Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

Expand Messages
  • S Douglas Cline
    Thank you Gaylon for this information. It is very helpful. AND I sincerely hope that the API for reconciling duplicates will be made available by the Church
    Message 1 of 26 , Nov 11, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you Gaylon for this information. It is very helpful. AND I sincerely
      hope that the API for reconciling duplicates will be made available by the
      Church for AQ's engine to do this in the future for Family Tree. AQ has
      always been less cumbersome, more intuitive, faster and overall more
      efficient than any of the previous Church software. Let's hope they give
      you full access to drive FT through the AQ engine. Frankly, I don't
      understand any reluctance on their part for this not to happen, especially
      now that it has worked so well in the past with nFS. So we'll hope for the
      best !



      Thanks again,



      Doug Cline







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Mary-Theresa Dameron
      My understanding from reading was that effective on October 31st, the combine and/or separate feature is no longer active in New FamilySearch. When opening the
      Message 2 of 26 , Dec 6, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        My understanding from reading was that effective on October 31st, the
        combine and/or separate feature is no longer active in New FamilySearch.
        When opening the link in AQ, the program refers me to Family Tree.



        From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Gaylon Findlay
        Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:54 PM
        To: AQ NFS
        Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS





        I haven't heard anything official about whether the combine capability would
        be removed from the FamilySearch API, and therefore from AQ's ability to
        provide it. From various things I had heard, I assumed that the combine
        capability would have been blocked by now, but just the other day I tested
        this to be sure, and it is still there. You have already heard this from
        others, but I think this is an important preface to the other observations I
        am making:

        I believe that when you currently combine nFS records using AQ, that this
        combining is also reflected in the Family Tree. For example, if you are
        combining record "AAAA-BBB" with "CCCC-DDD", one of these two records will
        seemingly disappear, as it is combined with the other. And I think it will
        not only be removed from view in nFS, but in the Family Tree as well.

        Based on the information posted on nFS, I believe that FamilySearch would
        prefer that you use the Family Tree to merge people, but they have still
        made it available to combine using AQ. I think that when you combine records
        in nFS using AQ, that FamilySearch does a corresponding automatic merge in
        Family Tree to keep the two systems in sync.

        Gaylon

        ----- Original Message -----

        From: "S Douglas Cline" <clinesd@... <mailto:clinesd%40comcast.net>
        >
        To: "AQ NFS" <AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> >
        Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 11:15:48 AM
        Subject: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

        Gaylon,

        I thought the video you most recently posted to this user group was most
        informative. Thank you.

        I have a question that I would like to ask: As we are all aware, New Family
        Search will go away sometime in the near future in favor of Family Tree, but

        I understand that for the time being, the Church is keeping New Family
        Search's data base and Family Tree's data base in sync with each other.
        Nevertheless, it is also evident that certain features of nFS are being
        taken away, forcing if you will, us to use Family Tree's features. An
        example of this is the ability to merge and unmerge individuals. Even
        though the ability to combine and un-combine is now defunct in nFS, this
        ability is still available through AQ. An example of this is when linking
        an individual in one's local data base to nFS, if several "hits" are
        encountered in this process, then AQ has the ability to combine and sync
        these "hits" into one. Also in the "Review with Family Search" option in
        AQ, AQ allows to combine spouses and children, etc.

        My question is this: If I use AQ's ability to combine individuals and
        family members in nFS using the methods I just described above, are they
        still reflected and synced with the data base in Family Tree? And for that
        matter, even though it appears like people are being combined in nFS by
        these same methods, is it really taking effect in nFS (since those combining

        functions are purportedly disabled)?

        Thanks in advance for your response. And by the way, though I don't
        participate as much as others on this site I watch assiduously the
        conversations that take place and learn a great deal in the process. Thanks
        again for a great product and for the great support that you and your team
        render to us users!

        S Douglas Cline

        Brown & Young Companies

        Cell: 801 560-2340

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        ------------------------------------

        Yahoo! Groups Links

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Leslie Vaughn
        I have been syncing/linking and combining records on NFS tonight. I have been adding information to individuals on nfs thru AQ and downloading information
        Message 3 of 26 , Dec 6, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I have been syncing/linking and combining records on NFS tonight. I have
          been adding information to individuals on nfs thru AQ and downloading
          information from nfs to AQ. Yesterday I did a bunch of combining on nfs
          using AQ.





