TOPIC:

Good evening all,

Following the import of my gedcom file in webtrees, some custom fields (by my old tool) to represent the old names use the variable "_FORMERNAME" which is not standard.

I have two questions:
1) how can I mass-correct from webtrees? (my alternative is to export the current gedcom, replace via notepad++ it works but there is probably something else)

2) which field should be used to replace "_FORMERNAME"?
a NAME field followed by a TYPE field? and what to put for "type"? What should be used for "change"? But then how to explain that it is the old spelling of the surname?

Thanks in advance for your help

Over time Individuals can have multiple names. To enter additional names you would add an additional NAME tag in GEDCOM or add the additional name via the "Add a Name" option on the "Edit" drop down.

Since your previous software used a non standard tag I would change the tag to a NAME tag. A name tag looks like the following:

You will not that I've included the sub-Tag TYPE. Which tells the system and reader what type of name is being entered. In webtrees the predefined type values are:

• adopted name
• also known as
• birth name
• change of name
• estate name
• immigration name
• maiden name
• married name
• religious name

The values listed above on the data entry screen have shorter, one word values in the GEDCOM TYPE tag. For example "adopted, change, married, aka, ..."

When you add a new name, technically any previous name would be a "former name", so in my mind using this value as a TYPE feels illogical and a lot of work when (for example) a woman marrys and now her birth name would be changed to "former name" so you can add a "married name". Also you loose the information about what the person's actual "birth name" was. This is even more complicated if the woman marries multiple times and now you would have to change her previous "married name" to "former name" so you can have a new "married name".

As you can see, I'm trying to dissuade you from using "former name" as a TYPE. Rather I'd encourage you to use the standard name TYPEs provided above.

Thanks for the response.

So the use of "also known as" or "change of name" and a detailed indication in the note field is the better way.

Now : how can I do the change from "_FORMERNAME" to "NAME and TYPE" correctly ? there is a way inside webtrees to do this ? I don't find it till now.
I've found the option "correct datas" in my tree, with the option " Convert NAME:_XXX tags to GEDCOM 5.5.1" but it correct only the tags "_MARNM" to Name and TYPE married but this option does not detect the _formername and does not propose to adapt it...

The "Name Tag" change PHP file does not have something for changing the _Formername tag a code change would need to be implemented. Code would have to created. What software did you previously use?

The question though is what predefined value would you want the TYPE to be set to? "birth", "aka", "maiden"? Does the use of _FORMERNAME get used to change only birth names or would it be used for any "former name"?

I agree with what Ken said. You should use the GEDCOM 5.5.1 standard types described in more details on page 56 of the GEDCOM 5.5.1 Standard or the few additional ones offered by webtrees as listed by Ken.

To give you a better advice we would need to better understand how many of these _FORMERNAME tags you need to take care of and what's behind those name tags. If these former names are women's maiden names then use TYPE maiden. In my database I do not use maiden names or married names at all. I use birth names only. That saves me a lot of headaches. But this depends on the respective surname tradition.

If it really is about a name change, e. g. about a person that acted as a source to the FBI in a mafia case and got his name changed to not get found by the mafiosi, then use the TYPE change of name. But do not invent additional TYPEs.

So, what's behind those former names, is there a common rationale for these names?

norwegian_sardines wrote: (...) What software did you previously use?

My Heritage (online version)

norwegian_sardines wrote: The question though is what predefined value would you want the TYPE to be set to? "birth", "aka", "maiden"? Does the use of _FORMERNAME get used to change only birth names or would it be used for any "former name"?

AND

Sir Peter wrote: (...) So, what's behind those former names, is there a common rationale for these names?

In the cases I have, it is a question of names written in a certain way in a birth certificate, differently in the marriage or death certificate, depending on how the priest or registrar wrote what he heard :
For example "Dupond" and "Dupont" which are both pronounced in the same way in French ( \dy.pɔ̃\ )

The "old name" would therefore be added with an explanatory note. I suppose the default value would therefore be "also known as".

efhache wrote: In the cases I have, it is a question of names written in a certain way in a birth certificate, differently in the marriage or death certificate, depending on how the priest or registrar wrote what he heard: For example "Dupond" and "Dupont" which are both pronounced in the same way in French ( \dy.pɔ̃\ )
The "old name" would therefore be added with an explanatory note. I suppose the default value would therefore be "also known as".

So this is more about different spellings of the same name and not about different names and yes, the TYPE "also known as" would be a good choice. You can add as many of these for the same individual as you like. And you can add sources and citations to it instead of or in addition to notes. Maybe you don't even need the notes.