Search resulted on record with no information
This set of records is posted for public access with no restrictions on the image- unfortunately the people's information was indexed as Ddddddd (was maliciously indexed) , there is a link to the image and to the indexing card with No Edit capability.
Would there be anything that can be done to fix now this problem or to wait until the Edit function is available?
Thank you.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-N3ZL-CCY5?cc=2821282
Answers
-
You can use the Feedback button at the right side of the screen of the record.
1 -
@Mirevo, Yes, it does appear that there were serious indexing error for the two images: 285 & 287. Unfortunately, there is a strong reluctance to reopen an indexing project to correct just 2 items, as we see here.
I think that, for the time being, the only option we have is to wait and hope for an improved capability (or access) that would allow us to edit such problems.
@Áine Ni Donnghaile , I'm sorry - I could not find the Feedback button that you referenced. If you confirm that you see it, I'll try to find out why I can't. Certainly, if that is available, I agree that it should be used in this case.
2 -
Thank you,
I have posted the page with the feedback function- I have instructed the guest according to your answer.
1 -
Some people have reported not seeing the Feedback button. It MAY be blocked if you have uBlock or Adblock installed. A reset for FamilySearch may be required.
0 -
I think content filter in this situation may not be correct. It could be a security certicate issue with the browser - most have more success with Chrome.
@Mike357 are you on Mac or using Firefox by chance? You might see Feedback by going to the Index and not the initial image link?
0 -
@genthusiast Another mod kept telling us that the Feedback button was not available in Firefox, but it was visible for me, in Firefox.
It was not visible for me in Chrome - when others could see it.
I reset uBlock in Chrome, for FamilySearch, and the Feedback button was immediately visible.
0 -
genthusiast : Thank you for your input, I agree with your final thought:
Using Feedback button in this specific instance: I hope the Feedback goes to the Indexing Project Admins - I have understood Feedback button to go to FamilySearch engineers. I assume they will give this Feedback to Indexing Project Admins - to whom it should go. I too hope for a day when editing of incorrect indexes will be an easier process.
I do not think the feedback goes into Indexing PAs as this records has been already indexed and falls into another department-> "Search"
I have the feeling that to reach the engineers the problem should be about a technical problem on the page and not to an error of transcription called like that.
As you I also hope the Edit function be available soon, so that all these correction my be performed by guests, patrons or relatives of these ancestors which records are from.
Thank you all .
1 -
@Mirevo The problem with Index open-edit available to the guest is same as open-edit in the Tree - verifying the input is 'correct'. Otherwise maybe make closed-edit available via FamilySearch once open-edit(s) have been submitted for a period and then 'verified' by FamilySearch. Too bad the Index was not indexed 'correctly' and not 'maliciously' to begin with... apparently this one got through the pre-publication process - something I had hoped was more thorough...
1 -
Sadly, it was maliciously indexed--writing ddddd to all names of people on a record, it is 100% malicious indexing and it passed as you said the prepublication process. .
1 -
Here's another interesting one to add to your Search bag-o-reports (related to above):
Notice how (*) before and after are considered when they are explicitly ≠, ¬ ≡
Maybe the maliciousness will help sort through Search?
0 -
@genthusiast Hmmm...
When I see those results I'm immediately struck by the thought that a routine was written to locate records to match the REGEX, but I suspect that it was not intended to write the REGEX into the records. That looks like a big mistake.
Just for a moment, giving the benefit of the doubt to the errant indexer, supposing somebody had wanted to try their hand at automated indexing and produced a routine that seemed to work on their test bed platform. Then they tried it on the target and discovered that they'd made a catastrophic mistake. They're probably over the hills and far away and still running.... (or just the other side of the partition keeping quiet and looking sheepish)
I frequently have to remind myself:
"Don't routinely attribute to malevolence that which is more likely to have been caused by incompetence"
1 -
OK, I did a little testing...
criterion comment
Aaa* notice the Capital letter after the asterisk in a lot of cases - that makes me think: Faulty Routine
Bbb* not as many cases
Ccc* more with the form where there is a Capital letter after the asterisk
Ddd* More because there are more names that match Dodd, Dodds, Doddrill
Eee* These look like real cases of an indecypherable character, maybe they hit the kill switch at D
This one will make you wonder though
Ffff Now that does look like the cat stood on the keyboard.
1 -
Hmm, the whole alphabet looks like it is returning more ...
yeah maybe not maliciousness ... makes you wonder about whether it is the automated indexing ... or even worse corruption. It sure seems like something is wrong - I hope not maliciousness... it would be really bad ...
Iiii* - this one is interesting ...
It dozes off and hits the same character sometimes - apparently...
Maybe these are to indicate where the human indexer needs to correct?
Oh well at least it's getting them ... searchable ... Mmmm*, Oooo*, ...
Qqqq* & Aaaa* ? Rrrr* Shhhh*
Tttt* - some of these definitely seem to be OCR ...
Are they overwriting some of the older human Indexing Projects with this/OCR? Something bad is going on...
It seems like they should pull these out for a 'finish' index - maybe by human indexers??
Could any of this explain your numbers at the beginning of some locations?
Malicious/Automated:
Are you sure they want Feedback on all of these??
I don't know. Consider this my Feedback.
0 -
Picking up on one of those in a search for Tttt*: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:KMJM-6FK
This record has a unique military serial number, so it 'should' be possible to discover what the correct name is and maybe work out how the gremlin came up with the full name "Tt/Ttaaww///S////Wv/Ss/V"
The citation includes the text "Electronic Army Serial Number Merged File, ca. 1938-1946,"
0