          Leslie Vaughn







          From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
          Mary-Theresa Dameron
          Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:24 PM
          To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS
          Importance: High





          My understanding from reading was that effective on October 31st, the
          combine and/or separate feature is no longer active in New FamilySearch.
          When opening the link in AQ, the program refers me to Family Tree.

          From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
          [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
          Of
          Gaylon Findlay
          Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:54 PM
          To: AQ NFS
          Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

          I haven't heard anything official about whether the combine capability would
          be removed from the FamilySearch API, and therefore from AQ's ability to
          provide it. From various things I had heard, I assumed that the combine
          capability would have been blocked by now, but just the other day I tested
          this to be sure, and it is still there. You have already heard this from
          others, but I think this is an important preface to the other observations I
          am making:

          I believe that when you currently combine nFS records using AQ, that this
          combining is also reflected in the Family Tree. For example, if you are
          combining record "AAAA-BBB" with "CCCC-DDD", one of these two records will
          seemingly disappear, as it is combined with the other. And I think it will
          not only be removed from view in nFS, but in the Family Tree as well.

          Based on the information posted on nFS, I believe that FamilySearch would
          prefer that you use the Family Tree to merge people, but they have still
          made it available to combine using AQ. I think that when you combine records
          in nFS using AQ, that FamilySearch does a corresponding automatic merge in
          Family Tree to keep the two systems in sync.

          Gaylon

          ----- Original Message -----

          From: "S Douglas Cline" <clinesd@... <mailto:clinesd%40comcast.net>
          <mailto:clinesd%40comcast.net>
          >
          To: "AQ NFS" <AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
          <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> >
          Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 11:15:48 AM
          Subject: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

          Gaylon,

          I thought the video you most recently posted to this user group was most
          informative. Thank you.

          I have a question that I would like to ask: As we are all aware, New Family
          Search will go away sometime in the near future in favor of Family Tree, but

          I understand that for the time being, the Church is keeping New Family
          Search's data base and Family Tree's data base in sync with each other.
          Nevertheless, it is also evident that certain features of nFS are being
          taken away, forcing if you will, us to use Family Tree's features. An
          example of this is the ability to merge and unmerge individuals. Even
          though the ability to combine and un-combine is now defunct in nFS, this
          ability is still available through AQ. An example of this is when linking
          an individual in one's local data base to nFS, if several "hits" are
          encountered in this process, then AQ has the ability to combine and sync
          these "hits" into one. Also in the "Review with Family Search" option in
          AQ, AQ allows to combine spouses and children, etc.

          My question is this: If I use AQ's ability to combine individuals and
          family members in nFS using the methods I just described above, are they
          still reflected and synced with the data base in Family Tree? And for that
          matter, even though it appears like people are being combined in nFS by
          these same methods, is it really taking effect in nFS (since those combining

          functions are purportedly disabled)?

          Thanks in advance for your response. And by the way, though I don't
          participate as much as others on this site I watch assiduously the
          conversations that take place and learn a great deal in the process. Thanks
          again for a great product and for the great support that you and your team
          render to us users!

          S Douglas Cline

          Brown & Young Companies

          Cell: 801 560-2340

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

          ------------------------------------

          Yahoo! Groups Links

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jim Pitt 48
          Like Leslie I have been syncing/linking and combining records. I have been doing it throughout all of November/December without any problems. Jim Pitt ...
          Message 4 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Like Leslie I have been syncing/linking and combining records. I have been doing it throughout all of November/December without any problems.

            Jim Pitt


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Leslie Vaughn
            To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 4:29 AM
            Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS



            I have been syncing/linking and combining records on NFS tonight. I have
            been adding information to individuals on nfs thru AQ and downloading
            information from nfs to AQ. Yesterday I did a bunch of combining on nfs
            using AQ.

            Leslie Vaughn

            From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            Mary-Theresa Dameron
            Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:24 PM
            To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS
            Importance: High

            My understanding from reading was that effective on October 31st, the
            combine and/or separate feature is no longer active in New FamilySearch.
            When opening the link in AQ, the program refers me to Family Tree.

            From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
            [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
            Of
            Gaylon Findlay
            Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 7:54 PM
            To: AQ NFS
            Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

            I haven't heard anything official about whether the combine capability would
            be removed from the FamilySearch API, and therefore from AQ's ability to
            provide it. From various things I had heard, I assumed that the combine
            capability would have been blocked by now, but just the other day I tested
            this to be sure, and it is still there. You have already heard this from
            others, but I think this is an important preface to the other observations I
            am making:

            I believe that when you currently combine nFS records using AQ, that this
            combining is also reflected in the Family Tree. For example, if you are
            combining record "AAAA-BBB" with "CCCC-DDD", one of these two records will
            seemingly disappear, as it is combined with the other. And I think it will
            not only be removed from view in nFS, but in the Family Tree as well.

            Based on the information posted on nFS, I believe that FamilySearch would
            prefer that you use the Family Tree to merge people, but they have still
            made it available to combine using AQ. I think that when you combine records
            in nFS using AQ, that FamilySearch does a corresponding automatic merge in
            Family Tree to keep the two systems in sync.

            Gaylon

            ----- Original Message -----

            From: "S Douglas Cline" <clinesd@... <mailto:clinesd%40comcast.net>
            <mailto:clinesd%40comcast.net>
            >
            To: "AQ NFS" <AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
            <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> >
            Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 11:15:48 AM
            Subject: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

            Gaylon,

            I thought the video you most recently posted to this user group was most
            informative. Thank you.

            I have a question that I would like to ask: As we are all aware, New Family
            Search will go away sometime in the near future in favor of Family Tree, but

            I understand that for the time being, the Church is keeping New Family
            Search's data base and Family Tree's data base in sync with each other.
            Nevertheless, it is also evident that certain features of nFS are being
            taken away, forcing if you will, us to use Family Tree's features. An
            example of this is the ability to merge and unmerge individuals. Even
            though the ability to combine and un-combine is now defunct in nFS, this
            ability is still available through AQ. An example of this is when linking
            an individual in one's local data base to nFS, if several "hits" are
            encountered in this process, then AQ has the ability to combine and sync
            these "hits" into one. Also in the "Review with Family Search" option in
            AQ, AQ allows to combine spouses and children, etc.

            My question is this: If I use AQ's ability to combine individuals and
            family members in nFS using the methods I just described above, are they
            still reflected and synced with the data base in Family Tree? And for that
            matter, even though it appears like people are being combined in nFS by
            these same methods, is it really taking effect in nFS (since those combining

            functions are purportedly disabled)?

            Thanks in advance for your response. And by the way, though I don't
            participate as much as others on this site I watch assiduously the
            conversations that take place and learn a great deal in the process. Thanks
            again for a great product and for the great support that you and your team
            render to us users!

            S Douglas Cline

            Brown & Young Companies

            Cell: 801 560-2340

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

            ------------------------------------

            Yahoo! Groups Links

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • S Douglas Cline
            As like the others, I am still able to combine records in nFS through Ancestral Quest. S Douglas Cline [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Message 5 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              As like the others, I am still able to combine records in nFS through
              Ancestral Quest.



              S Douglas Cline





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Mary-Theresa Dameron
              My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn t really talk to FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest database? If you are
              Message 6 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn't really talk to
                FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest
                database? If you are trying to uncombined individuals and click on the
                option to link to FamilySearch, you are warned on the screen that all such
                changes should be in FamilyTree.



                Mary-Theresa Dameron



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • S Douglas Cline
                Mine are being updated I FT also. SD Cline s iPhone 5
                Message 7 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Mine are being updated I FT also.

                  SD Cline's iPhone 5
                • stew999@gmail.com
                  Why is anyone continuing to combine or uncombine duplicates in nFS? nFS is slated to be withdrawn in early 2013 - I know they still have to transfer Notes and
                  Message 8 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Why is anyone continuing to combine or uncombine duplicates in nFS?



                    nFS is slated to be withdrawn in early 2013 - I know they still have to
                    transfer Notes and any nFS Sources before then.



                    The message is - get off nFS asap - do all your corrective work in Family
                    Tree without the complication of duplicates.



