One photo multiple people

In adding a photo of a home where four of my ancestors lived, I had a result I was not expecting.

I added the photo to my dad’s residence fact, and included his RIN number as well as his siblings, who also lived there.

When I went to add the photo the his siblings, it was already there, complete with the RIN, and the data I had included.

I was not expecting this because I had read that for census records, I had to enter the fact for each person of interest in the census.

Is this normal? What am I missing?

It sounds like you shared the residence fact. When you share a fact, sources/citations, media, and fact notes are also shared. Also, when you say that you “included his RIN number as well as his siblings, who also lived there” I’m assuming that you mean in the caption or description of the media.

If I shared it, I don’t know how I did it. I just added the photo.

I put the rin numbers in the ref# field beneath the captions and descriptions.

If the fact was shared it will show in the far right column. Also, the fact column will look different for the people receiving the share. It will display their role and the fact. (for example, Witness-Census or in your case, Witness-Residence).

If the fact was not shared, then you should look at the media for the people who received the image unexpectedly. Perhaps you tagged the media for those people at an earlier time. Click on the media item and then click on the “Tags” field in the far right pane to see how it is attached to each person.

I did tag the media for those people. I didn’t realize that tagging equaled shared.
from what I read in this forum, tagging isn’t good. Now thatI know how I did it, I can remove the tags.


Not sure what posts you are referring to but tagging media is fine. In fact it’s the only way to assign a media item to more than one person or fact. Some users are unhappy because there’s an extra step required in RM8 and RM9 when tagging media to another person or fact. RM7 defaulted to the highlighted person and in RM9 you need to select the person from a list. Hopefully that will get optimized but it’s an inconvenience in the workflow not a fundamental flaw in the feature

I misspoke; am adding this as a new item rather than an edit in case you use the email feature in responding. It is possible to keep adding the same media over and over again as a new item. That would accomplish the same thing as tagging the original media item though I am not aware of anyone proposing that as a strategy.

Let me try to clear my head and start fresh:" Is tagging the same as sharing?

I’ve read that sharing doesn’t transfer to another database, or print. That’s what I meant by tagging not being good.

I see. No, tagging media and sharing facts are 2 separate features:

I think I have it now, tags are for media, sharing is for facts. tagging is okay but sharing has its drawbacks in terms of searching, printing and exporting.

Thanks for all the patience you all have exhibited. But don’t think I’m done with questions.

That’s a simplification. There are also WebTags, Media Tags are stored in the MediaLinkTable, some will refer to Citation Tags instead of ‘uses’ and they are stored in the CitationLinkTable. So don’t be surprised to find different folks using language such as tag, use, link, share interchangeably among different entities. Always be aware of the context.

Please don’t confuse me with the facts (lol).

1 Like