Add ability to split incorrectly merged candidates

[Jez-C]

Jim Fitzpatrick contains a candidacy for Hyde Godley - Tameside from 3 May 2018, but it's a different person with the same name that stood for this election. Compare: Jim Fitzpatrick, MP - https://twitter.com/FitzMP Jim Fitzpatrick, Cllr - https://twitter.com/jimFitzpatrick5

[sjorford]

I've found a few more like this, listed in this Google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_-a4-cCPsFjK_zlk1vnm3EpQ8b8SWVxapqD5DfwBZsg/edit?usp=sharing

[sjorford]

If it's worth designing a user interface to split candidates, then Goodreads have something that might be a good model:

[symroe]

Thanks both. I'm having a think about how best to deal with this.

@sjorford that interface looks handy, and it's fairly obvious how to split elections, but what to do about other profile data? What if someone's added a Twitter profile for one person and I need to split them up? Do you think all info on the profile should get a radio button like that?

[mhl]

I've thought about this a bit (and half-prototyped a splitting interface). I quite like the Goodreads example, so I went with something similar, including all the person properties that are actually set, other names, identifiers and memberships.

My first instinct is to make them checkboxes rather radio buttons, because a few fields (in particular the name field and gender) you might want to copy rather than move:

But there aren't many fields that we actually use which you might want to copy rather than split, so equally you could assume the name field is copied over and leave that row out of the interface (and assume that any other fields you could update manually after splitting):

Obviously design isn't my strong point, but does something along those lines look possible?

[jf1]

Radio buttons seem best and fwiw I'd name them 'keep on original' and 'move to new'.

Another column with 'Add to new' checkboxes (to be used as well as 'keep on original') might be useful for gender but I can't think of any other fields that'd benefit from this and it doesn't seem worthwhile for just that one field.

[sjorford]

The radio buttons version is the kind of thing I was thinking of - @jf1 I agree that there isn't much value in treating the gender field differently.

Photos would also have to be splittable - would all of the photos attached to the page have its own radio button?

It's probably worth having a post-split screen, with links to both split pages, and a request to the user to double-check all the data and make any further changes that might be necessary.

[mhl]

Thanks both of you - oops, I'd forgotten about photos, but yeah, I think a thumbnail (linking to the full size image) in the table would work OK. Also :+1: for the post-split page

[symroe]

Refs https://github.com/DemocracyClub/yournextrepresentative/issues/1462