Residence Tag

FLQR

In the New format under Events, Residence and others are shown as 0 sources. These all came from various records, but mostly census records. It does not appear that adding the new Other Information Tag / Residence for an individual's Census record will also populate the rest of the family members. Perhaps it will when a new Census record is added to a family, I have not checked that yet.

Still it would be nice not to have to now tag a source to the thousands of census and other Residence records going forward. It is good practice to view the sources anyway, so many of us will ignore the lack of 0 sources under Events, knowing that there must have been an association to a source that generated the Residence. It is nice to have the residence tag to add going forward, but quite tedious to go back and explicitly tag the original source.

Thank you.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

The ability to tag conclusions in the Other box with sources is brand-spanking-new to the new interface of the person/detail page, which is so new that it is still in the process of being programmed and deployed. Source Linker, on the other hand, is some of the oldest programming still running on the site; it hasn't changed in many years. So automatic tagging of census residences is not going to happen soon, going forward -- and going backward is never going to happen, since the computer cannot read our minds.

LauraleeT1

@FLQR We have passed your suggestion along to the appropriate people. Thank you for contributing.

Curtis Ray Torrey

Although "the computer can't read our minds" (huh?) the computer programmers can write code that will complete the data it is providing the patron in the Source Linker process, or give the patron the option of doing so himself, neither of which is the case with this recent "upgrade." Unfortunately, just as was the case when a new version of the software was released a few years back when, all of a sudden, there were error messages everywhere objecting to the fact that a birthplace (for example) was now not recognized as being "standard" the same kind of thing is now happening with "Sources." And this "unstandard" condition was occurring with place names that FamiltySearch indexers had themselves provdided us, nonetheless. So unless you were not adverse to seeing these "error" messages pop up all over creation, you then had to return to the all the work that you had already competed, and deal with it again, dozens and dozens of times or more. Not a good use of time or effort.

Now, on the "New Person" page under the "Other Information" section, for every piece of data that was worked at long and hard in researching, discovering and adding to the "Previous Version, Other Information" section, you now get rewarded with a "0 Sources" tag for each and every piece of data that appears within the section. Once again, what could and should have easily been added during the "Source Linker" process has, instead, been overlooked by the FamilySearch programmers, testers, and quality control persons. Guess who now has the honor of going back to every page and adding sources? It really is discouraging and an extremely and unnecessary waste of time doing something that could and should have been provided for programatically.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

Are you suggesting that the programmers should've invented and used a time machine? That's what it would take to associate all of those previously-created conclusions with their sources.

When those conclusions were added, there was no mechanism in place to connect anything in "Other" with anything else. Therefore, the source information for those conclusions is not in the database. The changelog makes no differentiation between "typed in" and "transferred from an index"; it only tracks the action (adding the conclusion), the date that the action was taken, and the identity of the user taking the action.

You're asking for it to automatically add data that does not currently exist.