+1 for getting rid of the "pubMed entry" attachments. This is extremely annoying behavior for all of the reasons mentioned above.
I don't understand why having an attachment is a good workaround for getting back to the pubMed page when it causes so much clutter. I do a quick check to see if I have the pdf papers I want to read before I go offline (by scanning the articles in the directory for attachments), but once offline, I find I don't have the paper, only the "pubmed entry", which is useless...
I waste a ton of time dealing with irritating behavior - editing the js, deleting "pubMed entry" attachments etc. I have been waiting for years now for this behavior to go away. There are many users complaining about this 'feature'. Is there somewhere where users are actually requesting this behavior?
If you need to go back to pubmed, a simple method is to click on the extra field (ie the pubMed ID) and paste it into the pubmed search box. Takes you straight to the abstract in pubmed. It's really not that difficult.
If you need to go back to pubmed, a simple method is to click on the extra field (ie the pubMed ID) and paste it into the pubmed search box. Takes you straight to the abstract in pubmed.
sure, but that takes more clicks than deleting the attached link, which you find extremely annoying, so that's not really a solution.
Obviously we don't get feature requests for features that already exist, but yes, when we moved the URL out of the URL field, not being able to get to the pubmed entry with one click was one complaint and the attached link addresses that.
I do a quick check to see if I have the pdf papers I want to read before I go offline (by scanning the articles in the directory for attachments), but once offline, I find I don't have the paper, only the "pubmed entry", which is useless...
items with just an attached link do not get a dot in the "Attachments" column in the middle panel, so that would still work.
So, sorry, I'm not convinced--this is still what I say above. We'll get rid of it once we have a clickable PMID field.
" sure, but that takes more clicks than deleting the attached link, which you find extremely annoying, so that's not really a solution. "
I am not really following your logic here, these are two separate things. In one case I am deleting an attachment and the other I am going to pubMed. Comparing the number of clicks to do different things doesn't make sense to me.
Deleting the attachment is to reduce the clutter - ideally I want attachments to be attachments (ie the pdf of the paper), not links. It is strange behavior to have it as a link.
I can tell you that, as a user, I waste a LOT of time deleting thousands of "pubMed entry" attachments I do not want to try and keep a big database clean. I waste almost no time getting to pubMed without the attachments by using the PMID.
Seems like a clickable PMID field is a good solution for the users that need to go to pubMed in one click, not two. In the meantime, the links-as-attachments are a major pain.
Also, if you actually waste a lot of time doing this, see my post from May last year -- with a saved search, this takes you seconds to do in bulk. Deleting the links in the saved search once a week, you should be spending no more than 2mins/year on this.
Yes, the saved search is very useful feature for this. I still have to ctrl click each attachment to delete them and it consumes time. It's like pulling weeds from the garden. ;)
no you don't: ctrl+a to select all (which you'll note does not select the items, only the links), shift+delete to delete, return to OK. I wish I could pull weeds using select all. . .
+1 for getting rid of the "pubMed entry" attachments. There used to be a few years ago, a way of getting rid of that clutter in bulk, but I can't remember how - anybody know?
+1 for an opt out. would highly appreciate it! I don`t think this option would reduce user retention due to option clutter. If anything, it would reduce confusion of users (imo, no need for proficiency in zotero to be wanting that automatism gone) which are otherwise puzzled by the fact that, in this nicely organized and thought-out options menu, this option is truly absent. I have invested quite some time browsing the menu before consulting the internet, eventually finding this thread, reading it until the end before finding out that the opt out is actually entirely not an option.
Ditto to all the comments above about the annoyance caused by the "PubMed entry" ghost attachments. Come on, it's been almost 8 years since the first complaint in this thread. Can at least an opt out option be added, please??
+1 for please remove the automatic pubmed ghost attachment. Love Zotero, but somebody above used the analogy of pulling weeds from a garden, and this is exactly how it feels every time I import a citation from pubmed. Please make this optional.
-1 (minus 1). Until we get a clickable PubMed field, please keep the Pubmed Entry attachments. Especially while we do not have auto-update of data from Pubmed.
Upgrade Storage
I don't understand why having an attachment is a good workaround for getting back to the pubMed page when it causes so much clutter. I do a quick check to see if I have the pdf papers I want to read before I go offline (by scanning the articles in the directory for attachments), but once offline, I find I don't have the paper, only the "pubmed entry", which is useless...
I waste a ton of time dealing with irritating behavior - editing the js, deleting "pubMed entry" attachments etc. I have been waiting for years now for this behavior to go away. There are many users complaining about this 'feature'. Is there somewhere where users are actually requesting this behavior?
If you need to go back to pubmed, a simple method is to click on the extra field (ie the pubMed ID) and paste it into the pubmed search box. Takes you straight to the abstract in pubmed. It's really not that difficult.
Obviously we don't get feature requests for features that already exist, but yes, when we moved the URL out of the URL field, not being able to get to the pubmed entry with one click was one complaint and the attached link addresses that. items with just an attached link do not get a dot in the "Attachments" column in the middle panel, so that would still work.
So, sorry, I'm not convinced--this is still what I say above. We'll get rid of it once we have a clickable PMID field.
I am not really following your logic here, these are two separate things. In one case I am deleting an attachment and the other I am going to pubMed. Comparing the number of clicks to do different things doesn't make sense to me.
Deleting the attachment is to reduce the clutter - ideally I want attachments to be attachments (ie the pdf of the paper), not links. It is strange behavior to have it as a link.
I can tell you that, as a user, I waste a LOT of time deleting thousands of "pubMed entry" attachments I do not want to try and keep a big database clean. I waste almost no time getting to pubMed without the attachments by using the PMID.
Seems like a clickable PMID field is a good solution for the users that need to go to pubMed in one click, not two. In the meantime, the links-as-attachments are a major pain.
I have to use the "saved search" to delete pubmed entries when I feel they are really annoying.
I don`t think this option would reduce user retention due to option clutter. If anything, it would reduce confusion of users (imo, no need for proficiency in zotero to be wanting that automatism gone) which are otherwise puzzled by the fact that, in this nicely organized and thought-out options menu, this option is truly absent.
I have invested quite some time browsing the menu before consulting the internet, eventually finding this thread, reading it until the end before finding out that the opt out is actually entirely not an option.
(Yes, I've read through this thread. I'm just letting you know that it's a common annoyance.)
Come on, it's been almost 8 years since the first complaint in this thread. Can at least an opt out option be added, please??
Please make this optional.