Why multiple sources with the same information?

True_Brit

I don't understand why it has been recommended that multiple sources (duplicates) for the same event are added to individuals. It makes for an untidy collection. Surely one source is all that is needed as proof?

Brett .

@True_Brit

FYI

I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

Short Answer: The more, the merrier ...  

Please be aware, that in most cases, the "Sources" are NOT (Exact) "Duplicates"; but, in fact, they are SIMILAR "Sources", being DIFFERENT "Indexings", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event").

Sometimes, quite often, the later "indexing", provides ADDITIONAL "Details", including associated "Images" of the "Document", that were NOT included, with the previous "Indexings".

And ...

I DO NOT agree that having SIMILAR "Sources", being DIFFERENT "Indexings", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event"), makes the "Sources" 'Tab', an untidy collection, far from it; especially, if one groups all the SIMILAR "Sources" together - which I do (Referencing each one, in relation to the others).

I just DO NOT understand WHY some Users/Patrons, feel that it is so ONEROUS a task, to "Attach", the SIMILAR (or, what some, refer to; as, SAME) "Sources", being ANOTHER "Indexing", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event").

The ADDITIONAL "Sources", being ANOTHER "Indexing", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event"), really provide additional proof/evidence.

Again, the more, the merrier ...  

Plus ...

I just DO NOT understand WHY some Users/Patrons, feel the need to "Detach" (and/or, "Delete"), the ALREADY "Attached", SIMILAR (or, what some, refer to; as, SAME) "Sources", being DIFFERENT "indexings", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event").

ALL (past) "Sources" that WERE originally "Attached", by OTHER Users/Patrons, were done so 'in good faith', WITH the EXPECTATION that such "Sources" WOULD remain, in place; and, on record (ie. 'in situ'), attached to one's Ancestors.

I will just NEVER understand, WHY some Users/Patrons, are so concerned; and, feel it pontless/tiresume, with having SIMILAR "Sources", being DIFFERENT "Indexings", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event"), it is really just MORE supporting evidence/proof. 

I am sorry ... I just do not feel the same way as you do.

I for one, would be EXTREMELY "Disappointed", if ALL the SIMILAR "Sources", being DIFFERENT "Indexings", of the SAME "Document" (ie. "Event"), were not available; and/or "Removed".

Just my thoughts.

Just another perspective.

Brett

gasmodels .

One of the reasons for attaching multiple sources is that the hinting engine which provide suggestions for sources does not work well when one source is attached and others are not in particular if they have been declared to not be applicable. Therefore the advice from the developers is to attach all sources that apply to a record even if they appear to be duplicates. Doing this will resulting in the hinting engine working better and other sources may be found.

In the past there have been discussions about providing a way to collapse multiple sources for say a birth into a single entry in the sources to provide a more compact listing of sources. I do not know if this possible improvement is under development or consideration. My personal position is in line with what Brett posted above. Having multiple sources only makes the information stronger and understanding multiple sources can sometime resolve issues.