Below I have written it all

Sandy Shortt-Smith

I am just a novice Indexer enjoying more Indexing than usual with the Covid lockdown restrictions. I would really like to be doing this CORRECTLY and not have future people have to correct my innocent but still......mistakes.

My Question is:- I have come across a few times now......the same name....ie.........John Smith ie living on Black St.......next line.......John Smith.......living on Wallis St........next line......John Smith.....living on North Street..........when Ive been checking.....the transcribers have transcribed the 1st John Smith and then jumped to the next surname after Smith. Is this how it is meant to be? It feels like all the other John Smiths are being overlooked . They are different people living in the same Electoral Roll but being treated as one. Which is the correct way please.

summary....... Do I type EVERY name on that Electoral Roll page..........or.......do I type the 1st John Smith and then jump to the next change of name.

I respect the 2 qualified Sisters who are both experienced Genealogists but are both saying different ways. One says transcribe EVERY name, which FEELS right as each is an individual which needs recording to be found . The other Sister says, you are wasting your time, type the first n go down to the next change of name which may be 3....4.....John Smiths etc......

As the Novice I would like the Correct one way to do it please.

Hoping that you understand what I am trying to portray. If I havent said it clearly, Im sorry, just contact me and Im happy to chat on the phone. Enjoy your day,

Thankyou

Sandy

John Empoliti

i don’t have access to the New Zealand Electoral Roll Project. But here, for a couple of projects I work on is the pertinent type of instruction you should find for most (but not all) projects these days. It is often given in the “What to Remember About This Project” section of the instructions. This guidance is NOT given for the third Project I listed, but I have never had to make that decision, perhaps because of the large number of Fields that are captured for this project.

However, another thing you should know is that the system will delete all all adjacent identical Entries except for the first instance. So, if two adjacent Records (I.e. persons) you’ve indexed result in two Entries that are identical in every Field then the system will only keep the first one. And, as has been mentioned already, the Researcher only needs one of those identical duplicate Entries to search and find the image and the various non-indexed data that distinguish the various John Smiths (for example) such as their professions or street addresses.

US, New York, Suffolk—Index to Land Records, Grantees, 

• Index each unique name. Some names may be duplicated. When names in the grantee and grantor columns are exact duplicates, index only the first instance of the names 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.

US—City and Business Directories, 1749–1990 [Part C]

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.

Liberia—2008 Census [Part M]

I found no instructions on this duplicate names issue

Gail Davies

Hi Sandy

I'm also in New Zealand doing the Electoral Rolls. We are making an index of the names in each batch and for the researcher to find their John Smith that name only needs to be typed once and when they are searching the rolls they will see them all and choose their correct relative. Since we do not index any of the other information about each name indexing them would be a waste of effort. Of course, any variation of John Smith (middle name, initial or different spelling) that would also be indexed.

Hope that is helpful.

Cheers

Gail

Susan Ann Mullen

We need the shared batch code for this project to give you an accurate answer. Please copy the project name at the top of your page and include the 7 numbers and letters code in the brackets at the end of the project name. The code starts with the letter 'M'.

MalxEllis

Hi Sandy,

I've been Indexing & Reviewing the NZ Electoral Rolls for a while. The answer you're looking for is bascially no, except when you can determine the sex of person in one line and not the other.

Gail's response above is pretty much on the money... we're indexing these so others can find names and attach the pages to the family tree, rather than individuals. Some people search using sex to find people, so it's also important to record these accurately. Personally, I'd never limit a search using this function because it's not always recorded accurately, but there you go.

So for example;

0001 Smith, John, 123 Imaginary Street, Funkytown, Digger Driver

0002 Smith, John, 4077 Mash Street, Funkytown, Clergyman

0003 Smith, John, 9999 Nine Street, Funkytown, Gentleman

0004 Smyth, John, 67 High Street Funkytown, Fireman

You'd record the first leaving the Sex field BLANK (because being a digger driver alone doesn't mean he's a bloke - you'd be surprised how often Reviewers have to fix these)

You'd record the second with the Sex field as M (because a Clergyman theoretically can't be a woman)

Don't bother recording the third because the names are the same and so is the Sex when compared with the second record. You can put this entry into the system but it will delete it out when you return your batch, you'll be wasting your time a bit.

You'd record the fourth because they're a Smyth rather than a Smith, and record the Sex field as M.

I hope that makes it a bit clearer.

Malcolm