in my database, in some cases, death is omitted and this concerns a substantial number of people who, starting from 1490, are certainly not alive. Is there a tool that allows you to classify a range of people as deceased without having to intervene on each individual?
Thank you.
Does the Calculate Estimated Dates addon meet your requirements?
It follows on the Probably Alive concept.
You could increase the maximum age to a couple centuries. That would start finding the MUCH older part of your database.
To avoid manually selecting of every individual to Add, there is a Select All checkbox for adding to the overaged individuals found to be missing a Death.
I think I would add only the automatic death events, not the Birth Events.
And, as always, BACKUP before using tools that modify data.
Gramps knows that all these people are no longer alive and treats them as such.
In your Preferencesâ Dates tab, there is a âMaximum age probably alive.â The default is 110. So anyone without a death event will be considered dead today (23 Jan 2020) if they were born before 23 January 1910 by the program. Changing that number will move that threshold date.
https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_5.1_Wiki_Manual_-_Settings#Dates
Personally, I have a problem entering a contrived date. Just because you do not know the death, why give them one. This is how erroneous information becomes âfactsâ for future genealogists. Just my 2 cents.
Thank you very much. Seems to have worked. I made two steps: the first setting the limit to 150 years, the second to 120. However, I removed the flag to overwriting the pre-existing estimate data (not that there were any), to make the two steps coherent and considering making use of the to this plugin only in this case.
1 Like
Thank you. Right considerations.
The GEPS discussion talks about using the tool to add updated Death Events simply for performance & filtering reasons.
Youâre right though. Import/export conversion incompatibilities DO tend to mangle soft dates (like âcalculated after 1790â) into hard dates (like â1790â). And short date formats in many graph views drop that distinction too. (It would be nice if the tilde was employed more consistently for approximated years. It survives cut&paste as plain text. Plus, it is represented on most keyboards.) But using added estimated dates ARE helpful in distinguishing between a couple dozen un-dated "John Doe"s listed in the People View by providing their approximate eras.
â symbol : asymptotic to; almost equal to
~ symbol : approximately
â
symbol : is congruent to; very nearly equal
=~ symbols : approximately equals
Date quality in GEDCOM exports
If considering date qualifiers, you should be aware of this proposed change to GEDCOM exports.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.