I have been working with the Family Tree capability of adding people and citations for events to my database and now my master source list is a MESS!
It is not really a Family Tree interface problem. Whenever you import citations from any other people they are going to be a mess since I don't think most people know how to use citations.
Here's one simple example:
Master Source: Leah Olsen in household of Stephen Olsen, "United States Census, 1910"
and the footnote, short footnote and bibliography ALL say the same thing: "United States Census, 1910," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch...03/1:1:M5XS-BC7 : accessed 12 February 2019), Leah Olsen in household of Stephen Olsen, Castle Dale, Emery, Utah, United States; citing enumeration district (ED) ED 42, sheet 15A, family 251, NARA microfilm publication T624 (Washington D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, 1982), roll 1603; FHL microfilm 1,375,616.
I can live with the 3 long entries as the details of the citation, but the Master Source seriously needs work! Maybe it is just me, but I would rather that such a Master Source said only: "Census, United States, 1910".
It is attached to Leah Olsen and likely also attached to Stephen Olsen and others in the family group. They all have the same source and it is not necessary or proper to put their names in the Master Source.
Doing it as they have done results in one Master Source record per person per event and kind of removes the ability to know what all your sources are. The source in this case is a Census and it is from the United States (not Canada or the UK or ...) and it is from 1910 (not any other year). That is a unique source and the specific citation of that source identifies it in terms of the person / people and the exact place within that source where the information may be found. Can you imagine how nice your Master Source List would be:
Census, UK and Wales, 1881
Census, UK and Wales, 1901
Census, United States, 1910
Census, United States, 1920
Maybe some of you don't agree with my sense of Sources and Citations. It is open enough in RM& that you can do it almost any way you want.
Given that, what may be needed is some way to massage thousands of Master Source records to conform to the style that the user wants. Consistency has value - but my list is now a MESS!