. Not sure what you mean, create in TNG? I don't generally input any data there, and don't export from it. Did you mean FH? And what popup? I did enter them and TNG accepted both, and then there is a Merge tab which one enters text to find merge candidates, and then it merged them to one place.Could you deliberately create two Place Records in TNG with similar names that tidy to the same name, and review the resulting popup message.
I did verify that some embedded ',' and spaces were removed from over 100 places, but, unless I change my procedures on import, I lose that tidying because of the way I've been handling places. When I input to TNG today, I clear the entire tree, but the places are restored to keep the geocoding, which otherwise would be a very slow process to regenerate. I periodically have to redo geocoding, or do some sort of merge. Restoring the place records after import is of course not a good practice when new places are added in FH, since they are lost until I keep and not restore the places. This is a downside of recreating the entire tree each time I import. I will have to review how to avoid this in TNG.
Embarrassingly, I should have done this before, but I found the 'map' geocode function, so maybe I don't need to do it in TNG. Then I wouldn't need the procedure above and it's inherent weakness. I'm doing the 'mapping now. I see FH 6.2.5 has switched geocoders; is that significant?
Yes I did have the box ticked to avoid repeat Caption Notes, saw no issue with that, based on my comparisons.
Realize my 'base' for comparison was my v3.2 Gedcom files previously input (after manual removal of ASID's), with a full file compare noting any and all differences. With LFT, nothing needs manually be done, and with TNG, just the aforementioned prefix.
No problem whatever with the unused Media Record purge; I don't need them in TNG.
Question:With regards unclean Place records, how is the tidying ever completed within the FH Gedcom itself?
I will review the other options as well.
Thanks.