                    ===Stewart



                    From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                    Mary-Theresa Dameron
                    Sent: 07 December 2012 20:40
                    To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS





                    My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn't really talk to
                    FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest
                    database? If you are trying to uncombined individuals and click on the
                    option to link to FamilySearch, you are warned on the screen that all such
                    changes should be in FamilyTree.

                    Mary-Theresa Dameron

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • S Douglas Cline
                    If u have used family tree then u know the answer. SD Cline s iPhone 5
                    Message 9 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      If u have used family tree then u know the answer.

                      SD Cline's iPhone 5
                    • Leslie Vaughn
                      Because we can do it through AQ with minimum of effort. All my changes made through AQ to nfs are updating to FT. When AQ can interface with FT then I will
                      Message 10 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Because we can do it through AQ with minimum of effort.



                        All my changes made through AQ to nfs are updating to FT. When AQ can
                        interface with FT then I will use it that way. I occasionally go directly
                        to FT to view my changes and to do some editing and adding just so I can be
                        familiar with it. But I much prefer using AQ for that feature. Also
                        using AQ you can see the various data on nfs that is not transitioning to FT
                        and I am using Gaylon's tips to make sure the most correct information is
                        kept.



                        I know that most of the good features will be available in FT but they are
                        not there yet, such as adding my notes or getting the notes of others. As
                        long as the information transitions from nfs to FT I will continue to use AQ
                        to make changes and to reserve temple ordinances. I believe that if we
                        were not supposed to be doing it that way at all, the ability to do so would
                        be removed.



                        Leslie Vaughn











                        From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                        stew999@...
                        Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 4:03 PM
                        To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS





                        Why is anyone continuing to combine or uncombine duplicates in nFS?

                        nFS is slated to be withdrawn in early 2013 - I know they still have to
                        transfer Notes and any nFS Sources before then.

                        The message is - get off nFS asap - do all your corrective work in Family
                        Tree without the complication of duplicates.

                        ===Stewart

                        From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                        [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf
                        Of
                        Mary-Theresa Dameron
                        Sent: 07 December 2012 20:40
                        To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                        Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS

                        My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn't really talk to
                        FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest
                        database? If you are trying to uncombined individuals and click on the
                        option to link to FamilySearch, you are warned on the screen that all such
                        changes should be in FamilyTree.

                        Mary-Theresa Dameron

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Rosemary Hopkins
                        I am continuing to use AQ for all of my family tree updates. It is easy to do and I can have a nice red tag that shows me who I have checked in family tree.
                        Message 11 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I am continuing to use AQ for all of my family tree updates. It is easy to
                          do and I can have a nice red tag that shows me who I have checked in family
                          tree. Once I have tagged everyone I am concerned with, I will go back and
                          add more sources. It is a slow process, but I still find I like AQ for
                          doing everything related to my family history research and for submitting
                          things to the temple. Occasionally I hit a snafu, but if I close
                          everything out and try later, I can usually do what I need to do. I am a
                          great fan of AQ. It is so easy to use and helps me keep things straight.
                          Thank you, Gaylon, for a fine product. Rosemary Hopkins

                          On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Leslie Vaughn <Leslievaughn@...>wrote:

                          > **
                          >
                          >
                          > Because we can do it through AQ with minimum of effort.
                          >
                          > All my changes made through AQ to nfs are updating to FT. When AQ can
                          > interface with FT then I will use it that way. I occasionally go directly
                          > to FT to view my changes and to do some editing and adding just so I can be
                          > familiar with it. But I much prefer using AQ for that feature. Also
                          > using AQ you can see the various data on nfs that is not transitioning to
                          > FT
                          > and I am using Gaylon's tips to make sure the most correct information is
                          > kept.
                          >
                          > I know that most of the good features will be available in FT but they are
                          > not there yet, such as adding my notes or getting the notes of others. As
                          > long as the information transitions from nfs to FT I will continue to use
                          > AQ
                          > to make changes and to reserve temple ordinances. I believe that if we
                          > were not supposed to be doing it that way at all, the ability to do so
                          > would
                          > be removed.
                          >
                          > Leslie Vaughn
                          >
                          > From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                          > stew999@...
                          > Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 4:03 PM
                          > To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS
                          >
                          > Why is anyone continuing to combine or uncombine duplicates in nFS?
                          >
                          > nFS is slated to be withdrawn in early 2013 - I know they still have to
                          > transfer Notes and any nFS Sources before then.
                          >
                          > The message is - get off nFS asap - do all your corrective work in Family
                          > Tree without the complication of duplicates.
                          >
                          > ===Stewart
                          >
                          > From: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > [mailto:AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
                          > Behalf
                          > Of
                          > Mary-Theresa Dameron
                          > Sent: 07 December 2012 20:40
                          > To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AQ_NFS%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: Re: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS
                          >
                          > My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn't really talk to
                          > FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest
                          > database? If you are trying to uncombined individuals and click on the
                          > option to link to FamilySearch, you are warned on the screen that all such
                          > changes should be in FamilyTree.
                          >
                          > Mary-Theresa Dameron
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          >
                          >


