I wonder if any fields under the Citation Detail, text, media, etc.
The Media tag field is obviously not considered. Apparently, only the Source fields, Citation Name and Details fields are compared. Setting aside how my file got this way, most urgent is understanding the Merge All Duplicate Citations command. However, clicking on Media or Citation Used in this pane reveals differences.And the Footnotes are identical, of course. In the Edit Citation panel to the right under Citation Details, I find the Citation Name and Details fields to be identical or blank.I find I have dozens, if not hundreds, of either unnamed citations (blank name) or citations with identical names.It will list all the citations for that source by name (if they have one) on the left pane. Click the arrow on the Citations column to reveal the Citations window.Open the Source tab and select a source with multiple citations.But there is nothing RM can do about the inadequate way Ancestry is generating sources and citations for this particular set of images. In summary, RM8 really must look at image files tagged to citations when merging citations. And even in RM7, the citations can’t be merged but you really have the same problem of footnote sentences for different images looking the same.
#Rootsmagic 7 book software
If you downloaded your Ancestry tree via GEDCOM to some genealogy software other than RM, you would have the same problem of footnote sentences for different images looking the same. But that still leaves you with the footnote sentence for couple A being exactly the same as the footnote sentence for couple B, even though the actual pages were totally different. That would solve your immediate problem and make RM8 work like RM7 for these particular citations. Well, RM8 could include the image in the comparison of duplicate citations when doing the automatic merge. My conclusion is that this particular marriage index is being handled very poorly by Ancestry and in a certain sense there is nothing that RM8 can do about it. So two different images from the same collection of census images had different citations. The citation in Ancestry and hence the footnote sentence was specific to the exact state, county, year, and page number associated with the image.
My previous test with census records and TreeShare was very different and more successful. So TreeShare and RM8 were not doing anything wrong, but the way Ancestry is handling this particular marriage index makes for a very poor automatic footnote sentence. The images for the two couple were different and correct for each couple, but the source name and citation name were the same in Ancestry as TreeShare had stored in RM8. I then looked at the same information online in the little Ancestry tree that I had just made. The problem was that the citation didn’t have a different page number or anything different else in the citation that would identify the fact that the citations were for different pages, even though the image was different.
#Rootsmagic 7 book full
But the Source Name and Citation Name and full footnote sentence was identical in RM8 for both couples, even though the image that was tagged to the citation was different and correct for each couple. I had two different couples with two different images. I need to acknowledge this isn’t the way I normally do my sources, so I may not be understanding exactly what’s going on.
#Rootsmagic 7 book download
I then used TreeShare to download the tree to RM8. I created a very small Ancestry tree that used the New York State, Marriage Index, 1881-1967 as a source for two different couples.
0 kommentar(er)
