1935 South Dakota state census record citations incorrect
Can the citations for the 1935 South Dakota (SD) state census records be corrected to correctly identify the correct image number and the total number of images in that film? Every 1935 SD census citation that I've seen so far is incorrect and requires a change in the citation before I can use it. This error occurs while viewing the image and clicking on the "Information" drop-down. The other four SD census record citations (1905, 1915, 1925, and1945) have all been correct.
Answers
-
@Lynn Tenney When you find these kinds of errors in the record collection, the best way to report them is to click Feedback right there on the page where you see the citation. Depending on your browser or screen size, the Feedback button is either on the right side of the page or in the lower-right. You can highlight the part of the page that has problems and then explain the problem. The feedback goes directly to the folks who maintain the record collections and can fix them.
0 -
Thank you. I tried reporting it through chat but they said to go to the Community. I'll go enter feedback for a few right now. But I suspect since I've never found a correct one in 1935, that whatever data is feeding into the citation is pulling from the wrong field. It's probably a single easy fix that will correct all tens of thousands of records in the 1935 SD census data set.
0 -
I do not see a place on the screen I am on to give feedback other than to rate the suggested topics to choose from for help. So please excuse me for putting this in the wrong place, but there doesn't seem to be a suitable place. This is my third attempt to find a place to give this error. Please forward to the correct department:
If you click on the link in the citation below to view a single census card for the 1935 South Dakota state census, you will see the Information tab below. Clicking on the Information tab shows you this citation:
"South Dakota State Census, 1935," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-DW53-YLQ?cc=1614831&wc=MJ4L-DP8%3A1041680801 : 21 May 2014), 004447088 > image 3156 of 3506; State Historical Society, Pierre.
The only problem is that the citation is not referencing image 3156 of 3506; it is actually image 2973 of 3307.
As far as I can tell, every citation for the 1935 South Dakota state census is wrong. I have not seen one that is correct yet. According to your catalog, there are 673,322 records in the set. As I previously mentioned, It's probably a single fix that will correct all the records in that set. The 1905, 1915, 1925, and 1945 census citations are correct.
Thank you in advance for forwarding this to the correct department for correction.
0 -
@Lynn Tenney, the citation is actually correct. It's giving different numbers because it's citing the entire film, instead of the cleaned-up section of it that the waypoints lead to.
You can switch between the two modes of citing the image by clicking the downward triangle after the collection name ("South Dakota State Census, 1935") above the image. You'll switch between
South Dakota State Census, 1935 > 004447088 > Image 2973 of 3307
and
Film # 004447088 Image 3156 of 3506
which both point to the same image, showing John J Moe, and associated with the index entry for him (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MV4T-G9H).
If you switch to the thumbnail view on the film-number "address" for the image, you'll see dozens of images consisting of a blank page with a tab on top. The tab sometimes has a name on it (for example https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-DW5Q-M1N?i=212&cc=1614831&cat=1143646), but the image really doesn't give any information. These and other "no indexable data"-type images have been cleaned out of the version of the image set that can be accessed using the waypoints. The citation, on the other hand, is for the full film, with all of these filming bookmarks and such still in place. That's why it has different numbers than what you're seeing.
0 -
It's curious to me why the 1935 census is different from the 1905, 1915, 1925, and 1945 SD census records. I use the film version for the way I research the state census. You have to put family groups back together by analyzing the card, locations, and card numbers which is easier for me to do on a film roll, especially when people are not properly enumerated or are improperly indexed. It would be nice to be able to search on the card #, which is referred to in the second citation as a page number, which it is clearly not. I'm just trying to find a way for the serious researcher to cite the records consistently between record sets. For now, I'll have to correct things on my own. Thank you for your reply, though, at least I know why it looks incorrect. Perhaps the image numbers above the image itself need to change to reflect what is happening.
0 -
I always write my own citations for everything on FamilySearch. The machine-generated ones always seem to repeat the most useless or nonsensical parts of the catalog entry, and none of the parts that I'd need to actually find the record again. (I'm not sure I ever manage to write citations with the same format twice in a row, but I don't worry about that.)
I haven't looked at the other SD censuses: do they all have waypointed versions with the "administrativia" pages weeded out? If not, that would explain the difference in the citations. If they all have such versions, then I guess the citation content is just a random choice on the part of some lowly data tech at FS.
0 -
I agree, I change each citation to add elements that I may need later, such as the date accessed, card #, etc. There are so many versions of citations, and publications all have their own format requirements. I was just looking for one less thing to change since the other SD census citations seemed to agree with the image # and total # of images as viewed on the screen. I can live with it.
0
