How can I delete this unwanted source?

[LornaHenderson 0]

As per my email on the list, attached are some screen shots of my attempts to find the remaining reference to a source I'm tyring to delete.

 

List of events filtered for citations to source x says there aren't any qualifying events.

 

List of citations report gives a result of one, and variable output depending on format, screen and PDF one outpuf, rtf or word giving a conversion error.

 

I need to know where it thinks it is being used so I can check my data and either fix it to another source or delete the citation, and then delete the source

 

Help!

TMG6.07WhereIsMyCitation.doc

[collybs 0]

Lorna

 

Have you tried the 'person and source report' in John's TMG Utility.

[LornaHenderson 0]

Lorna

 

Have you tried the person and source report in John's TMG Utilities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yep.

zilch shows up.

I'm beginning to think that the 1 citation is a figment of TMG's imagination, and I should just delete the damn thing anyway, but I got stubborn as to why and where.

 

Ta for trying

[GenerationGoneBy 0]

It looks like it's in 2019's baptismal tag and you have no sureties attached.

[Terry Reigel 0]

I can't replicate anything like it - looks like a tag type with no name, appearing for person #1063, who has no name.

 

I suspect some sort of data corruption. I think a chat with support would be the next step.

[Jim Byram 0]

I need to know where it thinks it is being used so I can check my data and either fix it to another source or delete the citation, and then delete the source

You have a citation to this source from a source? If so, you should be able to find it using a List of Sources?

[Terry Reigel 0]

Jim is exactly right - you have this source cited as the "Source of this Source" in Source #1063.

[LornaHenderson 0]

Jim is exactly right - you have this source cited as the "Source of this Source" in Source #1063.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks all, but..

 

I thought it might be something like that, but I'm darned if I can spot it.

the two sources are completely separate logically, and appear to have absolutely nothing connecting them visible

I can't even spot how I can input/update/change a source of a source - and help didn't help

 

Running a list of sources report, filtered by source number, separately for both numbers just showed up a one line report showing number, surety, abbreviation

Couldn't spot anything in the filters available that would let me find a source of a source either.

[Terry Reigel 0]

Lorna,

 

Did you look at source #1063 - Peter & Jill Billing email "EM METTERS, Devon: ex P & J Billing"...?

 

On the Attachments tab of the source definition, in the lower half "Sources of this Souce," you should see a citation to source # 2019 - Bere Ferrers: BAP

 

Just delete that citation.

[LornaHenderson 0]

Lorna,

 

Did you look at source #1063 - Peter & Jill Billing email "EM METTERS, Devon: ex P & J Billing"...?

 

On the Attachments tab of the source definition, in the lower half "Sources of this Souce," you should see a citation to source # 2019 - Bere Ferrers: BAP

 

Just delete that citation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Looked there, nothing listed at all.

On the attachments tab for 1063 the only entry is the repository

2019 has nothing on that screen either.

 

However, I've just noticed that source 1063 isn't "Metters, Devon" at all so no wonder I've not spotted it.

 

I'm sure I've NOT renumbered it.

Searching for METTERS brought up source 1362, which does, indeed have 2019 as a source of a source.

 

I just reran the list of citations to check it did indeed say 1063, it does (but wont next time as it is now gone).

 

So I guess I've solved one problem and raised another, why on earth does the list of citations report show the wrong number?

 

Thanks for all your help

[Terry Reigel 0]

So I guess I've solved one problem and raised another, why on earth does the list of citations report show the wrong number?

 

Thanks for all your help

You're welcome - glad that finally nailed down.

 

I've replicated the wrong number issue and will report it. My guess it's displaying an "internal" number and not the one users see. The difference I'd think is missing sources, or deleted sources, or something of the kind.

[LornaHenderson 0]

I've replicated the wrong number issue and will report it. My guess it's displaying an "internal" number and not the one users see. The difference I'd think is missing sources, or deleted sources, or something of the kind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ta Terry,

glad I wasn't completely missing the plot, just rather unobservant as to the abbreviations on my source, and rather fixated on the numbers.

 

I have heaps of gaps in my source numbering, (years of tidy up behind me, and ahead) so yes it is highly likely to be an internal number, lower than the actual visible number.

 

That source was probably the only one in my db that had a source of a source, I've never really noticed it or used it, and didn't really read the heading of the box!!