US—City and Business Directories, 1749–1990 [Part C]
I'd be super grateful for help on this. When indexing a name that has a late spouse written, how would I index the spouse? Would I only index the first name because that's all that's written, or should I index the surname of the widow also?
For example: "Wolf Elizabeth wid. John, h 1408 Mansfield." Would I index "John" or "John Wolf"?
Secondly, if I had a name such as: "Wolf Leopold, (L.W. & Bro.) 302 Pike Bldg, h. 2609 Hemlock,"
I would index "Leopold Wolf," but, because of the brother, would I also index another "Leopold"?
Thanks!
Best Answer
-
The project instructions and examples will answer your questions. They can be brought up at any time by clicking on the last icon on the horizontal toolbar, or the Help Tab and Project Instructions from the drop down menu.
When you click on Example 2 in the project instructions it shows you how to index the deceased spouse without a surname.
You are indexing each unique name. So from your example, you would index Leopold Wolf and L W Wolf, but, not because it says Bro. We can't assume the name of the brother. But since L W is a unique name from Leonard you would create another entry.
"Index each unique name. Some names may be duplicated. When names are exact duplicates, index only the first instance of the name listed. Skip the other exact duplicates and then index the next unique name. Unique names include names with different middle initials, spouses listed with the individual, and different name spellings."
0
Answers
-
Dear Ron,
Thank you for your question. In order to answer your inquiry regarding this batch, please send us the Share Batch code. You can do this by one of two ways: Go to Help on your tool bar and open Share Batch or go to the top of your screen where you will find this number after the name of the batch. You can copy and paste this number in your return message. Thank you for your diligence.
2 -
I have a different take on the Wolf Leopold, (L.W. & Bro.) example. I think that this construct stands for “Leopold Wolf and Bro.” not L W Wolf. So it doesn't need another listing.
Here below is another example of this kind of construction from one of my batches. Look at the last listing showing in this clip - for Smith Harry D (H. D. S. &Co.). To me it says Smith, Harry D (Harry D. Smith & Co.). So only one listing is needed.
1 -
My guess is either way would be fine. I would create two records because I don't see how we can be certain that this is not an extra middle initial for a different person. My judgment could be tainted as my family history has a long line of men that only used their initials. After I started using their initials in my searches, I found a lot more records for them.
0 -
Hi Melissa. I’m pretty confident in my interpretation of this type of construction. I’ve seen it in many batches, and interpreting it this way is not just plausible - I think that it is compelling. Here below are other surname Smith examples just from this batch. Essentially all principals are surnamed Smith in this batch. It won’t hurt to add an extra Entry (my opinion) because the Researcher renders the final judgement, but I don’t think that it’s necessary.
0 -
I suspect (only a guess) that the publisher of the directory is unwilling to mention the full name of a business unless paid to do so. And extra to bold and enlarge it.
1 -
For your first question regarding the deceased spouse we do not add the surname to his name since it is not recorded. We index what we see.
https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/how-do-i-index-last-names-surnames
- "Do not assume the surname of an individual based on the surname of someone else, such as a parent or a spouse, unless directed otherwise in the project instructions."
The Project Instructions, What to Remember about this Project, bullet point 5, we read: "Index names of employers and employees. When indexing business names, index the names of individuals only. For example, "The Ad Book" would not be indexed, but "Barner Kehlenbeck Wines and Liquors" should be indexed. In this case, you would create 2 entries: one for Barner (surname) and another for Kehlenbeck (surname). "
The entry you post for your second question, (L.W. & Bro.) , is a business. Please do not index Wolf as the surname since we do not know that. It should be indexed L.W. We do not know if the W is a surname so you can index both initials in the given name.
"If you cannot determine whether a name is a given name or a surname, type it in the Given Names field."
https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/how-do-i-index-given-names
0 -
I certainly would never index L W as a given name with no surname. There would be thousands of entries with nothing but an initial in the given name fields.
0 -
Hi Melissa. No, I didn't think you would - I apologize if I gave that impression. I did think you meant to use L W as the Given Names and Wolf as the Surname (you wouldn't do that either, would you?). I think now that you meant to create a new Entry and use L as the GN and Wolf as the SN. That does open the possibility that the Principal is not the eponym of the company (but simply an employee with the same initials and not necessarily the same name). I have to admit that I have used and even endorsed your interpretation before and added an extra entry. But I've seen so many of these that I've leaned more toward the interpretation I've mentioned above. As you said previously, either will work. Sorry for my misinterpretation of your intent.
0 -
No need to apologize, John. It was not your comment that left me with that impression. it was the moderator's post below yours that suggests to index L.W. as a given name with no surname that gave me pause. "Please do not index Wolf as the surname since we do not know that. It should be indexed L.W. We do not know if the W is a surname so you can index both initials in the given name."
Yes, I would have indexed L. W. Wolf as another name in addition to Leonard Wolf. In your examples, I would also index Harry R Smith and another record for Harry R S Smith. Maybe I am going overboard, but, that is how I interpreted the pop-up and instruction: "Unique names include names with different middle initials". You've probably done alot more of these than I have.
1 -
We all bring our varied experiences to interpreting the instructions and the documents we’re given to index utilizing those instructions. Overall I think we’re doing pretty well. The Researchers can take it from there.
0
