Improve Merging

cyphix333

I use merging a lot after uploading receipts, but it seems it could be improved.

1. One of the major annoyances of merging is that it seems to prioritise the receipt data over the other data you have listed; like for example, if you merge two items and they have different descriptions, then the Receipt description will take precedence without even asking what you want to do if they are different - I get not asking might not be present to make the process simpler, but if that is the case Wave should allow you to select the default action you want to take on which fields will take precedence if they are not the same.
2. Another annoyance is that it seems to remove any Vendors you have input for whatever reason - like it seems it doesn't care about any of the data at all in the merged transactions - otherwise why would it remove the vendor when the receipt version doesn't have a conflicting Vendor - it simply just ditches the data.

cyphix333

I just tried to merge a receipt with a transaction that has been split, but when doing so it seems to ditch the receipt as it is no longer mentioned at the top; additionally, if you unmerge them, the receipt seems to have vanished from the receipt item you posted to accounting.

Alexia

Hi, @cyphix333,

I've been testing the merge feature a bit to see how it prioritizes information. I couldn't give you the exact rules, but the merge feature prioritizing the transaction linked to receipts isn't absolute. From what I can tell, Wave will give priority to the description name that's most elaborate. This, of course, doesn't actually resolve your issue and your feedback is absolutely valid, it's really just an interesting bit of information that might help predict the behaviour of the transactions you'll merge in the future.

I tried merging a transaction with a vendor to one that didn't and the merged transaction was linked to a vendor. Can you give me a step-by-step breakdown of what you did to lose a vendor in a merging? Being able to replicate this issue will give us a better idea on how we can stop it from happening in the future.

cyphix333

Hi @Alexia,

Interestingly enough a couple of times lately when I merged with a receipt it actually kept the more elaborate name as you stated, but in the past it always seemed to take the receipt name no matter if the existing transaction was more elaborate or not - so not sure if something changed, but thought I'd let you know.

As for losing vendors, I generally always merge transactions that come via a receipt, so maybe that has something to do with it; I haven't tested if the same would happen to two transactions created via the Accounting section.

So what generally happens is I create the transaction via the Accounting page and then afterwards I may upload the receipt, post it to accounting and then I will merge it with the existing transaction; the existing transaction will have a vendor, which will be lost upon merging and also lost even if unmerged.

cyphix333

Just did another one of these and it picked the name from the receipt (which was less elaborate) and it also removed the Vendor attached to the existing transaction.

Alexia

Hi, @cyphix333,

Thanks for following up. @Justin_A might be in the best position to offer more insight into prioritization during transaction merging.

The merge feature in your version of Wave is relatively new and your feedback is invaluable in helping us refine it. Thank you for taking the time!

cyphix333

Not a problem at all @Alexia

JCD

That explains why Merge altered the date (incorrect on the receipt!)
Doesn't explain why can no longer merge more than 2 transactions
used to be able to merge bill payment + receipt + bank transaction
Can this be re-incorporated?