Family Historian User Group

I tried the Lumped Source Splitter plugin and see that it could be very useful. I did have one issue with using it however. I was testing on a source with 10 links. After running the plugin I had 10 different sources all with the same name and found it a bit clumsy to try figuring out which individual each new source was linked to. The situation would be much worse if I used it on a source with hundreds of links.

Would it be possible to have an option to append the Individual's name to the beginning of the new source? For example.

Old source name: Newspaper article
New source name: Henshaw, Robert Levi - Newspaper article

Or am I missing something?

Thanks,
Bill

It is easy to discover what the Source links to by using View > Citations to Source Record... command of the Where Used Records Links plugin.

I think the problem there is that it could relate to many individuals with many different facts, but then a list might be useful.

What I do is run plugin Where Used Record Links on the source which gives a full list of where the source is used, you can also click on many of the entries to take you direct to the Fact/item

tatewise wrote: ↑

09 Mar 2023 17:25

It is easy to discover what the Source links to by using View > Citations to Source Record... command of the Where Used Records Links plugin.

I know about that command and use it all the time. I guess I was just thinking that if there were hundreds of facts all with the same name, it would be a bit clumsy to have to do this for each fact.

Bill

jimlad68 wrote: ↑

09 Mar 2023 17:26

I think the problem there is that it could relate to many individuals with many different facts, but then a list might be useful.

What I do is run plugin Where Used Record Links on the source which gives a full list of where the source is used, you can also click on many of the entries to take you direct to the Fact/item

I guess I was under the impression that after running the plugin the old source which linked to many individuals was split into many sources, each of which was linked to only one individual. I must be missing something. I'll have to play around with the plugin some more.

Bill

Bill,

The plugin help describes how citation equivalence is determined and how the split source name is derived. Essentially, the individual (with a small i) Where within Source values (or selected Templated Source field values) are appended to the original lumped source Title and Short Title.

From your description, it sounds like you do not have distinct Where within Source values for the various citations. In these circumstances, it may be simpler to add these prior to splitting, as it is easier to see what they relate to (but you will have to add them to all duplicates of the same citation, so it could be a lot of work if the same citation is applied to lots of Facts).

It doesn’t look at where the citation is used, so your example wouldn’t work I’m afraid.

Another option is to display the new split sources in a Query. For example, if you are splitting the 1940 census, and you know each citation is linked to at least the census Fact, you could tabulate individuals, 1940 census, and source (assuming it is the first/only source).

Work down the list, amending the source titles one by one according to which fact they are listed alongside. Exactly how you set it up depends on how your source is structured, but hopefully you can apply that general principle.

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

09 Mar 2023 18:16

From your description, it sounds like you do not have distinct Where within Source values for the various citations. In these circumstances, it may be simpler to add these prior to splitting, as it is easier to see what they relate to (but you will have to add them to all duplicates of the same citation, so it could be a lot of work if the same citation is applied to lots of Facts).

It doesn’t look at where the citation is used, so your example wouldn’t work I’m afraid.

Mark,

Unfortunately I didn't often use the Where within Source field back in the day. I put everything in the Note field. I have since changed my ways.

I was afraid it might not work, but thought I'd ask the author in case you had a trick up your sleeve.

Thanks,
Bill

Mark1834 wrote: ↑

09 Mar 2023 18:33

Another option is to display the new split sources in a Query. For example, if you are splitting the 1940 census, and you know each citation is linked to at least the census Fact, you could tabulate individuals, 1940 census, and source (assuming it is the first/only source).

Work down the list, amending the source titles one by one according to which fact they are listed alongside. Exactly how you set it up depends on how your source is structured, but hopefully you can apply that general principle.

Mark,

I'll give this a try. For something like a census, the source is probably the first for that fact. That wouldn't usually be the case for some of my lumped sources. I think I'll just have to bite the bullet and use View > Citations to Source Record... and the Where Used Records Links plugin after splitting the lumped source as Mike suggested.

Thanks,
Bill

You can do the same thing directly from the View > Citations to Source Record menu option in FH7 if it’s easier. However, neither the plugin or menu option update dynamically, unlike a Query.

Mark, did you check your claims about the plugin and command? I think not!

The plugin will provide all the Citation details for any number of selected Source records, whereas the command only does one Source at a time.

The plugin Result Set allows the Source Titles to be edited and the Result Set will update just like a Query.

The command Result Set works much the same (one Source at a time) but editing the Source Title is a little more awkward.

IMO there is no need to write a Query.

My comment was a little too brief. Using the command or plugin, only certain fields will update after it is run. With a Query, all changes to listed fields are updated in real time.

Neither of us know exactly how Bill has structured his sources, so I have no opinion on which is the preferred option - I'm just suggesting alternatives.