Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m Annoyed

Allow users to select which marriage date will be printed out on the family group record

Currently, if there are multiple marriage dates the first one entered will always be printed on the family group record (whether it is correct or not). I propose that the marriage date that will be printed on the family group record will be user selectable. (Just like the birth, death, christening, and burial dates on the summary tab of the individual details page)
5 people like
this idea
+1
Reply
  • 1
    Thank you for your suggestion. I agree the marriage date should be able to be selected. I also vote for having the date backed up by a source.

    FamilySearch Patron Services
    • I think it would be best for the system to use the last entered date as the user should only add the date if it is more accurate.

      Here is an example: I added 1900 Census source that allowed me to add a spouse and it included an estimated marriage date of 1896 that I entered. Then I was able to find a 16 May 1897 marriage date with a source. The main screen still showed the 1896 either because it was entered first or because it is an earlier date. I then go back an delete the 1896 date. It would nice to avoid this extra step and many people do not know how to do this.

      A similar improvement could be made for birth and death dates and places as better sources are found. I would also like to see them come in standard format with month spelled out and standard place (typically you then would not need to go back and edit the format).
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I believe this option is being planned for the family tree site which is presently being developed.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • This has not happened and does need to be addressed. Also while you are at it make it easier to add marriage sources.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Why is there more than one marriage date? Any incorrect ones should be deleted, that is what could not be done in New Family Search
    • There are a huge number of instances where different dates are recorded for various marriage-related events: Bonds, Licenses, banns, publication, publication of intention, registration of intention, betrothal, officiator's return of marriage, etc., any two or three of which might occur regarding a single marriage.

      It is frustrating that there is no way to enter these on a couple page as relating to a marriage. And equally frustrating that other status items also cannot be entered.

      Since the designers have elected not to show or allow tagging of coupleness items on individuals' main pages, it seems only reasonable to provide these and other specific options on the coupleness page.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I have a situation where two dates are recorded in the records. See Abraham Peirce KZ67-PT7 and Lurena Rugg. I have put notes into the marriage and each person to explain. However, there are three marriage dates in the Marriage box. I fixed the first one to read 16 November 1842 in Rindge, NH but it is displaying last. This I believe is the marriage date and the other one 25 Oct 1842 in Boxford Mass. is a banns date. Believe Lurena was residing there and therefore the marriage was recorded there too. There is no image to tell and these records are really an index/copy of records created by the town clerk to send to the State Recorder. The originals reside in the town records and are not on line for our use. Because FT system displays the different marriage dates (I believe from nfs) it would be nice to be able to select the correct one.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • The Boxford item was registering intention to marry. Lurena was then of Rindge, NH according to the extract of the record.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I suspect that the advice you would get from anyone official at Family Search is that a couple should only have one marriage date. When there is one date, documented with sources as you have done, only that date should be labeled as a marriage. Then that one, correct date will be the one printed out.

    Looking at your record for Abraham and Lurena, I would say that the event “16 Nov 1842” with no place should be deleted because it is an incomplete duplicate. Then, since Jade explained that the 25 Oct 1842 event is an intention to marriage publication, I would document it in a note then delete it as a marriage. Then you will have just the one date and it will print on the forms.

    I do agree that it would be a great help to have “Custom Event” as a choice under “Add an Event“ just like on the individual page so that any couple event needed could be added but would not look like a marriage date or print in that box on forms.
    • Gordon, your reply embodies the very narrow conventional view.

      What is needed is a wide variety of coupleness-related events and non-couple events (such as owner-slave), but only a standard "marriage"-labeled event would print as a marriage date/place. The rest of the world and the past do not conform to the present setup. A 'custom event' is not acceptable because it would not tag as couple-related.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Hum, I think I would prefer to be labeled as someone who likes precision and accuracy. I think you would agree that a marriage date is not a banns date and an intention to marry doesn't mean a couple necessarily got married. I also think you would agree that trying to take all the possible varieties of couple information and squeezing onto one line of a Family Group Sheet labeled married is hopeless. I have have never printed out a FGS from Family Tree and never will. The two formats are just not compatible. But back to the point. If a section were added to the couple screen with custom events which were all tagged as couple-related then the couple screen could look like this admitted conventional couple:



    I would even think that this should not be two separate sections, but rather just one labeled "Events" with "custom event" being a choice under add event. Unless having the separate "Event" section with a single date could be the way to specify which event should appear on the pedigree chart.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated