I want to use split tree helper to identify any individuals who have ANY connection with the area of Swaledale, Yorkshire, together with ANY of their ancestors, descendents or other relatives. I had hope to do this easily using Lists. Looking at Tools/Work with data/Places, there are generally about 4 columns. Ideally I would like to type in the word Swaledale,up would come all the individuals linked to that place, and I'd just click that clever little `add all to named list' button, fantastic. BUT Swaledale is an area and thus may be found in column 2, 3, or even 4, not in column 1 from which Records are currently selected. eg. Hipswell, Catterick, Swaledale, North Yorkshire, England. The only way around it at the moment using Tools/Work with data/Places is to put all records from column 1 in a list, then sort column 2 and do the same, then column 3 and so on but I've noticed that when I subsequently split the tree to produce a GEDCOM of all my Swaledale ancestors a few wives and inlaws are missing.
Jane See how to use the text option to selct Swaledale as the sort (clever) but dont quite understand what `add spouses of all in result set' means - how can I add people back to the resulting GEDCOM? Laurel
Not for the first time, Jane has beaten me to it. I was going to suggest using a query with the following row filters: You can then enter Swaledale (or any other text) when you run the query and, as Jane said, it will find individuals with Swaledale anywhere (including note fields or records), together with all their ancestors, and then all their descendants, and then all their spouses.
As Peter has posted this will add back in the descendants etc.
Depending on your requirement you might need to add in the extras in a different order to avoid ending up with too many people in the result set.
In Peters example because he has added Ancestors first you could end up with cousins of some one born in Swaledale.
You might therefore want to add Descendants first and then Ancestors, so only people whose direct descendants or ancestors have an event in Swaledale, but you might need to tune the results a bit, as the other way around you will add Ancestors you don't want. You might find simply adding one generation up or down rather than all might work better.
You can then use the Query directly on the Split tree to delete everyone not found by the query.
Jane (admin)
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
Thanks to both Peter and Jane. I havnt used Queries much either but I'll have a go! The fun of HAVING to produce something new is discovering all these wonderful facilities!
Oh dear, I've got very confused. I managed to create a new query as you described (I think). When I ran the split tree helper I ticked `Delete all records not found by the individual query' and selected my custom query. But when I pressed delete it asked for an Individual's name. Why? I've missed somthing somewhere. Do I need to somehow use this query with a List or something and if so, how? Here's in hope Thanks, laurel PS I tried to do a screen dump into word and save as a pdf to show you but couldnt even do that!
This web site was made with WebAPP v0.9.9.3.3, a web portal system written in Perl
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their
respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster.
Marble theme based on "Crash" theme by my2cents
Author:
Logged
Queries
