Inaccurate standardization of place
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.