How do I add correctly formatted source titles when adding to multiple IDs from "Images"?

Paul W

I just used this feature for the first time, whereby I am able to add an image to multiple IDs. Instead of my usual method of adding an effort separately to the ID of the person who was baptised, giving it a title, then adding the image to the mother and father with an appropriate (different title) I thought I'd try the "new" method (whilst in "Images") of attaching the image to all three IDs.

However - as I'm sure some of you will know - each time I amend the source title it changes this for the others to whom I attached it, too. Should I have ignored this "enhancement" and added the source separately to child, father and mother, in order to retain the appropriate title format for each?

At present I either have to have a title reading "Peter Reay, Hetton le Hole, Durham Baptism" or "William Reay in entry for Peter Reay, Hetton le Hole Baptism" or "Margaret in entry for Peter Reay, Hetton le Hole Baptism". Not very helpful.

Oh, this is handy: I found Peter's sister's baptism directly below, so can illustrate the page in question, with the option to add Ann's baptism record to her parents as well:

What's the point if I can't ever add to the three Source sections in the standard FamilySearch formats?

Adrian Bruce1

It strikes me that this method reverts to what the rest of the world does outside FS FamilyTree. (If that sounds faintly sarcastic, well....)

In my desktop program, a source record refers to one event and has one title that appears everywhere the source is used. I usually give a title along the lines of "Baptism of Fred Bloggs, dd/mm/yyyy, Much Binding in the Marsh"... I take it as read that one or both of the parents will appear.

In FS FamilyTree, because the source record has been indexed at a lower level, there are two or three (usually) personas within that source and we attach those personas to the profile, hence "Margaret in entry for ..." refers to the persona for Margaret who is, presumably, not the primary persona in the source.

My guess, if I understand your description correctly, would be that these images are not at the persona level, but one up at the source level, and hence there is only one title to apply. I guess that if you want to provide a source title not dissimilar to the persona level, then you need to create a source-title along the lines of "Baptism of Peter to William & Margaret Reay, Hetton le Hole" - or even "Baptism of Peter and Ann to William & Margaret Reay, Hetton le Hole".

Presumably this issue will go away when the image is properly indexed with personas. But you will then have to index them all again - unless FS do something "automatic" 😲

As an aside - I had the reverse problem when I first started working in FS, because I tried to use the same source-record for all people in a family in the census and couldn't work out why it was so hard to do. Eventually, I realised that there were already personas set up for each member of the family on that census - I shudder to think of the hinting that FS generated in the meantime because I'd told the system that the parents and all 3 children were actually the same... 😮

Julia Szent-Györgyi

(The "Attach to Family Tree" button on unindexed images is some of the oldest programming still in use on FS. It predates source tagging entirely, even of things in Vitals. It's older than Source Linker, which was introduced in 2014.)

The Attach to Family Tree button creates a linked set of instances of a single source, so you can't individualize the title for each separate instance.

To my way of thinking or working, the single generic title is a feature, not a flaw. I simply write a title that describes the entire record, not just one of the people mentioned in it. My usual format for a church register, for example, is "[place/church], [denomination], [type of register]: [name(s) of primary], [date]". Then I include a full transcription in the Notes/Description field, which the button makes very easy, since it sticks the box right there next to the image. (And if it's a multi-page register entry, I can go look at and transcribe the other pages without losing any of my typing.)

The "Add to my Source Box" checkbox often gets the description "dratted", as in "I forgot the dratted checkbox again". The reason I wish I could just get into the habit of always checking it (but somehow still haven't) is that it's easy to remove the instance from my box, but completely impossible to add it after the fact. If there's an instance in my source box, I can add other instances as needed to other profiles (or to the segregated lists on couple relationships), but if there isn't, then the set cannot be expanded. If I discover that I recognize one of the godparents, and this baptism is the only source I've got for his address, then I can, by a convoluted series of steps, attach a copy of the source with my carefully-written transcription, but I cannot keep it connected with the other instances of that source, so if I notice a typo while I'm looking at the child's sources, my correction will not be reflected on the godparent's version.

You can, if you wish, make use of the "copy to source box" function to create separate instances of the source, but you'll lose almost all of the advantages of using the Attach button: you'll only be able to do one person at a time, and corrections or other edits of the source on one profile will not be reflected on any other profile.

Gail Swihart Watson

I have had relatives visiting and missed this. When I have an image source from a source collection, I first add the source to the primary person, and check the option to add it to my source box. I can then add it to other secondary persons. I do this by going to secondary persons and add source from source box. I believe someone told me once it could be done slightly easier by starting at the source box and adding the source to secondary people by ID. I have yet to try that.

One thing I have noticed is that once the source is added to everyone involved, I can edit the title if I want and that edit stays at the person I'm in and doesn't show as an edited title in other persons.

Paul W

In case my point is unclear, the screenshot below illustrates how Margaret being mentioned in the (indexed) baptisms of her children is reflected in the format transferred to her sources section:

When I add a source from an Image Only collection, I stick to this format - adding the image page to the child, father and mother. It seems I am unable to do this if adding a page I found when working within "Images", if I choose to use the option to add it to all three in one go.

BTW - I did not choose the option to add this page to my Sources Box - would that have helped?

I still have the opportunity (if it exists!) to get this right, when I add this to Ann Reay (and parents) sources, later on. (Didn't notice her baptism also on the page, first time round.)

Paul W

@Adrian Bruce1 and @Julia Szent-Györgyi

Thank you both for your responses.

There are a number of things in Family Tree I would prefer to do "my way", but I have thought it better to try to conform with set formats, knowing this is not "my tree" (of course) and, in this example, that other users will immediately recognise the set "FamilySearch" way of displaying sources. So that (in this instance), others would immediately see that ""Peter Reay, Hetton le Hole, Durham Baptism" had a link leading to his baptism record and the other two ways of titling the record would make it clear that (parents or not) William Reay and "Margaret" were mentioned in a record relating to Peter Reay.

However, I will take your ideas on board any give a title of "Baptism of Ann Reay to William & Margaret Reay, Hetton le Hole, Durham" when adding this item to all three IDs after I've finished writing this. (I won't bother trying to undo / redo what I've already done in the case of Peter.)

Paul W

Yes, that will do fine! Actually, I have now manually edited the title of the event relating to Peter Reay (not illustrated). I only needed to do one edit, of course, as (once saved) the new title has been automatically applied to the item in the Sources sections for both William and Margaret.