Consistency between batches
I'm indexing Italian records. I know there can't be that many of us. I'm doing records from Catanzaro, which are only 6% completed and have been that way for quite some time. When I do a batch sometimes I get births, sometimes marriages, sometimes deaths. The years are all over the place.
Why can't I be given a batch in the same year or the same record type -- why not the very next set of pages to index? Consistency between batches would help me go faster, since I would be indexing records of the same type and same or similar year.
Best Answer
-
I don't know why they are not in sequence anymore. You might want to make a suggestion to FamilySearch.
You can give Feedback by opening one of your batches and you will see "Feedback" button on the top right hand side of the screen. This feedback will go to FamilySearch.
3
Answers
-
In order to answer that I would need to know the order in which the Batches are placed by the Project Admins. I do not know that. I would think along with you that they would be entered 'sequentially' as the film was made - however that may not be the case due to pre-indexing processes that only they would be aware of. This is the best answer I can give as to why you may receive Batches in a 'random' order.
I hope this helps.
1 -
@DanielZappala That would be ideal for the reasons you mentioned and the additional benefit of being more likely to have the same scribe’s hand to decipher. However, I’m pretty sure that would be a complex and cumbersome distribution process to program and manage, so I wouldn’t expect it to be implemented any time soon. But I'm just another volunteer and don't have special knowledge of what is planned.
Right now, I think distribution of batches is done on a first-come-first-served sequentially from a given digitized film, and then on to the next film after the first is exhausted . As you probably know already, your best bet now to get related batches of the same type, perhaps even by the same scribe, is to check out the maximum number of batches you’re allowed at a time. When you run through them get another 10 (or so) etc.I've been told that the batches are not necessarily handed out sequentially anymore. They used to be in the old Web Indexing Program. So I don't have a good stopgap remedy for you. I can only commiserate with you.
2 -
Even under the old system, if you checked out ten batches in order, the next time you went back, the ten you got could be from a different film altogether, even though they might be a sequential series from that new film. They might even be from a different period or, in some other way, not tightly related to the earlier batch. Still, being sequential within themselves would help decipher the handwriting, etc.
2 -
This is driving me nuts for the Saône-et-Loire batches too. They can be anywhere from 1690-1825 with a huge variation in information, style etc. What particularly drives me nuts is the batches from the French Revolution, which all require using a calendar calculator to put in the dates correctly. I hate having to pull that up randomly. I'd rather just commit to doing some revolutionary calculations and do only that instead of back and forth and back and forth.
0 -
Nothing you can do about it. They are distributed somewhat randomly. In the old desktop program, you could be assured of getting some sequence when you downloaded a full 10 batches. Now, what you see is what you get. I complained about the same thing when the web indexing started. You see what good that did.
0
