* Addresses and Churchs

Questions regarding use of any Version of Family Historian. Please ensure you have set your Version of Family Historian in your Profile
Post Reply
User avatar
davidm_uk
Megastar
Posts: 735
Joined: 20 Mar 2004 12:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: St Albans, Hertfordshire, UK

Addresses and Churchs

Post by davidm_uk » 21 Jan 2015 16:32

I'm in the long process of tidying up my Addresses and Place.

At the moment, against baptisms, marriages and burials, I have the Church name in the Address record, and the village/town, county, country in the Place record. So in Tools - Work with Data - Addresses I just see a long list of, for example, St Mary's, in Field 1 of the Address record, each with a different "Used" count.

Should one use a second Address field to identify the church more specifically, particularly as I have some photos of churches that I'd like to associate with the church in some way, or maybe I have to do that for each fact? Or do I just have one entry for St. Mary's which only means anything when it gets associated with a Place in a Fact

What do others do for an "address" that might appear under many different places, for example High Street?

I suppose it wouldn't matter if an specific address was always associated with a specific place, and viewed as such in FH, but they don't seem to have this connection until they are brought together in a fact.
David Miller - researching Miller, Hare, Walker, Bright (mostly Herts, Beds, Dorset and London)

avatar
jbtapscott
Famous
Posts: 235
Joined: 19 Nov 2014 17:52
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Corfu
Contact:

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by jbtapscott » 21 Jan 2015 16:45

I have been reviewing the same as part of a proposed migration from TMG. I am looking at having the Church Name in the first field of Address and the name of the village / town in the next, although I might move that to the third field if I find that I have street names for quite a few of the churches.
Brent Tapscott ~ researching the Tapscott and Wallace family history
Tapscott & Wallace family tree

User avatar
davidm_uk
Megastar
Posts: 735
Joined: 20 Mar 2004 12:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: St Albans, Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by davidm_uk » 21 Jan 2015 17:04

The general recommendation here is that village / town goes in the Place record, not the Address record.

With geocoding, many are moving to have at least a 4 field Place record: Village, Town, County, Country.

I'm not sure that replicating any data between the Address and Place records is a good idea, although there's a lot of ongoing discussion on here!
David Miller - researching Miller, Hare, Walker, Bright (mostly Herts, Beds, Dorset and London)

User avatar
PeterR
Megastar
Posts: 1051
Joined: 10 Jul 2006 16:55
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Northumberland, UK

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by PeterR » 21 Jan 2015 17:22

I also generally have just the Church name, and sometimes its street address if there is one, in the Address Field.

I find my old (March 2012) Plugin Address Summary Report useful, especially if added to the Tools menu, for checking similar cases of same Address but different Place. It works just as well in V6 as in V5.
Peter Richmond (researching Richmond, Bulman, Martin, Driscoll, Baxter, Hall, Dales, Tyrer)

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16312
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by tatewise » 21 Jan 2015 17:40

The 'same' Addresses are listed several times purely becasue they are associated with different Place names.
It should usually be possible to add something to the Address of each one, such as a street name, or parish name, or even a modern postcode to help locate them.

I have moved this thread to General Usage where all the other Place & Address discussions take place.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

User avatar
LornaCraig
Megastar
Posts: 1510
Joined: 11 Jan 2005 17:36
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Oxfordshire, UK

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by LornaCraig » 21 Jan 2015 19:29

tatewise wrote:The 'same' Addresses are listed several times purely becasue they are associated with different Place names.
Could you clarify that, Mike?

I have, for example, an address which is simply 'St Mary's Church'. It is used 45 times, in association with perhaps half a dozen different places. It is listed only once in the address list, as I would expect. Without the addition of a street name to distinguish between the different St Mary's churches, how could it possibly be listed several times?
davidm-uk wrote:Or do I just have one entry for St. Mary's which only means anything when it gets associated with a Place in a Fact
That's what I do, to avoid duplication of data in place and address fields. I do add street names if I know them but often I don't. And if a street name is added, for example 'St Mary's Church, North Street' it becomes a different address.
Lorna

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 16312
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by tatewise » 21 Jan 2015 20:46

Sorry, a senior moment.
If the Address fields are literally identical then they are only listed once.

But David said "I just see a long list of, for example, St Mary's, in Field 1 of the Address record".
So presumably they are all slightly different forms of St Mary's, e.g.
St Mary's
St. Mary's
St. Marys
St Marys
St Marys
Saint Mary's
etc...

Nevertheless the advice of adding something: a street, a parish, a village, a district, a postcode, will distinguish them.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

avatar
Adrian Robinson
Silver
Posts: 7
Joined: 13 Jan 2015 22:57
Family Historian: V6

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by Adrian Robinson » 21 Jan 2015 22:31

I know that I am new to this group, but having much the same issues around place and address, so I only use the place field.

I have read the various bits of advice, but to my simplistic view I found this the easiest way, for example:

St Marys Church, High Street, Liverpool
St Marys Church, Main Road, Newcastle
St Marys Church, , Birmingham

each is then shown as a different place and I can add pictures to the place

The only problem I have with this is in the reports, some show the separating commas and some do not.

I suppose it is down to personal choice as long as you can display and interrogate your data the way you want.

Adrian

User avatar
davidm_uk
Megastar
Posts: 735
Joined: 20 Mar 2004 12:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: St Albans, Hertfordshire, UK

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by davidm_uk » 22 Jan 2015 10:11

Adrian,

Interesting idea to ignore the Address record and just use Place records!

Maybe the examples in your post are just that, to indicate how "St Mary Church" could be entered, but in practice you may want more Place fields, eg.

St Marys Church, Back Lane, Pinner Green, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England

Normally, good practice suggests that you should always use the Place fields in the same way, ie. field 5 would always be County Name, and you just leave a field blank if it's not used or not known. At some point you may want to produce a query that only list Towns, or a particular Town, so having the Town name in a specific field becomes important. If a Place field is unused just enter it as, for example:

St Marys Church, , , Stevenage, Hertfordshire, England

I think some FH reports strip out the extra commas.

Obviously using only Place records means that there will be a lot more of them, I don't know if this is a potential problem.

I'd be interested to know what others think about this approach of putting everything in the Place record. At least when editing it you can see the whole thing in one place.
David Miller - researching Miller, Hare, Walker, Bright (mostly Herts, Beds, Dorset and London)

avatar
jbtapscott
Famous
Posts: 235
Joined: 19 Nov 2014 17:52
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Corfu
Contact:

Re: Addresses and Churchs

Post by jbtapscott » 22 Jan 2015 10:17

Going at a tangent to this - the decision may also be influenced by what types of reports you want to run in FH as certain of them (e.g. Indiviudal Summary Report) show the Place data in one position (to the right of the Fact Date) and the Address data (if selected) under the date in smaller characters.
Brent Tapscott ~ researching the Tapscott and Wallace family history
Tapscott & Wallace family tree

Post Reply