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • mkitchen@juno.com
                          For your information, using Ancestral Quest to combine followed by a selection of the Summary values accomplishes the same thing as a merge in Family Tree.
                          Message 12 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            For your information, using Ancestral Quest to "combine" followed by a selection of the Summary values accomplishes the same thing as a merge in Family Tree. It also gets on the change-log as a merge which you or others can do an unmerge if needed.

                            So, for all intents and purposes, in using AQ, you are actually doing a merge.

                            At the moment, AQ is much better at finding duplicates than is Family Tree.

                            FamilySearch has told Incline Software that they will keep the old methodology running until they tell him to start using new methods.

                            My advice: use the sandbox website (beta.familysearch.org) and practice a few merges and unmerges.

                            As always, make sure that your are combining or merging records that are truly duplicates and not just people of the same name.

                            In my estimation, a much bigger problem is records that previously have been improperly combined. With AQ, you can better see that problem. The other day, I helped a patron where four sisters had been combined into one record (Bessie, Essie, Dessie, and Mary!)
                            In my own work, just this week, I found a record where a Homer J. Beck, b. 1902 in Arkansas was combined with a Homer C. Beck, b. 1890 in Kentucky. Looking at the person in AQ showed the different birth dates and places and gave a strong hint of an improper combining.
                            When records are improperly combined in new.familySearch, it migrates to Family Tree as only one person.

                            So: KEEP ON USING AQ!

                            Merlin Kitchen



                            Please note: message attached

                            From: <stew999@...>
                            To: <AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com>
                            Subject: RE: [AQ_NFS] syncing FT and nFS
                            Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 21:02:41 -0000


                            ____________________________________________________________
                            Veteran Home Loans
                            Apply for VA Loans with competitive interest rates at Military.com.
                            http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50c26d56299d96d556369st04vuc

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Bill Buchanan
                            Actually the two sites are still linked and there is some exchange of information. Names, dates and places are communicated, but not necessarily relationships.
                            Message 13 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Actually the two sites are still linked and there is some exchange of
                              information. Names, dates and places are communicated, but not necessarily
                              relationships. The biggest problem is probably combined records, which
                              cannot be separated in FT. If you can separate them using AQ, please do.
                              Otherwise send all the info to support@..., where wrongly
                              combined records can often be separated by a special unit.


                              Bill Buchanan


                              On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Mary-Theresa Dameron <jbdmtd@...
                              > wrote:

                              > **
                              >
                              >
                              > My real question is that since FamilySearch doesn't really talk to
                              > FamilyTree since Halloween, are our changes being made in the latest
                              > database? If you are trying to uncombined individuals and click on the
                              > option to link to FamilySearch, you are warned on the screen that all such
                              > changes should be in FamilyTree.
                              >
                              > Mary-Theresa Dameron
                              >
                              >
                              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              >
                              >
                              >



                              --

                              Bill Buchanan
                              website: http://billbuchanan.byethost17.com
                              blog: http://billbuchanan.blogspot.com


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Mary-Theresa Dameron
                              Thanks for all your replies. The Quaker records I am working on need a lot of work according the current AQ interface - be interesting to see what happens
                              Message 14 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Thanks for all your replies. The Quaker records I am working on need a lot
                                of work according the current AQ interface - be interesting to see what
                                happens when AQ is linked to Family Tree.



