FTAnalyzer questions.

[Alexander Bisset]

How it displays in Ancestry's online tree is different to how the data is stored. The online tree is quite cut down compared with how its actually stored. Online data forgets to show BEF, ABT & AFT etc. for instance. Which causes me no end of issues when people mistake my death dates as say 1881-1905 as 1881 which is how Ancestry mistakenly displays any between date. Ancestry's online tree display is just bad in the way it corrupts dates.

 

[Stephen L]

Hope this is the right place to ask. I am thinking about starting to enter 1939 Register data into my family history program. I use Family Tree maker but the same issue would be true for any program.
I am thinking ahead of making it possible to use FT Analyzer with the data. As the 1939 register is a census substitute would it be sensible to enter a Census Fact, with the year 1939, then the place?

Stephen

 

[Tim]

Hope this is the right place to ask. I am thinking about starting to enter 1939 Register data into my family history program. I use Family Tree maker but the same issue would be true for any program.
I am thinking ahead of making it possible to use FT Analyzer with the data. As the 1939 register is a census substitute would it be sensible to enter a Census Fact, with the year 1939, then the place?

Stephen

Hi Stephen, I'd suggest you add it as a Residence Fact? It's more accurate and this will be interpreted correctly by FTA when it caters for 1939.

 

[chrissy1]

Thanks for the link again - I too was thinking of doing that, but forgot what it was called......

 

[chrissy1]

Just located a step by step guide to exporting a gedcom for FT Analyzer from FTM- now loaded OK. Many thanks to whoever wrote that article - I would NEVER have got there without it! Now to try and use FT Analyzer, as it should now function with FTM data.......(My old reunion program wouldn't work.)

Apparently I have 2453 Census facts with no Lost Cousins fact.........all of which I am invited to list today..........(some time maybe, but not all today!)

However, I am not sure how it links in with my LC data, as the report says 0 cousins have been located in any census and I can't locate a list of cousins, ticked or unticked, to add to LC.The instructions state:

The Lost Cousins tab shows you people you have found on a census but have yet to enter onto Lost Cousins. Note this uses a Custom Fact called "Lost Cousins" which you will need to add to your FHP and record against those you have entered at the Lost Cousins Website.

For creating Custom Facts, please see the section in the documentation "Using FTAnalyzer with popular Family History Programs" and then choose the Family History Program.

This report will then show you a list of people that you have entered for that census year but have not recorded a Lost Cousins Fact.

I have read the instructions for FTM and Ancestry, but don't understand. Have I got to go back through every single item I HAVE loaded onto LC and somehow mark them on my FTM program before anything will come up in the LC section?? If so, do I have to then reload the Gedcom onto FTAnalyzer after I have done this.....?

 

[Bryman]

I have read the instructions for FTM and Ancestry, but don't understand. Have I got to go back through every single item I HAVE loaded onto LC and somehow mark them on my FTM program before anything will come up in the LC section?? If so, do I have to then reload the Gedcom onto FTAnalyzer after I have done this.....?

It might appear to be rather a lot of work but that is more or less what you need to do in order to get the advantage of using FTA to identify any missing LC census entries.

FTA is not able to login to LC and see what census references you have already entered so has to rely on being advised by you entering LC facts into your FTM program so that they will appear within the exported Gedcom file. Hence my recommendation that most members would probably find it easier and less daunting to try and add LC facts at the same time as they enter the references to their My Ancestors page at LC. Then to use FTA to identify any that fall through the cracks (hopefully not very many).

To help in your situation, it would ne nice if a file could be produced from LC listing all references entered but that would give Peter extra work to make it available. I think that he would suggest using the existing reports and directing output to a file rather than the screen. That would still not be an end to the matter as you would then have the problem of processing that file to a suitable input format for your FHS.

I fear that it will be a long manual process to update your FTM data and then reload a newly generated Gedcom into FTA. It doesn't have to all be done in one go and perhaps you would be able to plan the updating process in stages using the existing reports from LC, either doing the work in name sequence or by household within census year. I think that the latter would be my preferred approach.

I am not familiar with FTM but perhaps another member may be able to suggest the easiest way to process the required updates. Good luck.

 

[chrissy1]

"I think that he would suggest using the existing reports and directing output to a file rather than the screen. That would still not be an end to the matter as you would then have the problem of processing that file to a suitable input format for your FHS.

I am not sure quite what the above means, but understand it's going to take a lot of work!

Thanks, Bryman, at least I know why it doesn't appear to work!

Apparently I have 2453 relations which appear on censuses covered by LC, 937 of which are already recorded on LC, leaving 1516 still to add, but if 937 now need re-entering on FTM and then the whole tree needs to be downloaded again...... it's not a job for any time soon!!! That daunting prospect has definitely put me off for the foreseeable future.

