Can the "marriage end date" have parentheses added to it? maybe accept "Not Married" too?

Question

Two questions - one I think might be doable, the other not so much. Anyway, I just removed a marriage end date for one couple. It was not really needed - end date was 1439, the year they both died, and no additional marriages or children were involved. It looked funny (and superfluous) in the bio's datafields, displaying as "married November 26, 1423 to 1439 in Hanley Castle, Worcestershire".

But for the profile of the previous wife (Elizabeth Berkeley) it is relevant. Still looks funny, though:

Richard Beauchamp KG — married October 5, 1397 to December 28,1422 in Monmouthshire, Wales

Would it be technically easy to add parentheses for the "marriage end date" field so that a date entered there would display within () along with the "to"? (Much like anything in the "Other Nicknames" is in quotes.)

Richard Beauchamp KG — married October 5, 1397 (to December 28, 1422) in Monmouthshire, Wales

This would make the editor in me very happy!

Second question. Would it be possible to have an entry of 00/00/00 in that field (marriage end date) display not as a date, e.g., (to 00/00/00), but as (relationship was not a marriage) or something like that (without the "to")? Not sure of the coding limitations. If "to" couldn't be dropped, would (to...no end: not married)  work?

Obviously, if 00/00/00 returning text in that field would be possible, WHAT text to return would require another discussion!

:see the related/closed question: http://www.wikitree.com/g2g/140721/should-we-have-a-designation-for-not-spouse (closed because not technically feasible)

Cheers, Liz

Answer 1

Hi Liz,

I think we can add the parantheses. I'll add that to the to-do list.

As you expected, the not-spouse thing is a horse of a different color.

Chris

Comments

This has now been fixed. Thanks for pointing it out, Liz.

Answer 2

I believe that would be redundant. We are all born into this world unmarried and we remain that way until we take action to enter into matrimony. If there is a question about whether or not person entered into matrimony, that should be discussed in the biographical narrative. If there was a marriage ceremony but subsequent action took place to recognize it as null, that should be in the bio. If a spouse dies, that is self explanatory. Why would we need to single out a person or persons to say this person was not married to that person, unless there was an interesting story behind why anyone might mistakenly believe a marriage covenant had taken place. Otherwise, every profile would says something to the effect of...."John never married Jane his mistress. Nor did he marry any of her ladies in waiting. He also did not marry the any of the kitchen staff, the scullery maid or any other woman who spent the night under his roof regardless of whether they were related or not." Doing so would be silly. The burden of proof is on proving that a marriage existed not on trying to prove negatives.