RootsMagic, FamilySearch Family Tree ID Numbers, & RootsMagic Facebook Page

My genealogy program of choice is RootsMagic which I use in conjunction with FamilySearch's Family Tree.  Each individual on Family Tree (FT) has a unique ID #.  Robert Laws's number is KDQ1-33T.

When I research on FamilySearch and find a document that I want to add as a source to an individual, I need to know the person's ID #. 



Ideally, I would like to be able to click on RootsMagic, find the person, check the number, then return to FamilySearch Family Tree and choose the individual with that number and add the source.

I scouted through Bruce Buzbee's book, Getting the Most Out of RootsMagic 7, but was unable to determine how to add an ID # and have it appear next to the surname.  I finally decided to add it manually, adding a few spaces after the name, then typing the number in parentheses.  Perfect, I thought.

But not so perfect.  When I looked at the list of individuals on the left sidebar of RootsMagic I saw the usual alphabetical list -- except that Robert Laws was not in order because the ID # had prevented it.  Darn.  That didn't work.

The light bulb came on and headed to the RootsMagic Facebook page. 



Last evening I posted my question.

I know there must be an easy way to add FamilySearch Person ID#s to the individuals in my RootsMagic tree but I have been unable to find out how. Can anyone help, please? 

Within an hour someone had responded with clear, concise directions.  By the time I checked Facebook this morning, others had chimed in with more questions to determine exactly what I wanted to do and exactly how I wanted the results to appear and responded with comments.  More clarity about using RootsMagic's FamilySearch Central came soon after.  Family historians are the best and I'm becoming a fan of Facebook!

If you're like I was and want to add the FamilySearch Family Tree ID #s to your individuals in RootsMagic, these are the steps:
> Click File at the upper left of the program.
> Choose FamilySearch Central.  It will ask you to log into FamilySearch.
> Click AutoMatch at the top of the screen and let the program do its work.

AutoMatch will match individuals from Family Tree with individuals in your RootsMagic program without adding any data.  According to Getting the Most Out of RootsMagic 7 it must be an "undeniable match" which, I assume, would include name, birth and death dates and locations, parents, etc.  But, of course, you can match each person individually.

Now I'm a fan of RootsMagic's FamilySearch Central, too.  Technology is so amazing!

--Nancy.

Copyright ©2017 Nancy Messier. All Rights Reserved.
.

A Touch of Mytreeitis

Ron Tanner has talked about mytreeitis for a number of years at RootsTech.  It's the non-infectious disease of being too possessive about one's FamilySearch Family Tree and the individuals who are added there.  For the longest time I've had not problems with others adding the wrong individuals as ancestors, probably because not many people were working on the same lines.  But when I began looking at "my" tree more closely this week, I've seen several problems.  And now... now I have mytreeitis. 

Family records tell me that Robert Laws and Elizabeth Thompson are the parents of my great-grandmother Elizabeth Laws Doyle.  Family records stop with Robert and Elizabeth so, in truth, I don't know who Robert's parents are.  Maybe they are Robert Laws and Ann Maddison but if they are, wouldn't it have been kind of the person who added Robert and Ann to have also added sources, or at least a reason statement, to help document this parent/child relationship as well as their marriage?

When I search for Ann Maddison I find no record on FamilySearch or Ancestry that connects her with Robert Laws, let alone Elizabeth Laws Doyle.  But the fact is, I can't definitively say that Robert and Ann are not the parents of Robert Laws.  However, other sources on FamilySearch seem to indicate that Robert's parents may be Margaret Burton/Buston and George Laws.

Maybe I'm too careful.  I don't add individuals to my genealogy software program (let alone an online tree) until I have enough information to be relatively certain of names, relationships, and dates.

I would like to ask my cousins and other relatives who add people to FamilySearch Family Tree to please leave "my" tree alone.  But I won't.  While it may be frustrating, challenging, and annoying to have people on the tree without any documentation, I know having these unknown individuals and relationships will encourage me to research more and, hopefully, make me a better and more careful researcher.

Ah, the joys and challenges of a shared, online family tree.  And the challenge of mytreeitis.  I'll recover.

--Nancy.

Copyright ©2017 Nancy Messier. All Rights Reserved.
.

Data Problem: "Birth after Mother's Child-Beaing Years"

This is my first experience with this kind of data problem at FamilySearch Family Tree.  I am, perhaps, too careful with my research and hesitate to add anyone to a tree until I feel confident I have enough documentation to convince me of the accuracy of the names, dates, and relationships.  I added Abel and Eliza (Hartley) Armitage and their two daughters to Family Tree a number of years ago, but another attached Abel's parents.  I'm aware of his parents names from Abel's baptism record but I don't think names alone are enough to add them to Family Tree.

A few weeks ago I was looking at my Armitage line on FamilySearch, specifically Abel Armitage and his parents, and was surprised to see this message:  "Data Problems:  Birth after Mother's Child-Bearing Years."  Oops.


Abel's parents are shown as John Armitage, no birth year noted, and Hannah Baxter, born 1760.


What is the source of the problem?  Other records for Abel -- baptism and a series of census records -- consistently place his birth year at about 1821.  If that year is accurate, then the problem must lie with the person named as his mother, Hannah Baxter, or with her birth date.

Abel's baptism record gives only his parents' given names, John and Hannah.  It is the only record I've found with both of his parent's names on it.  Abel appears in the 1841 U.K census, at age 20, living away from home.  By 1851 he was already married.   


Abel's 1847 marriage record to Eliza Hartley names only his father John Armitage.




There are seven sources attached to Hannah Baxter Armitage on FamilySearch Family Tree.  Six are baptism records for children and the other is a marriage record with her name as "Hannah Baxter OR Pearson."  A note tells me that Hannah was created based on an extracted IGI record and can be found in "England Marriages, 1538–1973."  The citation states, "John Armitage and Hannah Baxter Or Pearson, 09 Aug 1784; citing Saint Peter, Huddersfield, York, England."

If Hannah had been 16 at the time of her marriage in 1784, her birth year calculates to about 1768.  Based on these calculations, she would have been 53 in 1821, the approximate year Abel was born.  There is a slim possibility that she may have had a child at that late age.  From Family Tree, the birth years of children were 1803 (2 children, George and Harriet), 1818 (Marianne), and 1821 (Abel and James).  Is there is any accuracy to these children?  If so, were the ones born in the same year twins or born at least nine months apart during the year?

Now begins the search for Hannah, mother of Abel Armitage, with only Abel's baptism record as a source.  What's sad is that six generations prior to Hannah Baxter are already named and linked in FamilySearch Family Tree.

This reminds me why I am cautious about adding people to my own personal family tree in RootsMagic and even more cautious about adding them to a public tree.  This also reinforces how important it is to consider dates and ages of parents and children.  Keep a calculator handy!

Have you had similar experiences with your families in public trees?  I'm sure it's much more common than I realize.

--Nancy.

Copyright ©2017 Nancy Messier. All Rights Reserved.
.