When I added my relations to LC some years ago, I did not have a FT program which was compatible with FTAnalyzer, so it wasn't possible to complete the processes simultaneously and in any case, the commitment of the 937 names to the FT program ca 1995 possibly predated the advent of LC!

***I have just opened FT Analyzer again and I now get an error message which tells me I need to load a gedcom! Where did it go? I give up.

 

[Bryman]

***I have just opened FT Analyzer again and I now get an error message which tells me I need to load a gedcom! Where did it go? I give up.

Don't give up. It just takes a little while to find out how things work. Every time that you reopen FTA from scratch, you need to specify the name of the Gedcom file for it to process rather than be stuck with what was used previously.

When FTA starts, left click on the File entry in the top row, under the FTA title.
That will produce a drop-down list of which the top one is "Open GEDCOM File...".
Left click on that item and the folder containing the previously used file will be displayed.
You can scroll up/down or move to another folder to find and select the file that you wish to load.

Further to my previous post, there may be a simple way to speed up the updating of FTM for the LC facts already entered. Please check that FTM will allow a new Gedcom file to supply updates to a tree rather than just a complete new tree. Other members may be able to confirm that. It is certainly true for my FHS so I would expect that to be so for FTM.

I will have to perform a few trials to see if my idea works to insert the Gedcom details into the FHS. I will get back after I have done a few tests.

 

[Bryman]

Unfortunately, reversal of the Gedcom generation did not work, at least not in my software. Also, although the Gedcom was accepted as a partial file (ie not a complete reload of everything) it did reset all values for the individual that I was trying to amend. Perhaps FTM might be different but I would need someone else to test in that environment. Sorry to have raised any false hopes.

 

[PhilGee]

I regularly use a Gedcom file to update FTM data via a merge - using another FTM file is also possible.

It works quite well, but there are a few problem areas. Because FTM uses its own family and individual numbering and census/address/occupation data may be in a different order, it has difficulty in matching entries and usually duplicates the data.

There may be a way to use a spreadsheet and Gedcom or report output from FTM to do the job.

Phil

 

[PhilGee]

I have had some thoughts and a quick experiment with FTM2014.1 (the MacKiev update). Without some programming, there doesn't appear to be a really easy way to go ahead but there may be a a filtering system available.

By using the "file>export" "selected individuals" option, you can use the "filter in" "all facts" option with "census" "contains" "1881" "date" (or 1841/1911) to select all individuals with the relevant census entries provided you have actual census ("1 CENS") records - FTM should have created these when you entered your census data.

You can now filter out all the registered LostCousins by using the "filter out" "all facts" option, with "LostCousins" " contains" "1881" "date" (or 1841/1911 as appropriate), leaving only those without the LostCousins flag for the selected year (skip this if there are no LostCousins flags, as the entry will not be there to select).

Select OK, then the "GEDCOM" output format drop-down, remove all ticks from boxes, select OK twice and save the file.

Now the messy bit: for each person you enter on lost cousins, you need to add the three lines below before the "1 NAME" line for that person to add the flag (you can do this without creating the LostCousins event in FTM, as it will be automatically created when you merge the first file)

1 EVEN
2 DATE 1881
2 TYPE LostCousins

replacing 1881 as appropriate.

You can delete all the lines after the line starting "1 SEX" to the line starting "0 @", though it would be worth retaining any lines starting "1 FAMS" or "1 FAMC" as these are "family group" links. You definitely want to remove any lines starting "1 CENS" or "1 RESI" or "1 OCCU" and following lines until the next line starting with a number less than 2 to avoid FTM duplicating these records during the merge. You can do this before adding the LC data to ensure it is removed for everyone.

Then you use "file>merge" to load the gedcom data back into the FTM database and create the LostCousins flags.

As always, there is no guarantee this will always work, as it depends on too many factors, so make sure you have a copy/backup of the ".ftm" file BEFORE you merge the data in.

Phil

 

[chrissy1]

Thanks, Bryman, that explains a lot. I have reloaded the gedcom and it's working now. I am systematically ploughing through the list of relations alive in the 1911 census as thrown up by FT Analyzer, and won't switch the computer off until I have finished 1911, so I won't lose the data or get it in a different order. In the process I am adding 1911 to the LC event, which I managed to create from the very comprehensive instructions online. (Thanks to whoever wrote that - very helpful and in simple computer-idiot language even I could understand) However, the LC site itself has given up on me now! It suddenly stopped working (though all other sites are still responding). It must be objecting to the sudden flurry of activity...............

provided you have actual census ("1 CENS") records - FTM should have created these when you entered your census data.

