Boarders
Very often in US Census records there are a number of individuals not directly linked to the family marked as "Boarders"; How do you manage that situation to avoid the "unfinished attachments" alert?
Comments
-
@guido paoluzi cusani Don't think anything to be done really until you or someone else figures out where they may, or should be, in the Family Tree…
2 -
Go to the person's Source tab and scroll down to the census. Click Dismiss. A pop-up will appear. Click Dismiss again. That will get rid of the alert.
0 -
Unfortunately dismissing unfinished attachments removes the alert for all users.
In 1920, my grandfather - with a terrible misspelling of his name - was listed as a boarder and not brother-in-law when he lived with his sister and her family. If someone had dismissed the alert, then I may have missed finding him.
I only dismiss alerts if there is an error such as a duplicate entry for a person or AI/OSR mess. Otherwise I ignore them because someone may be looking for those people.
Per #4 of the link:
If you do not want to see the unfinished attachments messages, click Options at the top of the Sources tab. Click the switch next to Unfinished Attachments. The option remains off until you turn it back on again.
4 -
@GFre said
… While removing the alert doesn't affect the search function, we should still use caution, as errors may hinder others or cause confusion …
I (nearly) always remove the alert as it serves no useful purpose to anyone related to the servant / boarder / whoever in question.
For instance, my gran is in the English 1921 census at Stalybridge in Cheshire, the other side of the county from her birthplace. She is a servant in the household of Mr & Mrs Heginbottom. Suppose someone had entered the 1921 for her employers, then, I hope, Gran would have been left alone in FamilySearch. When I come along to add her 1921 in FamilySearch, then I will find it via a search and the Unfinished Attachments message is no help to me - whether it's there or suppressed.
If I was a Heginbottom researcher just doing an audit of the family, knowing that my gran hadn't had the 1921 attached, is equally useless data, since I haven't any idea who the servant girl is. It simply clutters up the screen alerting me to things I (as a Heginbottom researcher) can do nothing about.
Once I have audited the attached sources for one of my families then, and only then, I will remove the alert. The only time I wouldn't remove the alert is if I have an unresolved suspicion that the unattached person might be a relative. This has happened to me - people were entered as "Visitors" when they were actually siblings. I left them as visible unattached entries until I sorted out who they were.
NB "Heginbottom" is the genuine spelling on the original 1921 - it's usually "Higginbotham" or similar
1 -
Another option is to ''Add unconnected person". This is done by going to the "recents" list and scrolling to the bottom of the list. This may be a good option in some cases. In the process you may find a duplicate record for the person. Also, you need to be careful about declaring a person living or deceased. If they were born more that 110 years ago, you can create them as decease. If less than 110 years old, create as living unless you know they are deceased. In the case of living, you may not want to create a profile since you are the only one who can view it. Any way, this is an option.
2 -
Wayland thankyou for your insightful remarks
0 -
As stated above by @Wayland K Adams, by adding an "unconnected person" from a census record in FamilySearch, this can be a constructive step in genealogy research, even if you can't link them to the main Family Tree right away. This step creates a Record for Future Researchers: By using the "Add unconnected person" option, you create a dedicated profile for that individual if they are deceased. This makes them searchable and discoverable for other researchers who might be looking for that specific person.
It also helps resolve Identity: As stated in the above notes, sometimes people listed as "Boarders" or "Visitors" in a census are actually relatives, like siblings. Creating a profile for the unconnected person allows you to gather more information and potentially connect them to the right family later when you find a linking document.
You never know what information your linking of these individuals may bring you in the future, or another member of the FamilyTree you may never meet.
1 -
well said @sc woz
0 -
As I indicated above, it is also possible to make an argument that creating a profile for an "unconnected person" is pointless and just sets up work for the future researcher who is genuinely connected to that "unconnected person".
The census record, which is the source, is just as discoverable without the unconnected profile as with.
The unconnected profile needs eventually to be merged with the other profiles of that person - a task that is a degree of magnitude harder than simply attaching further source records. Having merged half a dozen profiles for many of my relatives, I'd far rather have the simpler task of attaching further source records.
There is also a risk when attempting to create an unconnected profile, that the system suggests an existing profile that is plausible but wrong. The researcher into the main family is unlikely to be able to know that the suggested profile is wrong - indeed, it's totally unfair to expect them to have the detailed knowledge to distinguish between the options.
4 -
Dismissing a person does not remove them from the census or from allowing that person to be found. They will still be the place holder for that location and space in time. The only thing that it does is let the person using the tree is to say that that person is not of this family. However I do try to take a long look to see if there might be a family connection before I dismiss them. This especially true for very young servants or labororers. They may be grandchildren, nieces, nephews, etc. taking care of Grandma and such.
3
