ERROR REPORT - Same sources attached to more than one person
Over the last few days, a VERY active contributor has been adding sources to an O'Neil family. I attached those same sources to another O'Neil family back in 2021.
This NOT a "someone is messing with my tree" complaint. I'm well aware of the collaborative nature of the FSFT. This contributor is conflating and confusing people of similar names in several countries and several states within the US. It happens. O'Neil/O'Neal/O'Neill is a fairly common Irish surname. According to one list, it is #9 on the Top 10. I'm confident in my research because the father of this O'Neil family died early, and the mother remarried, to Henry Geoghegan, a much less common name, and the children are enumerated in the censuses with their stepfather.
What I do find alarming is that those sources could be added to another person of a similar name without first detaching them from the correct person/family.
I'm detaching the sources from the "other" O'Neil family as I find them, with an explanation, but to my mind, this error should not be able to happen. I've also put Alert Notes on several of the profiles.
Thoughts?
Answers
-
I assume I was seeing the same issue on Sunday. Whilst I was reviewing attachments (on sources attached to more than one individual, believing the sources to be attached to the wrong IDs) I found - in at least two separate examples - the same source to be attached to two different IDs. (I was hovering the mouse over the Detach option and, in each case, this showed the two IDs / names to which the source was currently attached.)
I have never experienced this before and can't confirm this relates to the same issue. I wish I could have grabbed a screenshot - difficult as this might have been. Alternatively, I should have recorded the ID references to check this really was the case. So, yes, I can quite believe there is / has recently been an issue with this happening.
About to close down for the night (0010 local time), but will try to replicate tomorrow.
1 -
Thanks for weighing in, @Paul W. I have the PIDs saved on the instances where I saw the issue.
I know we have talked in the past about a source being attached to more than one profile after a merge, but I confirmed that these PIDs had not been merged. The source had been directly attached to the other O'Neils within the last 48 hours.
0 -
I seem to recall a discussion here earlier this year about such multiple attachments, and I have an even fuzzier memory that the answer turned out to be something on the mobile app -- that is, there's some process or tool on it that allows this sort of blind attachment of sources to coincidentally-matching names. But I may be misremembering: it's possible that "it's the app's fault" was only offered as a theory. (I don't have the app, since I don't use my phone for internet stuff. [What can I say? I'm a Luddite.])
1 -
When I was formulating my post, I, too, recalled a post about a source being attached to multiple profiles. I have the app installed on my tablet, mostly to check to see if anything is different on the app, when there is a post with a problem I don't recognize. I don't use it for working on the FSFT, but I have no way of knowing if the other contributor was using the app.
I did find this thread - https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/490750#Comment_490750 where all the usual suspects were involved.
0 -
Yes, that's exactly the thread I was thinking of. (Yikes, it was in January and March? I was certain it was more recent than that.)
And here's Gordon's resulting suggestion/bug report: https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/141455/critically-needed-update-to-the-family-tree-mobile-app/p1?new=1
I wasn't misremembering: it is the app's fault, and I take it from your O'Neil situation that it has not been fixed. So your post is basically bumping the topic to the top, on the off chance that this time, the right people will notice.
One question occurs to me: is the tasks list on the mobile app dependent on the type of account? As in, do only LDS accounts have this "attach anyway" capability, or do public accounts also have access to it?
0 -
I hope I'm not hijacking this thread or misunderstanding the original post, but will I occasionally, actually VERY rarely, deliberately add a source to 2 people of the same name if I cannot determine which is correct. I spent a few moments trying to find where I had done this, and cannot remember. I know at the time I added information in the notes. It is always the scenario where 2 people exist of the same name, generation, location, approximate age and proximity to the primary in the source. Examples are a man has 2 cousins named John Smith, and in a census, a cousin named John Smith is in his household. FamilySearch is not quite friendly to doing this, but it can be done using the source box, because the source linker won't allow it.
2 -
@Julia Szent-Györgyi You asked:
"One question occurs to me: is the tasks list on the mobile app dependent on the type of account? As in, do only LDS accounts have this "attach anyway" capability, or do public accounts also have access to it?"
The issue of how the mobile app attaches sources is completely independent of the type of account.
0 -
@Maile L Calling your attention to this thread, please, since you had commented on the previous thread discussing the same issue. This one needs to be fixed, please.
0 -
I almost reacted too quickly to your first sentence and was going to query how you were able to do that. Then I read to the end of the post and realised that's how it could be done - i.e., by way of the source box! Thanks for reminding me of that.
So, perhaps that is the method that explains my examples of finding (via "Review Attachments") a source was already attached to two IDs. Also, @Áine Ní Donnghaile, I assume you are sure the "source box method" doesn't apply to what has happened in your case. (I assume it would show up differently if it had.)
1 -
@Paul W Given the speed at which this contributor has connected multiple unrelated families, I would doubt that any time or care has been spent in working around the system.
0 -
I wouldn't describe using the Source Box as "working around the system," since it is part of the system. And as for speed, I can attach sources with the source box several times faster than with the mobile app, so if speed is the indicator, we would conclude that the Source Box is the culprit.
I don't know any specific PIDs and have no other details than what I read in this thread, so I certainly can't reach any definitive conclusions, but I'd keep an open mind about possibilities.
0 -
I'll be happy to share the dozens of PIDs, but not in public because my intent was definitely not to out a sloppy attacher. My intent was to highlight that the system is allowing something to happen that cannot be.
1 -
The difference between using the source box versus using the mobile app is in the required intent: a person using the app is just following FS's suggestions. In contrast, attaching from your source box requires you to intentionally choose a profile and choose a source and make the connection. Even if things ended up in your source box unintentionally (which can happen easily: for some inexplicable reason, there's a checkbox for it in Source Linker), you're highly unlikely to attach those entries to profiles without some purpose in doing so, and that purpose is not supplied by any FS hint or other process.
1 -
I have seen multiple instances of a single source attached to more than one person/account. I do use a tablet, iPad. I do not use the mobile app.
0 -
@Áine Ní Donnghaile would you mind sending me a PM with the details such as IDs?
1 -
Done, @Maile L
1
