TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-07 > 1057090477


From:
Subject: Re: [TMG] Begeman Census - more problems
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 16:14:37 EDT


Kathleen,

Answers interspersed. . .

> I don't have a lot of census data for the family line I am working on at
> present, but plan to go and do some actual research this summer and want to
> know what I have. As I have said, I've been doing this piecemeal for about
> 25 years.

My census extracts were inherited from my mother's 25 years of genealogy. I
felt they had to be entered before I started doing my own census. I tried
several methods before Begeman's came out and wasn't at all satisfied.

What I have accomplished most people probably would have>
> accomplished in a couple years. Most source info is not in the computer. I
> started out with an Apple II genealogy program _years_ ago. I have names
> and notes (handwritten or on old Apple printouts). When I found that I had
> completed copying one census for one county in Wis for the 3rd time, I
> decided some organization had to set in before I did too many more dumb
> things.

I bought my first Apple in 1981. My mother bought her's several years after,
when Family Roots came out. When she passed away I moved all her data onto my
Apple II GS but found Family Roots for Apple was too limiting and bought a PC
and transferred the data to it. When Family Roots went out of business in 1997
I moved to TMG.

> I guess I just kind of jumped right into the advanced mode as I knew that
> was really the only thing to satisfy me in the end - but at the risk of
> needing to learn various aspects as I go along - read - try - read -trial -
> read - do. My question to the list a month ago was given the above shld I
> continue with ver 4 or start w/ver 5. A variety of answers - mostly to do
> Ver 5. That seemed to make the most sense. There are just enough reports
> for me at this time to be helpful - especially the research tasks and lists.
> I know others are waiting very anxiously. Questions below...

I think your right in starting with v5. I can't use it now because I use the
journal report alot for completing work. But in your case your doing mostly
data entry and the individual narrative should be ok for quite awhile.

>
> ****Would you use just the first name or the first name combined with what
> is implied to be the last name - based on how a census is actually taken
> with the line drawn as long as everyone has the same last name.
> Milbee, Neil
> --------- Margaret
> Your Name-census would now be Margaret Milbee - not just Margaret. Is that
> correct?
>

I enter the full name as it is in the census. In the case of a married lady I
would enter it in the name census tag. In the case of the child I would just
use the Name-var tag.

> But this is just as easy as you go to the witness tab of the tag entry
> screen, double click on the
> witness and select the name to print.
>
> **** I assume you would have had to put this name var or Name-Census in
> previously - I seem not to be able to do it right there (one the same screen
> I am entering the witness - correct. Simply put - When do you do data entry
> of your Name-Census for the enums? Would I assume correctly that if the
> census name (Margaret Milbee) is the same as the married name (Margaret
> Milbee) already in the data base that you would not go ahead and
> deliberately create a Name-Census for this person???

I haven't really used the method other than for testing. But I'm sure I would
enter the Census-head, then each of the census-enum and then go back to the
census head and enter the correct name. At that point I might do a test
narrative to make sure it prints ok. (in v4 I have a button on the tool bar for my
test narrative report - this can be done in v5 but I haven't done it and can't
explain it to you)


> How does this approach interface with using ||Margaret Milbee as [M2]?
>
Putting the name in the memo will only print in the sentence of the tag you
entered it in. I suppose you could revise the sentence to print the name like
it does for the witnesses. However, I have gotten use to M2 and if I print a
Individual detail I can easily see what the name in the census was.

> BTW my mother's name was Kathleen also. Her pet peeve was people calling
> her
> Kath-a-leen. -
>
> *** I agree - it was more of a childhood problem than as an adult I'm often
> Kathy - I go by both.
>
> Continued "Thank You's",
> Kathleen/Kathy

My mother became "Kay"

If I missed any of your questions just ask again <g>

When you get this working to your satisfaction. The next step is to
incorporate the relationship into the sentence. This isn't relavant to the 1850, 1860
or 1870 census but becomes important after that. And since your working on 1930
censuses you'll probably want to get it right the first time. You seem to be
pretty brave in starting off in advanced mode, something I would have done
myself <g>

Patt

This thread: