Adding missing indexed information
While looking at a source attached to my grandfather https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GBQW-GSX?view=index&personArk=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQK93-BCG3&action=view I noticed that there is no records for his children, which are listed in the image that was indexed.
How can I add the missing information ?
I have tried clicking the "edit" button for "relationships" which allows me to "add or remove fields" but you can only add fields that have already been indexed, so this does not seem to work.
Answers
-
In theory, you add people to the index from the "Indexed Data" side panel. To get to it from an individual's details, click the "back" arrow at the top of the panel.
The "Add" button is at the bottom of the "Indexed Data" panel.
The process is long and convoluted and unintuitive -- and doesn't actually work. It'll cheerfully lie to you about having added the person and so on, but if you reload the page, or try to go to the person's details page, or come back to the image from elsewhere, all of your work will have disappeared. Add the fact that any edits that affect the structure of the index run the risk of attracting the index-eating gremlin, and you're left with the fix being purely theoretical, currently.
I suggest instead that you use the image directly as your source. You can do that by going to the Indexed Data panel at the right and then clicking the "Attach To Tree" button at the top right of the image section.
If you click that button while the right-hand panel is on an indexed individual, then it just invokes Source Linker, but if you click it while no particular index entry is in focus, then it invokes a variant of the "attach to everyone" process that the old image viewer offers for unindexed images.
You can write a full transcription or translation in the Notes box; it's a very handy way to do it, because the image is right there, and you can zoom and pan as you need to get every detail.
In step 2, you can choose from your Recents list or find a profile by ID as your primary attachment point, and then in step 3, you get checkboxes for that profile's immediate family members.
Which reminds me that back in step 1, you'll need to use the "Add to Source Box" checkbox, because there are too many generations on the image to get everyone in one "go". You'll need to use your source box to attach the source to the grandkids, if you use Hendrik as your focus, or to the parents, if you use Andries as your focus.
Step 4 is just a confirmation, although you can write a reason statement if you really want, explaining that the children and grandchildren weren't indexed, and that's why you're adding the source this way. (I wish the "add to source box" checkbox was on that screen, or also on that screen. That's when I know whether I need it.)
Note that this "attach to everyone" process creates a single source with multiple instances: editing it in the Sources list of one profile will make the same changes on everyone else's Sources list entries as well. This is very handy if you notice a typo; you only need to fix it once. It is, however, a completely different structure from the one you're accustomed to, used by Source Linker, so it may take a slight adjustment in how you think about "a source".
1 -
Thank you for this information. Wow, it's really complicated, but at least I have the information.
Where did you get the Image group information ? I cannot seem to find that ?
0 -
I found the information.
0 -
It's new-style user interface: heaven forfend that information be actually visible without making the user work for it! (It's why I'm in the habit of putting the film/image group information in the Notes box -- I don't know what the auto-generated citation is full of, but such actually-useful-and-relevant details are all completely missing from it, nowadays.)
As you doubtless discovered, the film/image group number can be revealed by clicking the eye on Step 1 of the "Attach" process. (I'm accustomed to things behind such eyes being things like passwords. You know, like, things that are actually supposed to be secret. Why are film numbers secret?)
The number can also be revealed by clicking the "Group Data" sorta-tab-thingy above where it says "Indexed Data", and then scrolling down.
The example I happened to pick points out another common source of confusion and error: on multi-item films/groups, you have to pay attention to whether it's numbering the images by part or by whole.
(It also points out that the so-called cataloging data of the Images section is ... deficient. Yes, OK, I can figure out that it's religious, since it says Baptisatorum, and I can tell that it's 1881 and Gálos, because it says so on the image, but which religion? Would it absolutely kill someone to include that information somewhere? ....)
1