* How to Exclude on Any Fact Place Contains

[wildbill]

Hello all,

I am tailoring a Census query for the upcoming 1921 Census and will be targetting Surnames by geography.

The query is fine and I can exclude based on %INDI.CENS[1].PLAC>% does not contain County.

What I would like to achieve is the exclusion of anyone who does not have a Place beit BMD or other containing a partial Place string match, this way I could move area by area tracking down and updating families of interest.

My previous software had an 'Any Fact' selection where I could specify the Place Contains, I'm sure there is a way in FH that I am simply not seeing at present.

Thank you in advance

[Gowermick]

Bill,
You need to turn your logic on its head and only Include those whose Census place contains “County”. This will exclude all who were not in County as well as those who don’t have a County!
Simples

[tatewise]

I am trying to understand what you want to achieve.
There certainly is no 'Any Fact' option in FH other than what I explain later.

Your Rows tab filter that is based on %INDI.CENS[1].PLAC>% may not achieve what you intended.
It is only testing the 1st of potentially many Census Events for that Individual.
If there are Census Events for 1861 and 1871 and 1891, assuming they are chronological, only the 1861 Census is tested.
Those three Census Events are referenced by %INDI.CENS[1]....% and %INDI.CENS[2]....% and %INDI.CENS[3]... or if you use the [year=...] index %INDI.CENS[year=1861]....% and %INDI.CENS[year=1871]....% and %INDI.CENS[year=1891]...

A better solution may be achieved with a Fact type of Query that is closer to the 'Any Fact' concept.
Without any Rows tab filters, it lists all Facts (Events & Attributes). See Query > Facts and Evets > All Facts.
Then you can apply filters on %FACT.PLAC>% that apply to all Facts and the Individuals of interest will be the Fact Owners, and they can be easily added to a Named List for your 1921 research.
See FHUG Knowledge Base An Overview of Queries under Custom Query Types.

If you need any more advice on those concepts then please ask.

Another way of achieving multiple Fact analysis is by writing a Plugin that has a much more flexible capability than a query but requires a degree of understanding of 'computer programming'.

[wildbill]

Thank you both for your informative responses.

Regarding the logic reversal I have already done that to a degree. I came from Rootsmagic where a query was a process of MARKING (including) and UNMARKING (exclude), a blank query in Rootsmagic returns zero results whereas in FH returns all records hence the Exclude.

My problem still appears to be the lack of a criteria such as Any Fact - Place – Contains so allow me to paint a picture of my needs.

My hypothetical individual was born in Cumbria, travelled to Australia intent on immigration, returned to work in Ireland for some years, then did immigrate to USA and died there.

At present this individual has ZERO Census Events on file and eventually may have Census events in various countries. However tracking my Heaney family with geographic connections to Cumbria I want report only those with ANY connection to Cumbria which would include this person being born there.

Before migrating to FH I read it was the best program for one name studies but if it lack this capability to report only individuals with a connection to a particular County or Country then I would dispute that as I could build such queries in my previous software but could not save them for re-use.

I tried Exclude - Unless - %FACT.PLAC>% - contains - ‘my parameter’ but that produced zero results, I’m hoping I am missing something?

[Gowermick]

The reason I suggest include statements is because they better support what you want.
I.e include if Census contains place, or birth contains place or married contains place etc, and will slowly add any individual that meets any one of these criteria to your result set.

However, if you use exclude, the logic becomes a lot more complicated. For example, having excluded those not in county on the census, you then have to overule that condion to include those who were born in the county, or they wrre married in the county.

If you have Conditions A, B and C
The statement include A or B or C, is not the same as Exclude Not A and Not B and Not C.
I knew Boolean Algebra would come in handy one day

[wildbill]

I have to say I'm a little shocked for an advanced program like FH not to have such a criteria. If you tell me your name is Heaney it would be a logical question for me to ask if you have any connections with Cumbria and without me knowing if that was a Birth, Education, Census, Residence, Occupation etc.

I'm still sure there must be a way, just not one which has been presented yet, I will trawl through some custom queries I have downloaded and see if I can discover a way to achieve this in FH.

My previous software had the Any Fact - Place - Contains option so was good at grouping geographic families but was not good at isolating missing Census entries.

[LornaCraig]

Try the attached custom query.

All Facts at a selected Place (or Place part).fhq

(1.73 KiB) Downloaded 66 times

[tatewise]

The Query posted by Lorna implements what I suggested earlier regarding %FACT.PLAC>% and its Rows tab uses:
Add if %FACT.PLAC% contains ["Place or place part"] and is the equivalent of Add if 'Any Fact'...

We can't explain why your Exclude - Unless - %FACT.PLAC>% - contains - ‘my parameter’ does not work.

BTW: You have missed the point made in the Rows tab Help page https://www.family-historian.co.uk/help ... wstab.html
If the first filter is 'Add If' or 'Add Unless' it initially makes the result set empty and then just adds the required rows.
Conversely, if the first filter is 'Exclude If' or 'Exclude Unless' it initially fills the result set and then excludes rows.

[wildbill]

Thank you Lorna and Mike