Just because there are no siblings listed in the Mil Info, does not mean the soldier didn't have any. Just because only one sibling is listed in the Mil Info, does not mean there aren't others.
For siblings and parents to be listed in the Mil Info, there would have had to be a claim, affidavit, letter, or some other document specifically listing an individual as a sibling or parent of the soldier in the pension record. Often, there are no such documents in the pension.
Please do not assume that just because there are no siblings listed that the soldier had none.
Showing posts with label siblings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label siblings. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 30, 2018
Wednesday, January 4, 2017
Siblings living in the same household
Here is a post from Sandy in answer to a recent question:
After some recent checks, I would like to clarify the following guideline found in the manual:
When multiple siblings are living together...generally you'll probably want to select the lowest household number among the siblings living in the household.
As an example of this, if child Bob is household # 3 and his sister Judy is household # 7 and they end up living together one decade, then you should assign the family to household # 3. This likely happens most of the time anyway if you input the households in order, which you should be doing. (By nature of the fact that Bob is household #3, you would already have input Bob in all his decades including the one where he is living with Judy before you even start inputting Judy's household.) On occasion some NF's pop up later on when you do have a household for each sibling and you are forced to choose. Since it's in the manual and we want to be consistent, we will stick with the guideline of going with the lower household number rather than with the sibling who is the head of household as many of us have been doing. Since it's really more of a guideline than a rule (it does say "probably" after all), and because it doesn't really affect the way the data user uses the data, it is not necessary to always go with the lower household number. So don't go back to change it or tell inputters in their checks to go back and make changes. But do try to go with the lower household number when possible.
After some recent checks, I would like to clarify the following guideline found in the manual:
When multiple siblings are living together...generally you'll probably want to select the lowest household number among the siblings living in the household.
As an example of this, if child Bob is household # 3 and his sister Judy is household # 7 and they end up living together one decade, then you should assign the family to household # 3. This likely happens most of the time anyway if you input the households in order, which you should be doing. (By nature of the fact that Bob is household #3, you would already have input Bob in all his decades including the one where he is living with Judy before you even start inputting Judy's household.) On occasion some NF's pop up later on when you do have a household for each sibling and you are forced to choose. Since it's in the manual and we want to be consistent, we will stick with the guideline of going with the lower household number rather than with the sibling who is the head of household as many of us have been doing. Since it's really more of a guideline than a rule (it does say "probably" after all), and because it doesn't really affect the way the data user uses the data, it is not necessary to always go with the lower household number. So don't go back to change it or tell inputters in their checks to go back and make changes. But do try to go with the lower household number when possible.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Searching using family members
Here is some information from Sandy about searching for an individual on Ancestry and including information about family members - siblings, children, parents - in that search. These are just some things to keep in mind when searching and reviewing your results.
1) It looks like Ancestry searches for the siblings exactly even though you can't mark them exact. (I tested 1880, 1900 and 1920).
2) However, If you enter a person and list names of children in your search, Ancestry does not consider the children exact. It orders the results with those at the top having matching children (all matches, followed by some matches, followed by no matching children)
3) Ancestry does allow you to input a parent's name and NOT mark it exact. After entering a parent's name, the results pop up with those at the top having a parent with that name, followed by other names that match the target person but without having a matching parent.
In summary: It appears that the parents field is working fine (you can choose exact or not exact); the siblings are considered exact, and the children are not exact.
1) It looks like Ancestry searches for the siblings exactly even though you can't mark them exact. (I tested 1880, 1900 and 1920).
2) However, If you enter a person and list names of children in your search, Ancestry does not consider the children exact. It orders the results with those at the top having matching children (all matches, followed by some matches, followed by no matching children)
3) Ancestry does allow you to input a parent's name and NOT mark it exact. After entering a parent's name, the results pop up with those at the top having a parent with that name, followed by other names that match the target person but without having a matching parent.
In summary: It appears that the parents field is working fine (you can choose exact or not exact); the siblings are considered exact, and the children are not exact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)