burials, another for newspaper clippings, with a final one for 'other bits'. You can make as many sub-folders as you need to. I make sure that everything is indexed the same way so it makes it easy to skim down a list. Having the four folders helps if you have the same surnames in different branches - makes the Thomas Smith who married Mary Brown save getting confused with the Thomas Smith who married Elizabeth Green.

Odd you should mention about filling in gaps. This weekend past I was essentially working through my tree again using the free access to findmypast and adding any new or better quality evidence to my files. Had some nice surprises.

Thank you so much for your help. Sounds like I've got it now. I just need to set up my spreadsheets, filing structure and then work my way through it, checking and filing as I go. It really ought not to be too bad. I've got the information. Just...pray that they don't declare my genealogy program obsolete before I'm done. :>)

The important thing with any FH program is that you complete it in accordance with the GEDCOM 'standard'. i.e.enter an address the correct way, in the correct boxes. If you do, there shouldn't be any problem if you ever need a new FH program and have to export your files.

Good luck with everything. Shall we check back in a year's time to see how we're getting on? Though I suspect you might be nearly finished, while I will still be working on the first family name.

Added: I forgot to say that I actually have four spreadsheets - one for each surname of my four grandparents - to match the folders with all the documents.

Pam

[History_Hunter]

Pam;

Would you be adverse to sharing a blank copy of your spreadsheet. There may be things I haven't considered and should.

Regards;
Gary

[Pam Downes]

Hi Gary,
I'll see what I can do, but it will take me a couple of days as I'm busy tomorrow and Thursday, and I will need to make some amendments to the lay-out.
I also perhaps need to write my thinking behind the system. It's evolved slightly as more sources have come online.

We can't send attachments through the forum though I've just realised I might be able to upload a copy to somewhere like imgur and then just post a link. The problem with that is that I am majorly technically challenged, so I will definitely need a couple of days.

I'll get back to you.

Pam

[History_Hunter]

Pam;

I just realised I might be asking a lot of you. I have just created a spreadsheet that is similar to yours, but with columns for "Indices", "Civil" and "Ecc." under each record type (where relevant). This should account for all the different types of images I have for a given event. I've also expanded the "O" (Original, Copy or Image) designation to include "T" for transcripts, since I may want to obtain something better than a transcript or even use "O,T" when I have both. Am going to test this by logging and moving a copy of the data for a few people to a matching file structure. I'll adjust it until it works, then do the rest. Only then will I start putting things into the genealogy program. I tend to store image bibliographic data and any relevant notes in a text file of the same name as the record and within the same directory. That way, I can decouple the researching process from the genealogical tool data entry process.

In designing the sheet, I realized that, luckily, I was very forward thinking when I photographed the microfiche and microfilm frames I wanted to keep in addition to my transcription. I can hardly wait to see how well it works!

When I've tested it, I'll let you know and pass you a link to a shared directory on GoogleDrive from which you can download a copy. The layout I have is flexible enough to allow you to easily add columns for any of your required record types.