today’s unexplained Oddity (well odd to me anyway) :
What do the numbers in the above information found in Places List represent.
1652386, Yorkshire, England
withholding my S.W.A.G.
the reasonable guess was GPS, but we all know that is not correct…
Thank you for your kind assistance
Wheat
Screenshot, please. I don’t see any such numbers.
If it’s in the Place List, do a Place List report to see the facts that use it. If there are any, looking at the people with those facts may show others which provide context and a clue to what it should be. If it is an unused place, delete it as it doesn’t matter what it is.
1652386, Yorkshire - Google Search appears at a number of genealogical sites
For some reason, I cannot seem to take a screen shot.
It is listed as part of “birth place”
My guess is that has to do with an estate probably in some record books.
It is not a unique number, yet, in several instances there is a list of people -
Like @kbens0n said when you google 1652386, Yorkshire, England, there are a lot of different family files that show up with that specific place–all born and died at various times-- they could all be related BUT not sure-- I was surprised that when I searched for someone and entered 1652386, Yorkshire, England as birth place–Ancestry came up with that locations instead of no such place..
Well here is what Google " A I "had to say
The number “1652386” likely refers to the population of Yorkshire, England in 1652.
Here’s a breakdown:
Yorkshire’s History:
Yorkshire is a historic region in Northern England, known for its diverse landscapes and strong cultural identity.
Population Data:
While Yorkshire as a county in its own right no longer exists, it’s made up of four different counties: West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, North Yorkshire, and the East Riding of Yorkshire.
1652:
The year 1652 was a time of significant change in English history, including the Commonwealth period after the English Civil War.
The Number:
The number “1652386” likely represents the population of Yorkshire in the year 1652, which is a historical data point.
Yorkshire Dialect:
Yorkshire is also known for its unique dialect, sometimes referred to as “Yorkshire English”.
CoPilot on Windows said
That number, 1652386, appearing under “place born” in a genealogy database likely represents a location code or reference ID used within the system to catalog birthplaces. Some databases assign numerical identifiers to places rather than listing them by name, especially in large datasets.
Since it’s linked to Yorkshire, England, it might correspond to a specific parish, registration district, or historical boundary within Yorkshire. You might be able to cross-reference it with resources like the Yorkshire BMD Index or FamilySearch Yorkshire records to find more details.
Think I would contact some of those other researchers on google and ask them
Thank you, why I did not start with Googling or in my case Duck,Duck,GOing will remain a mystery, to me anyway.
Your answer suggests I may have been on the right path, and will perhaps pursue it further as time allows.
Now that it seems NOT something related to RootsMagic functions- that will mean “elsewhere” as one of those = might get back to you eventually.
Again Thank You All
Wheat
P.S. this is in the infamous “Gift” tree and there were entries for areas other than England -
With your permission, I would like to use a version of your answer as a comment for "future users of my information.
yes you can use anything you want- Artificial Intelligence answered it in both cases so you really don’t need to ask but thanks
Side question: Is it that (a) you don’t know how to take a screen shot or (b) some technical error is keeping you from taking one?
If (a), then you might find this post I made a couple of years ago useful.
I thought i knew how, normally i just right click select take screen shot
It mar be the version of windows - it seems built in.
Will read post and memtion it to “thr engineer in the other room over dinner”
Interesting about Copilot (nkess post 5/11 on Apr 6. When I did a Copilot Think Deeper enquiry I got a different response :
It looks like you’ve encountered a number–place combination that appears frequently in genealogy records—specifically, something like “1652386, Yorkshire, England.” In many genealogical databases (such as those used by RootsMagic and Ancestry), places are often stored with a numerical identifier along with the region name. In this case, 1652386 isn’t meant to be read as part of the place’s literal name (for example, it isn’t indicating a population figure or a postal code) but serves as an internal reference or identification number for Yorkshire within that particular system. This helps the database manage and cross-reference vast amounts of location data consistently.
Some users have speculated about different interpretations—like the idea that it might represent a historical population figure or even an estate record—but the most common explanation is that it’s simply the system’s way of indexing the location. You might find that several records list this same number next to “Yorkshire, England” (as seen with birth and death entries for individuals on sites like Ancestry), which reinforces the interpretation of it being an identifier rather than a descriptive numeric value.
This numbering practice is quite typical in computerized genealogical records. It makes it easier to link related records across large datasets (for example, when a place has several historical boundaries or appears in multiple record types like births, marriages, or burials). If you’re doing family research and stumble upon such codes, one useful approach is to use the identifier as a search parameter or cross-reference it with other geographic data sources. In many cases, genealogical software or community forums discuss these codes, providing additional context that might help clarify if there’s any additional local significance attached to the number beyond its administrative function.
Yorkshire itself is a region steeped in history, with its own unique dialects and administrative divisions (such as West Yorkshire, North Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and the East Riding), further underscoring why modern databases benefit from using internal codes rather than relying solely on text entries that might vary over time in spelling or boundaries.
I don’t know if RM can confirm any of this but, on the face of it, it seems as if you can ignore 1652386 - it probably adds very little to the story of your family.
@steve.turner --you did a Think deeper inquiry perhaps with additional info or a slightly different question-- I did a quick response inquiry..
That said I have read somewhere almost all of what you have posted above except it didn’t mention Ancestry or RM..
So just curious, I aske again using Think Deeper–1st paragraph similar to yours–2nd similar but different—they say Co-Pilot learns and grows the more you use it–so maybe it grows even more if 5 people ask the same question over a course of time
Personally I would keep 1652386 at least in my notes or as a fact until I figured out what it referred to
Dear Mr Turner,
Thank you for your reply, while it may not add much to our story, it adds a great deal or more accurately both informs and better yet reduces the need for me to spend my limited time on pursuing the explanation.
Again, my sincere thanks to you and all who have helped to better understand this “re-new to me” advernture
Wheat
Thank you and I agree it makes sense to keep the info and someplace put in the likely explanation.
Since traits tend to repeat, perhaps some future part of my family will see it either in my work or that of others and the NOT have to spend time pursuing “what it means”.
It has been summarized and a copy placed in my “book of conventions”
Again, thank you
Wheat
I just opened my database and did a place search for “1652” and got a hit in Alberta, Canada for the number 1652445. I have no one in my file with the specific town in Alberta in their record. Suspect it crept into my location during some update by RM. The number Wheat questioned is not in my place file, but changing the search to “165” I get 4 other places also in Canada, all in Quebec. There are actually 6 more places containing Cowley, Alberta, Canada, that lack any number and one I have deleted that had the 1652445 number.
It wouldn’t be a RM update causing that. If it was I would have that come up and its not in my file.
I am not worried about it in any case. As I find them, if not in use in my file, I will delete. None of those locations except the one with the numbers and the identical location without numbers (in use) carry GPS locations.
The one without the numbers is actually to the cemetery in that town.