                                Mary-Theresa



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • tomhuber.yah@gmail.com
                                The only thing that AQ doesn t handle is unmerging previously-merged records. It can be used to establish the visible records and it is very good at merging
                                Message 15 of 26 , Dec 7, 2012
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  The only thing that AQ doesn't handle is unmerging previously-merged
                                  records. It can be used to establish the "visible" records and it is
                                  very good at merging records.

                                  But for "unmerging" incorrectly merged records, you'll need to use
                                  Family Tree for that. For correcting such mistakes as wrong gender,
                                  you'll need to open a ticket via FamilySearch help. Make sure you
                                  provide all the required information (FS ID, name, relationships,
                                  etc., and proof that the person has had the wrong gender applied.)

                                  One last thing: FS is continuing to work on its documentation. Make
                                  sure you always are using the latest version for the "how to"
                                  instructions.

                                  Tom

                                  On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 18:09:40 -0700, you wrote:

                                  >Thanks for all your replies. The Quaker records I am working on need a lot
                                  >of work according the current AQ interface - be interesting to see what
                                  >happens when AQ is linked to Family Tree.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >Mary-Theresa
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Cleadie B
                                  I just use AQ yesterday to combine one complete family. As Bill said, relationships did not transfer for most of them. Had to go fishing in FT to get them
                                  Message 16 of 26 , Dec 8, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I just use AQ yesterday to combine one complete family. As Bill said, relationships did not transfer for most of them. Had to go fishing in FT to get them linked.

                                    As for not being able to separate incorrectly combined records -  nFS Has this to say about how to do it.

                                    "The combine and separate features are being turned off because Family Tree is now available.
                                    Family Tree handles duplicate records in a new, improved way that is incompatible with new.familysearch.org.
                                    If you need to deal with duplicate records or fix an incorrectly combined record, copy the person's name and person
                                    identifier. Then use that information to find the person in Family Tree.
                                    From there, you can resolve duplicate records or make the needed  corrections."

                                    Maybe I am wrong, but I believe the old records not moved to FT and will all be deleted, so there is no need to worry about data that had not transferred. What ends up on FT being the only thing to survive, and we are to work with what is there to correct the data for our line - if this is done through FT or AQ, it is up to the individual doing the work.


                                    There are very few records in my line that have possible duplicates, so I haven't had to manage any incorrectly combined record. Unless the example mentioned next counts as an example.

                                    I have come upon a man married to two women named Mary (each with their own IDs), and his children split between the two women. One had another husband and family, so when I took the children that belonged to the other Mary off her file, and put them with the right couple, all I then had to do was delete the unwanted marriage, and everything was fine, both Marys had their right husbands and children. (Except there were children missing from my family since the relationship didn't work from AQ, as stated at the top of this message.)

                                    I did run into a couple that gave a list of one or two duplicates to
                                    check. You could mark the data you wanted to use from each file, and it
                                    would merge. I have not seen any way to fix incorrectly combined record other than to just remove data that wasn't right, and add new data in
                                    its place. Maybe that is what they mean by fixing wrongly merged
                                    individuals. ??? Have to do a bit more searching the help files. :-)


                                    Cleadie B
                                    ________________________________
                                    From: Bill Buchanan <genealogistbuchanan@...>
                                    To: AQ_NFS@yahoogroups.com

                                    Actually the two sites are still linked and there is some exchange of
                                    information. Names, dates and places are communicated, but not necessarily
                                    relationships. The biggest problem is probably combined records, which
                                    cannot be separated in FT.

                                    ...
                                  • tomhuber.yah@gmail.com
                                    ... Wrongly merged individuals often include a child merged with a grandparent, creating an impossible loop. That has happened far too often because merging in
                                    Message 17 of 26 , Dec 8, 2012
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 08:14:13 -0800 (PST), you wrote:

                                      >its place. Maybe that is what they mean by fixing wrongly merged
                                      >individuals. ??? Have to do a bit more searching the help files. :-)

                                      Wrongly merged individuals often include a child merged with a
                                      grandparent, creating an impossible loop. That has happened far too
                                      often because merging in nFS was sometimes done without considering
                                      who was being merged, only that the names were the same.
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.