Home› Welcome to the FamilySearch Community!› Ask a Question› Family Tree

Some retired records are showing up as attached in Source lists, but not in source linkers

RTorchia
RTorchia ✭✭✭
June 2, 2023 edited September 26, 2024 in Family Tree

Here's an example -- three of the records listed in the Source list for this person are retired.

https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/LRWK-L2J

When I click on Review Attachments, the source isn't linked to anybody. (Meaning I can't detach from the source linker, and with a lot of these, I can't be sure who it's actually attached to since these profiles have been merged and attached to new parents so often.)

I'm not sure this is only occurring with retired sources, but it seems to be more frequent with those.

Oof, yeah, I noticed something really bad here. Something's happening where existing records are being renumbered, but it's causing a weird kind of pseudo-duplicate. For example:

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYPW-GG6Z

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F4ZN-VFH

If you look at the citation for the second record, it lists the ID for the first record. If you open it in the Source Linker, the URL is: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AHYPW-GG6Z&id=LKF6-6S6

If you detach either record in the source linker, it affects both, but only removes one from the Source list. For example, if you opened HYPW-GG6Z and detached Elizabeth Wells, then viewed her source list, HYPW-GG6Z would be gone, but F4ZN-VHF would still be in her source list, with the "not attached to all people" warning -- paradoxically because Elizabeth Wells isn't attached. (If you reattach the source, both sources are reattached.)

Tagged:
  • Sources
  • Source Linker
  • Reporting Bugs
0

Answers

  • RTorchia
    RTorchia ✭✭✭
    June 4, 2023

    Since this is evidence of data corruption, could somebody please be sure it gets to the dev team?

    0
  • Maile L
    Maile L ✭✭✭✭✭
    June 5, 2023

    I will look into this a bit and see what I can find. Thanks

    0
  • Maile L
    Maile L ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 18, 2023 edited August 18, 2023

    This has been sent to engineers. I am posting my reproduction of the issue here so they can see what is happening.

    Sources for Luranah Wells https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/LRWK-L2J

    image.png

    Source 1: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AH513-42N2&id=LRWK-L2J

    Source 2: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AHYLD-P53Z&id=LRWK-L2J

    Source 3: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AHYP3-HDPZ&id=LRWK-L2J

    Source 4: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AHYL6-6XW2&id=LRWK-L2J

    Source 5: https://www.familysearch.org/search/linker?pal=/ark:/61903/1:1:H513-42N2&id=LRWK-L2J

    Sources 1 and 5 are attached to daughter and mother 

    image.png

    but are not listed in mother’s sources https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/LJ5P-G4M  

    image.png

    Sources 2, 3, and 4 are not attached to any of the three persons listed 

    image.png

    If any attachments are made, in ANY of the sources, a duplicate source is created. For example, I attached source 2 to Luranah

    image.png

    which “fixes” source 2 but also creates source 6. 

    image.png
    0
  • Alan E. Brown
    Alan E. Brown ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 18, 2023

    @Maile L Sources 1 and 5, which you seem to think are distinct, are exactly the same. They have the same URL (except for a slight difference in URL encoding). And that source does indeed show up on the mother's list -- it's just a couple of entries below the screen shot excerpt you posted. Go to

    https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/LJ5P-G4M

    and look for entries with the title 'Mary in entry for Luranah Wells, "Maryland, Church Records, 1668-1995"'

    It looks like that source is actually attached twice (which is a separate issue). But it is definitely on the mother's list, and because it is attached, you would not be allowed to create a duplicate.

    I don't have time to look into the others right now -- there may well be problems there -- but what you reported for Sources 1 and 5 is not accurate, or at least I'm seeing something different.

    0
  • Maile L
    Maile L ✭✭✭✭✭
    August 18, 2023

    @Alan E. Brown It appears that these were part of different collections at one point but currently have the same Citation "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:H513-42N2 : 12 February 2020), Luranah Wells, 1714.

    1 - "Maryland, Church Records, 1668-1995" - record link https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F4ZN-L6J

    5 - "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995" - record link https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:H513-42N2

    Looks like the same thing happened with Luranah's sister Elizabeth. All of these are from collection "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995"

    • Record created 11 Jan 2016 with link https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:F4ZN-VFH and 11 Mar 2020 with link https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYPW-GG6Z both have the citation "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYPW-GG6Z : 12 February 2020), Elizabeth Wells, 1707.
    • Records https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V2WK-G4D and https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYLD-GXMM have the citation "Maryland Births and Christenings, 1650-1995", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HYLD-GXMM : 12 February 2020), Elizabeth Wells, 1714.


    0
This discussion has been closed.
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 42.7K Ask a Question
  • 3.3K General Questions
  • 568 FamilySearch Center
  • 6.7K Get Involved/Indexing
  • 640 FamilySearch Account
  • 6.5K Family Tree
  • 5.1K Search
  • 994 Memories
  • 2 Suggest an Idea
  • 473 Other Languages
  • 62 Community News
  • Groups