It is pretty common that the married names of females appear in the Last Names field in the main Vitals Name area, even though that is not preferred. And it is relatively uncommon to see a married name in the Alternate Names section. Thus, after turning on the new "merge experience," I ran into this issue several times, and it does not seem reasonable to have to manually explain this every time. My suggestion would be to have the "software" always assume that all of the last names of attached husbands be considered Alternate Names, and that the new merge function not require a manually typed explanation in these situations. It can post a little note on the merge screen next to the name that it appears to be a maiden vs. married name—just not require an explanation.

This raises a question I have always had about the Family Tree. I have assumed that the married names are included in the algorithm that generates hints, etc., so I never do the busy work of adding married names to the list of Alternate Names for all of the women. And I think the vast majority of female PIDs do not include all of those married names. Am I correct on this? Does manually adding the married names to the list of Alternate Names help the hints/search in any way. I would think the married names should just be assumed without explicitly listed in the Alternate Names. In fact, leaving the married name out of the list of Alternate Names should actually be preferable to avoid hints/matches between women with a maiden name that matches another woman's married name.

I only enter a married name in the Alternate Names area if the name is completely different than expected (e.g., when a woman keeps her maiden last name and hyphenates it with her husband's name).