Photo tagging from watchlist - why not LNAB?

Question

Not sure if this is a feature or a bug. When I go to add additional profiles to an image from my watchlist, the last name that shows on the list is the "current last name" only, with no mention of LNAB (except as part of the profile ID). Is this intentional? It seems out of place when the convention for WT profiles is to show a person's name as "FirstName (LNAB) CurrentLastName". Maybe just a space consideration given the limited width of the watchlist box?

Answer 1

Frank, I'm not sure I'm following you, and am perhaps missing the point, but I don't see the problem.  I assume that what you're doing is going to your watchlist and then clicking on the 'Images' tab, which shows you a string of all the photos that have been uploaded (by anyone) to profiles on your watchlist.  When any of those images was first uploaded to a profile, it was assigned an identifier based on the WikiTree ID of the host profile, which is in turn based on LNAB.  The title displayed on the image is the title is was given by the member who uploaded it, or if none was assigned, the display name of the host profile (current name).  If you roll your mouse over the image, you'll display the URL for the image, which is based on the ID (in Firefox it's displayed in the bottom left corner of the screen -- other browsers may differ).  If you then click on 'View/Edit Image Details' you go to the same edit screen you would have seen on the original host profile, and from there you can select other profiles to add the photo to.  So I don't see it as either a feature or a bug, it's just the way someone chose to implement the capability way back when.  Granted, it probably could have been done differently, but why would this be a problem?

Comments

I didn't explain very well. Let's say I edit an image containing multiple people, all of whom have WT profiles. On the edit image details, you can select several additional profiles to associate to the image by clicking checkboxes in your displayed watchlist.

Let's say I want to associate my 2nd great grandmother Marianna Kaminska to the photo. I scroll down to the Ks but I don't see her:

The reason I don't see her is that the watchlist on this page is sorted by current last name. So I would need to scroll back up to Brodzinski (her married surname) to find her:

I was just wondering if this intentional and whether this is the best way for this to work. I always think in terms of LNAB rather than married/current last name.

---

Aah, well, I see now what you mean.  Yes, the list of profiles on the image editing page is sorted by current last name, and within a last name it also appears to be alphabetized by preferred name rather than given first name (based on a very quick cursory look).  I had never noticed this, and I have honestly never found it to be a problem.  I would have to assume it was set up that way intentionally, but I don't know the rationale for it, and I doubt that box width was the reason.  You could always float a proposal to change it to LNAB order and see what kind of reaction you get from other members.

Answer 2

Sorry, Frank, but it works fine for me.  "Susanna (Haywood) Scadding" appears in full on one of the photos.  I can't remember if there are any profiles who appear the way you describe.

Comments

If I go to my Watchlist and click on the little button 'Images', then the links I see are the titles of each image, typed in by yourself and not by the computer.

---

See my reply to Dennis above. Maybe that explains my question better.