Link 'Other Information' Facts to Sources

LegacyUser

Beverly Farnsworth said: Facts in 'Other Information' (person profiles) should link to Sources so that when a Source is deleted it is deleted too. Problem is that if it isn't deleted, especially for Census records, the Residence remains and then an incorrect Place continues to be used in Searches for Hints.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Yes, yes, yes!

I have an open feature request to be able to source each "other" event/fact separately by tagging the associated sources.

The developers took an easy route (admitted by FS personnel) by lumping together "other" categories by type, which means they will have to rework the way they track changes to the Other events and places before they can effectively set up a tagging system that includes all events and facts in the other section. The same problem applies to the couple relationship area -- tagging is non-existent.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Oh, and by the way, Welcome to the community support forum for FamilySearch. FamilySearch personnel read every discussion thread and may or may not respond as their time permits. We all share an active interest in using the resources of this site and as users, we have various levels of knowledge and experience and do our best to help each other with concerns, issues, and/or questions.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: In other words at the moment if you tried to tag a residence with a source it would likely do something along the lines of tagging all the residences with a source instead. A fundamental alteration of the database structure is required to achieve what all of us want and is badly needed by the site.

However I do not think that untagging of a fact should result in the deletion of that fact. A flag should be raised on the profile as a data problem if there are un-sourced facts present, but they should not be not automatically deleted. That way lies the potential for too much destructive amendment of the system.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Um, yes, if tagging was available today with the way the other events are set up, you are correct.

However, we can't even tag any event or fact in the "Other" (or for that matter, the "Family") sections.

If we could, then yes, your second paragraph would apply.

The fundamental way that the Other section is organized is flawed and it is something that I saw a long time ago. Joe Martel chimed in with the underlying organization (Thanks, Joe) in another discussion and helped me understand what was going on. (I think it was Joe, but it might have been Ron Tanner or another representative who provided the information.)

Now, FamilySearch developers have to undo what they did in order to set things up correctly so we can tag sources to each individual event or fact, regardless of its "type."

I don't know what undoing what they did will do to the rest of the tree. Hopefully, FamilySearch will invite some of us in to do some beta testing to make sure nothing is broken as a result of undoing the "organize by type" approach they have taken with regard to all events and facts, no matter where they show up in a person's record in the massive tree.

LegacyUser

Merlin R Kitchen said: Until it can be done fully automatically, would it not be wise that when a patron detaches a source from a person, that the patron be alerted to also go to the "Other Information" and delete any "fact" put there by that source. If the source is attached to more than one name, such as a census, to deal similarly with all persons to which it is attached.
For example, when I have detached a census that really did not apply, I have gone into the "Other information" category and deleted the residence that was added by that particular source.

LegacyUser

Kristina Kuhn Krumm said: I have seen that we can add sources now to marriages, but it is really screwy how we have to attach the source. The source cannot be among the "sources" tab a the top, Because it is a "relationship source" interesting. This is not an easy task as there is no way to search through your source box for a source to attach. However this is better than "nothing"

LegacyUser

Brett said: Kristina

We have had the ability to add (ie. attached) 'Marriage' "Sources" to a "Couple Relationship" for a very only time.

The easiest what to do that is to ensure that when you are adding (ie. attaching) the 'Marriage' "Source" to the individuals/persons, make certain that you "Tick"/'Check" the 'Box" that says "Add Source to Source Box".



That way, you can add (ie. attach) a 'Marriage' "Source" to a "Couple Relationship" from the "Source Box".



I have been doing this for years.

The real problem/issue is that 'Marriage' "Sources" should be a "Taggable" Event - that is another matter.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The ability to tag anything other than a "Vital" conclusion needs a lot of work. Even the Family section tagging lacks a cohesive design as compared to the Vitals section.

The Other section is going to need to be redesigned. As I mentioned in my response from four months ago, the current design is not functional and needs to be redesigned. It impacts the change log, as well, so this is something that will require some serious decisions with regard to tagging. At best, I now provide a "title" for the Residence to show what the residence event is.

suzwilley1

I just ran into this exact issue. Someone had confused two children with the same name in two different families (even though the data clearly showed the parents were different). I corrected the child/parent links and sources and then happened to go back to look at something and noticed the child who had been in the wrong family still carried the Other Information related to the sources I had deleted from her.

I hope something can be done, even if it's a warning message to check Other Information when you delete a source.