Ich wundere mich, warum hier mein x5 Großmutter die meisten count hat und dann mein Bruder
Als Startperson bin ich Thomas Burkhart eingetragen.
Was mache ich falsch?
Viele Grüße
Thomas
hier ist mein Vater unbekannt
aber in FS sauber verlinkt:
For each separate tree, I ~believe~ the person listed is the one with the lowest RIN (Record ID Number) ~because~ they were added to the database FIRST (before any others in that tree).
Count trees will start each tree with the lowest RIN in it. Maria Josefa Matzenmuller is RIN #1 in your database. That is why that tree begins with her. The root person of the database is not the same as RIN #1.
If your brother is Dr. Gregor Burkhart is means he’s not linked to your grandmother’s tree. You have some relationship issues to fix. He is the lowest RIN is his tree.
how can I set RIN’1 to me?
Create a fresh new database. Have it open alongside your master database. DragNDrop JUST yourself from master to fresh. Then again, drag Yourself from master and drop Yourself ontop of Yourself in fresh, but this time answer EVERYBODY for whom to copy. Now I ~believe~ the fresh will have You as -1.
When you drag n drop on the top of yourself you have to check the box at the bottom that your the same person. Then it will merge the records. Instead you have two copies of yourself in the database. Do a manual merge making sure you keep the copy with RIN#1 on the left when merging. The issue with your father you will need to make sure to link yourself to him.
The RIN numbers are primarily keys for the internal use of RM’s database system. In a perfect world, we might not ever even see them while using RM and the numbers would really not mean anything at all.
However, there needs to be some sort of ID that we can see for each person, for example if we have two people in our database with the same name and the same birth date, are they really two different people or are they the same person being displayed twice because they are linked to the same spouse twice?
For that reason, it’s usually advantageous to keep the display of the RIN numbers turned on. And with the RIN numbers turned on, it’s only human nature to ascribe some sort of meaning to them. For example, some users will file their paper records according to the RIN numbers in their RM database even though the RIN numbers don’t mean anything and even though there are things that can happen in RM to change the RIN numbers - like if you copy people between databases.
I don’t know what the solution to this problem would be, or even how serious of a problem it really is. I do know that I am not RIN #1 in my own database, and I don’t really care. I really do try just to use the RIN numbers to tell people apart when there can be ambiguity about whether two “different” people are the same person or not. Other than that, I try just to ignore the RIN numbers.
RIN numbers cannot be changed, not even by using SQL, except by things like copying yourself first into a new and empty database and then copying everybody else into the same database. But if you do that, then it’s likely that everybody else’s RIN number will change as well.
The worst thing about the RIN numbers probably is when they show up in the Count Trees report. For each tree, RM needs to tell you how many people are in each tree and it needs to give you some sort of indication about who the people are in the tree. So what it does is to list the person in the tree with the smallest RIN number. That information is often of little or no value in figuring out who is in each tree in the Count Trees report.
But I honestly can’t think of a good solution, even if RM were to have some other number than the RIN that was more meaningful than the RIN. RM would still need to pick one person from each tree to represent the tree. How should it pick the person? The person with the oldest birth date, or what? And what if the people in a tree don’t have birth dates? It’s a difficult, difficult problem. That’s why there has never been a good solution.
ich habe das mit der frischen Datenbank 2 mal versucht ; mein Vater ist immer noch nicht da.
Ich habe versucht ihn separat mit seiner FSID von FS zu importieren. Auch das ging nicht.
Ich lasse die mal so stehen und mache an einer Datenbank weiter, die ich aus FS neue angelegt hatte.
In diese möchte ich successive die Ancestors meine Grosseltern, UrGroßeltern usw aus FS importieren.
So müßte ich doch Generation für Generation auch die indirekten Verwandten bekommen ?
Allerdings bekomme ich auch wieder nicht normierte Plätze zurück, die ich im goßen Baum schon gemerget hatte.
Müsste das klappen?
Etwas frustriert
Euer Thomas
I have tried this with the fresh database 2 times; my father is still not there. I tried to import him separately with his FSID from FS. That didn’t work either.I will leave it like that for now and continue with a database that I created anew from FS. In this one, I would like to successively import the ancestors of my grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. from FS. That way, I should be able to obtain indirect relatives generation by generation, right? However, I am also getting back non-standardized places that I had already merged in the large tree.Shouldn’t this work?A little frustrated
I cannot see any reason if you are using the FamilySearch Person Tools that your father wouldn’t come in when adding him under family members. Can you give us a screen shot of what you are selecting when adding?
When you look at the FSPT is his FS icon blue next to his name under your family members? If so they your father is already in the database. If he is then you need to link the relationships together.
If you Import more ancestors you will only get the children in the family. Make sure when importing to do so in a different database. You can start to have issues in a database if you are trying to use Import and the people are already in the database.
ok
ivch musste erst noch eine 2. Instanz von mir zu der mit RID 1 mergen.
meinen Vater musste ich manuell relation setzen.
ebenso mein Gr0ßvater …
Muss ich nun für alle weiteren Generation die relationship manuel erfassen?
Warum wird dies nicht automatisch übernommen
The Set Relationships tool is static. By that I mean that it doesn’t create relationships for newly added people automatically. So when you add new people to your database, you need to run the Set Relationships tool again.
However, when you do run the Set Relationships tool, it sets all the relationships for all the people who are currently in your database at the same time. It’s not like you need to run the tool to set the relationship to your father and then run the tool again to set the relationship to your grandfather. You just need to run the tool once if both of them are already in your database. But if you then add a great grandfather, you do need to run the tool again.
1 Like