Phil Gee, only I added the LC event on FTM yesterday, as my previous program (ca 1995) was not compatible with FT Analyzer (or Win 10). I am still working through the thousands of 'shaking leaves' on FTM to ensure that all original census data is added, because prior to purchasing FTM 18 months ago, my only census records were those I laboriously hand-typed in the notes section....... The relevant info was all there, just not in a form that FT Analyzer could pick up....so some census data is probably still missing from FTM. (I am only just moving out of the dinosaur age with regard to FH technology...)

 

[Bryman]

However, the LC site itself has given up on me now! It suddenly stopped working (though all other sites are still responding).

I don't know how late you may have been working but I have often come across something similar, being the other side of the world and hence about 12 hours ahead of UK.

I believe that LC does a scheduled backup every night at either 1am or 2am UK time. For the duration of that activity, one is not able to access anything on the LC site. It normally lasts for about 20 minutes and then everything just carries on as normal, including any request already submitted after the backup started. One just has to be patient.

It would be nice to have a message to explain what is going on but I have learned that it is best to avoid giving Peter yet more things to do. After all, the number of members likely to be active on the site at that time is rather small.

 

[chrissy1]

I believe that LC does a scheduled backup every night at either 1am or 2am UK time. For the duration of that activity, one is not able to access anything on the LC site. It normally lasts for about 20 minutes and then everything just carries on as normal, including any request already submitted after the backup started. One just has to be patient.

Thanks, Bryman. I am guessing that is what happened - it is OK again now and it was around that time last night.

 

[Tim]

it would ne nice if a file could be produced from LC listing all references entered

You can download this file from LC. On the My Ancestors page, click on Show More Detail. A new window opens with the data in it, CTRL+A to highlight all, CTRL+C to copy, and then paste into Excel.

 

[Tim]

I have had some thoughts and a quick experiment with FTM

Hi Phil,
I found your post very interesting, thank you. But I have a number of questions.

For Chrissy, she has no custom Lost Cousins facts in FTM, so she needs to pull the data from the LC site and then compare with the gedcom. The people with a match are the ones that need the custom fact added to FTM.

I like your Merge approach, but have you considered just merging the following data? Would it work?

0 @I7@ INDI
1 EVEN
2 DATE 1881
2 TYPE Lost Cousins

Would this just add these new lines to the original entries?

 

[Bryman]

You can download this file from LC. On the My Ancestors page, click on Show More Detail. A new window opens with the data in it, CTRL+A to highlight all, CTRL+C to copy, and then paste into Excel.

Thanks Tim. I had wondered if something like that might give the desired information but did not follow up when I failed to achieve the required update with my GenoPro software. There is no merge facility available, unlike with FTM.

 

[Bryman]

I like your Merge approach, but have you considered just merging the following data? Would it work?

0 @I7@ INDI
1 EVEN
2 DATE 1881
2 TYPE Lost Cousins

Would this just add these new lines to the original entries?

That was the approach that I tried with GenoPro but without a merge facility it did not work. Also, because this information is not standard for GenoPro, ie Custom Tag, the software does not know what to do with that information. Perhaps FTM is better suited.

 

[PhilGee]

I like your Merge approach, but have you considered just merging the following data? Would it work?

0 @I7@ INDI
1 EVEN
2 DATE 1881
2 TYPE Lost Cousins

Would this just add these new lines to the original entries?

Unfortunately, more information is needed for a successful match. I have just tried merging the following without success:

0 HEAD
1 GEDC
2 VERS 5.5.1
2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED
0 @I140@ INDI
1 NAME Edith Emily /English/
1 EVEN
2 TYPE LostCousins
2 DATE 1871
1 FAMS @F19@
0 @F19@ FAM
1 CHIL @I140@
0 TRLR

This has the same @I and @F numbers as the exported Gedcom, but FTM just adds a new person - presumably, these are just created/used when saving/parsing a Gedcom file and ignored internally. Even adding

1 REFN I0418

which is unique and unchanging doesn't link the data.

Interestingly, the exported Gedcom does not have the "1 CHIL" entries in all the relevant "0 @F" sections - which may be a problem with my system!

Phil

Note: edited as I posted before completion!

 

[PhilGee]

Update: A further set of tests shows that the following will merge successfully provided you set the match level at or below 250 in the advanced drop down when merging.

0 HEAD
1 GEDC
2 VERS 5.5.1
2 FORM LINEAGE-LINKED
0 @I140@ INDI
1 NAME Edith Emily /English/
1 EVEN
2 TYPE LostCousins
2 DATE 1871
0 TRLR

Notes:
The date was used because this person already has 1881 and 1911 entries.
The @I140@ is the identifier created when the tree was exported as Gedcom (it was @I0418@ when the original Gedcom was loaded)
The first 4 and last lines are needed for the Gedcom to be accepted

Phil