* Recording Census Sources

[Normie]

I am new to FH and have imported my GEDCOM file from findmypast. The main rationale for this is to be able to produce a complete family history story. FH seemed to be a good option as it has reporting options that should make that possible.

After importing the GEDCOM file, none of the media records come across, but I can see I can add them manually. The majority of these will be census records. Typically a census record source will relate to several members of a household. Ideally I want to show in the report the sources together with the transcription and census image. I appreciate that I can add the transcript as a note to the source and the image with a link to it.

What I want to see in the report is a single reference to the source census record, attached to this the census image and transcript. I am testing with the 'ancestors by generation' report. When I produced this report, I ended up with 2 references to the same source, one for each partner (see below).

2. Findmypast, "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612; Record set: 1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census; Subcategory: Census; Category: Census, Land & Substitutes; Collections from: United Kingdom, England;
7. Findmypast, "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612; Record set: 1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census; Subcategory: Census; Category: Census, Land & Substitutes; Collections from: United Kingdom, England;

I thought that the option to 'combine identical citations for the same source' would have resolved this, but it does not. Is there anything I can do to avoid these duplicates?

The second issue is to identify where to link the media to and to add the notes. This seems to apply to only to one person, not all people in the census. I have tried various fields to link the census image to, but without any apparent difference.

Hopefully this makes some sense. All I want to achieve is a report containing a single source record for a census record, with the census image and transcript attached.

Would appreciate any ideas to achieve this.

[davidf]

All I want to achieve is a report containing a single source record for a census record, with the census image and transcript attached.

This will request will jump you into the lumper/splitters debate that crops up in numerous questions! (see current discussions on Multiple evidence of event). You may decide that all the discussion is too esoteric - but where you stand on that debate will determine how you solve your issue.

Your request seems to imply that you are instinctively a "splitter" (or have assumed that position from your export from FMP). You view a "source" not as "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census" but as a specific bit of it (that which relates to a household).

But can I check?
You have facts - like an address for a person on a particular date (e.g. census day) - the "census fact".
You have sources - things that you have found which tell you something (e.g. x lived at y) or support what you believe.
You link sources to facts through the right hand side of the properties box (after clicking the yellow scroll icon if necessary), through selecting a source and then if necessary saying from where in the source you are drawing the information. (This link is called a citation - but FH does not make a obvious "Thing" of citations - it is the bottom half of the yellow side of the properties box.)

If you are looking at a Household, you can either

• specify the lines on the census return as your source: "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612; . (The rest of the source definition from FMP is pretty redundant and can be omitted if you want to tidy things up a bit.)
• specify the entire census as your source "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; and then specify where in that census you find the information Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612;

(It is possible to define your source as something like "1861 Census for Sheffield" and then define where in the pages for Sheffield you find the bit you are interested in - but most people adopt one of the above two alternatives.)

If you select the first option (which I think is your inclination) you will attach your transcript to a note on the source and attach the images to the source.
If you select the later you will attach the relevant part of your transcript to the "Text from Source" field and attach the image to the citation (which is offered as the first choice when you click on the media icon in the right hand side of the property box - under the list of sources)

Others will comment on whether you can get something like:
2, 7, Findmypast, "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612;
In your report - I don't make much use of reports (prefer diagrams)

One thought that does cross my mind is: do you have duplicate sources due to the way the import from FMP has worked? Check in the Sources Table of the Records View of FH - do you see duplicate sources? Does for instance Findmypast, "1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census - Findmypast". Archive reference: RG09; Piece number: 1765; Folio: 116; Page: 27; Schedule: 157; HouseHoldID: 2114612; Record set: 1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census; Subcategory: Census; Category: Census, Land & Substitutes; Collections from: United Kingdom, England; appear twice?

If it does you need to do some merging - but come back to the forum to discuss this first and get advice about ensuring you have a back up first!

[tatewise]

Welcome to the FHUG.
What David has said is valid, but until you are more familiar with FH, some of the details may be obscure.

Yes, most web based family trees such as Ancestry and FindMyPast to NOT download the Media files.
The Media records hold URL links back to the website images, which must be downloaded manually.

I think FindMyPast uses one Source record for each Census year such as 1861 England, Wales & Scotland Census and records the Reference details, etc, in the Citation fields.
That makes it more awkward to have a Text From Source transcript and attached Media image per household member, because that must be repeated in the Citations associated with each of their Census events.
That arrangement is what we refer to here as Method 2 lumper Source Citations.
The alternative, Method 1 splitter Source Citations have a Source record per household, which holds the Reference details, the Text From Source transcript, and attached Media image all in one record and the Citation fields are mostly empty.
See glossary:sources|> Source Records for more details and is one of the topics in how_to:key_features_for_newcomers|> Key Features for Newcomers that I advise you study.

Yes, the Combine identical citations for the same source should combine them as you say.
But the slightest difference will cause them to be replicated, even if the difference does not appear in the Report.
A detailed examination of Citation data would reveal the differences, but may not be worthwhile as explained below.

The solution to the above problems and your stated objectives is to create new Source records per household, and link them to the household members via their Census events, making your current Source Citations redundant.
There are examples of this approach in the Family Historian Sample Project.
See how_to:recording_census_records|> Recording from a Census Record for details.
ancestralsources:index|> Ancestral Sources companion program simplifies the task and is another topic in how_to:key_features_for_newcomers|> Key Features for Newcomers.

Also see how_to:index#importing_to_family_historian|> Importing to Family Historian which does not have a specific guide for FindMyPast (we don't seem to get many migrants from there) but the other guides will give some general clues and the list below advises how to repair common residual problems. especially UDF.

[Normie]

Thanks for the replies, it gives me something more to look at.

I have looked at the references tatewise suggests, but have had a little difficulty making them work as I expect, most likely to me being unfamiliar with the terminology .

Having followed David's logic forward, I believe the duplication is caused by having multiple references to the source to census facts for an individual.

Census Sources.jpg (233.33 KiB) Viewed 4080 times

(Sorry, could not figure out how to enlarge this image)

The example I am following down shows the source linked to three facts, Occupation, Residence and Census UK 1861. I guess this is why I am getting duplicate references, so will explore this further.

Thanks for the help.

Normie

[tatewise]

The reason the image appears as it does is that it has a VERY large white border.
If you can use a photo editor to crop the border and rescale the image it will be larger.
See info:forums#posting_topics|> Posting Topics for techniques that work.

Multiple references to the same Source are not causing the replication.

It will differences in the Citations which can be revealed by clicking on the [+] expansion buttons of each Source.
Keep clicking subsidiary [+] expansion buttons until no more (just like nested folders in File Explorer).
It may well be star bulleted UDF tags such as _PRIM and _UID that need removing.

CensusSources.png (211.43 KiB) Viewed 4066 times

[davidf]

Multiple references to the same Source are not causing the replication.

But it does look as if somehow the residence and occupation facts for 1861 have two sources:
1861 Census
1851 Census

Not a cause of the original problem - but it does look as if some tidying may be required!

[tatewise]

Yes, David, you are correct.
I suspect that both Census years say he was a Green Grocer and was resident at New Street, Kingsholm St Mary.
It is the Date of the facts that should perhaps be a Date Period from 1851 to 1861 although purists may frown on that as there is only proof for the two specific Census dates.

[Normie]

Thanks Mike and David for all the suggestions.

Having gone through the data again, I agree that the data needs some tidying up. They will have different residences and occupations between census, and it seems reasonable to me to preserve that information.

In the end, the duplication appeared to be attaching notes to the source record. By removing the notes, the source only appears once in the report; which is my aim.

I have gained a much better understanding from this, and without your help I would have made no progress.

Thanks

Norman