* DIRECT G4

[KiwiPeterHill]

Just a quick one this time, While searching on Myheritage .com site I came across some family connections and some them have the following notation in front the names, either Direct G5, DIRECT G4 or DIRECT G3
Are these likely to be important to my research or are they just likely to be some sort TAG the persons who's tree its on has used.??

[wulliam]

Those sound to me all like someones code for "Direct ancestor: ggggg-grandparent" etc

[davidf]

That was my thought.

Does it look as if there is a root person - either some distant ancestor or the compiler?

Do you also have "Indirect G3" etc.? If you do you might be able to work out what qualified to be "direct". It could be a strict interpretation of ancestor / descendent of the root person, or it could mean a "blood relative" rather than one through marriage.

G3 could be a "count the G's" relative measurement of the generations between the tagged person and the root person. - Where the root person was (present or distant past) would indicate in what direction the "G" was being measured.

[KiwiPeterHill]

I am not sure, I do suspect it is one users tags, so maybe just worth ignoring,
There's no real pattern. On one entry, Both Parents have a Direct G4 tag and only one of the 4 siblings has a Direct G3 tag, none the children appears to carry tags.
The other entry both parents carry Direct G5 tags, the Wife has a G4 and one of the 5 Children has a G3 tag

[davidf]

I am not sure, I do suspect it is one users tags, so maybe just worth ignoring,

Probably true, but it's lockdown so let's chew it over!

There's no real pattern. On one entry, Both Parents have a Direct G4 tag and only one of the 4 siblings has a Direct G3 tag, none the children appears to carry tags.
The other entry both parents carry Direct G5 tags, the Wife has a G4 and one of the 5 Children has a G3 tag

Well I detect a possible pattern if G is number of generations back into the past:

• 1st entry
  • Direct G4 - Parents (of x)
  • Direct G3 - One Sibling (of x) others untagged as Direct
  • - Children not tagged
• 2nd entry
  • Direct G5 - Parents (of y)
  • G4 - Wife (of y) - note no mention of "Direct"
  • G3 - One Child (of y)- note no mention of "Direct"

Do these two entries "align" - are the G4's in both entries in the same generation?
Where you have one sibling of many or one child of many tagged - are their "lines of descent" in any way notable (in that they end up with someone's Parents who are (or could be) tagged Direct G1)?

[ColeValleyGirl]

Have you tried asking the person whose tree it is?

[davidf]

That's one of those (few) times when I want this forum to have a "Like" button! Of course!

[Gowermick]

When I saw the family with G4 at top with children at G3, could G be short for Generation? Perhaps generations from the match?

[KiwiPeterHill]

[*]G4 - Wife (of y) - note no mention of "Direct"
[*]G3 - One Child (of y)- note no mention of "Direct"
[/list]
[/list]
Do these two entries "align" - are the G4's in both entries in the same generation?
Where you have one sibling of many or one child of many tagged - are their "lines of descent" in any way notable (in that they end up with someone's Parents who are (or could be) tagged Direct G1)?

Sorry, just laziness on my part, I left the DIRECT off those. As for lines of decent, I am too new to this to be able to tell.
I will try contacting them, as I say it not super important, I just do not want overlook information that should be in my Tree because of ignorance.

Regards Peter
NEW ZEALAND (Heading into lockdown level 1 soon)

[KiwiPeterHill]

further to this, I followed the Direct G in that family tree, and Direct G8 is back to 1735
while Direct G3 is 1919 - 1979

So G has be Grandparent or Great Grandparent X3 or X8 as the case maybe.
anything Newer than Direct G3 appears as Private.

[Gowermick]

I too suspect it is a personal thing, with owner of the tree marking those who are his direct ancestors.
I do a similar thing using a custom ID.
Those who are direct ancestors have an ID based on their Ahnetaffel number relative to the root, with letters appended for their descendant. When in the depths of the tree, it makes it easier to spot if you are working on a direct ancestor or not, especially if I have altered the home person for any reason, when relationship to root no longer refers to true root, but the amended one!

Likewise with Brickwalls, where for every direct ancestor who is a brickwall, I have added a media image of a ‘Stop Sign’, which then appears as their image in the focus window. Every now and then I run a query to list them, and have a crack at the brickwalls.

[KiwiPeterHill]

thanks for all that, well worth considering.