<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"> <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'>I also favor using the location name as it was then. Many of my ancestors were in the area of Virginia that became West Virginia and I record all pre-1863 locations as Virginia. While it does make FTM a little crazy when I do this, it certainly accepts the override to the default WV. It just makes no sense to me to list a current name for a place when that name was not appropriate in that time period. This is also the practice I use for client research documents with a notation stating so.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'>Jeff Pauley<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'>Pacific Pointe Genealogy Service<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'>Goodview, VA<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'> <p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Renee Zamora [mailto:harrisena@gmail.com] <br> <b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 01, 2010 11:25 PM<br> <b>To:</b> APG Public List<br> <b>Subject:</b> [APG Public List] Historical vs Current Name Places<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>I have a personal question and wondering if I could get a feel for how others do this.  In the past I recorded name places based on where they were located currently.  Simply because it was easy to lookup.  Then I started to put the historical places based on the event's time frame.  Now my database has part current and historical name places, simple because I never transferred everything over.<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>Since starting to use new FamilySearch I see that they are trying to record places as they are known currently.  Should I follow and change everything in my database to reflect it's current location?  I could record a place currently as "Queensbury, Warren, New York, United States" and then in event notes put formerly "Washington County" to reflect the historical event. Then in the individual summary it will note the change historically.<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>The benefit of doing this would help me keep my place list neat in my database.  I just wanted to know how others are handling this, and the pros and cons of each way.<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><br> Thanks!<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <p class=MsoNormal><br clear=all> Renee Zamora<br> <a href="http://www.harrisena.com">www.harrisena.com</a> <o:p></o:p></p> </div> </body> </html>