Genealogy Chat

In principle you are right of course, and I like the iea of putting where they lived at a known date rather than wildly guessing at a birthplace. Problem is many people, as I have just done, upload large Gedcom trees. Family Historian which is the prog I use supports birthdates in the form 'between 1811 and 1816', or 'before 31 May 1821' 'after 3 Apr 1881' which are all formats I make use of but GR either ignores these or garbles them so the date is unreadable. Equally for earlier events I enter the baptism date and place on my FH tree, this then transfers but leaves the date and place of birth blank on GR. I am in process of preparing a separate FH tree especially for transferring to GR but it is a long process as I have to trawl through 4000 individuals. (Before anyone accuses me of being a 'Name Collector' these are all blood relatives or their spouses, not a living person amongst them and all evidenced by research that I have carried out over nearly 20 years)

here here! Names in my tree are real common. Dates / estimated place of birth - even county really helps. Sue

When I have searched for a Surname and clicked on the 'Eldest First'. I get a long list of 0's / blanks/ for dates and birth places. Re dates of birth, however far back, via IGI or before 1837 it is possible to make a guestimate from birth entries of children.. If you have no idea where the relly was born , then put in something like 'lived Kentish Town 1841 ' or wherever. I have spent ages contacting members who have a rellly of the same name , only to be told that it was unlikely as 'Joe Bloggs ' descendents all lived in Norfolk ,Devon or wherever. and mine lived in Tooting. Surely not beyond a bit of imagination! Dem