Inaccurate standardization of place

RIPoole

I have found another inaccurate standardization of place. Livingston County, Missouri is standardized as Livingston, Victoria, Australia in the "Missouri, County Marriage, Naturalization, and Court Records, 1800-1991" collection. This one doesn't have a Place Original listing, but I believe it is the same kind of error as the others I have seen. Here is the link: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6CT4-HMPW. There are plenty of others in this collection that are indexed this way: https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?q.anyPlace=Livingston%2C%20Victoria%2C%20Australia&f.collectionId=2060668&m.defaultFacets=on&m.queryRequireDefault=on&m.facetNestCollectionInCategory=on&count=20&offset=0

I have chosen to edit the name of my ancestor, Nathan R Tracy, but have left the place as it is so that the engineers can see the problem. I have fixed the place in Nathan's record.

Teresa Winterton

Thank you for reporting your concerns about standardized places that appear on indexed records that are not correct.

We understand that when records have been indexed, there are sometimes automated processes which select the standardized location, and sometimes that process makes mistakes.

Many indexed records, however, can be edited. When the Edit button at the top of an indexed record is active and has not been greyed-out, you can usually make the individual corrections yourself as described in the following knowledge article about correcting Indexing and Transcription errors.

https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/how-do-i-fix-indexing-or-transcription-errors-in-historical-records

When corrections cannot be made, here are a few common reasons why you may not be able to correct a transcription error that you find.

• As of March 2020, the capability to edit incorrect dates and places may depend on language, location, and the collection where the record is stored. If you are unable to edit a date or place, please be patient. The capability is forthcoming. 
• Some of the indexed records on FamilySearch.org do not have a corresponding image that can be used to validate the correction.
• FamilySearch may not own the index, and our agreement with the index owner may not allow for user-submitted corrections.

In the past we have been able to send major issues to a specialized team to determine how to make major corrections, however, they have been backlogged and have run more than a year behind in working with major known issues. We no longer have the ability to forward new concerns to them.

Thank you for your patience during this time of transition. Please feel free to make whatever corrections you can make manually, and we apologize for any inconvenience you may experience when you find a large quantity of records with incorrect locations in the indexed information.

RIPoole

This is the kind of issue that can and should be reported.