How can I report errors in the identification of records

JamesCobban

I cannot find any place on the FamilySearch web site for reporting catalog errors.

I tried to paste in the URL for the page which is displaying incorrect information but that failed. So I will just provide the trailing portion of the URL: /ark:/61903/3:1:9Q97-Y39G-H59

The descriptive line above the displayed image reads:

"Canada, Ontario Marriages, 1869-1927 Marriages 1882 no 1001-3867"

However if you click on the "Information" tab at the bottom of the page to see the catalog record, that is the information copied from the original archive, it clearly declares that the original microfilm reel contains "Marriages, no. 1001-3867 (v. A-B) 1883". Note 1883, not 1882. If you look at the bottom of the image the original page was filed on the fourth of july 1883. again, not in 1882.

If you click on the hyperlink for 1882 in the image description line you will see that it lists the sets of documents for 1882, divided according to the separate microfilm reels from which FS created this database, as "no 1001-3867 no 1001-5165 no 5163-9212 no 9210-13131 no 13132-14449", showing an overlap in record numbers. But if you go to the corresponding page for 1883 you see "no 3868-7984 no 7982-12116 no 12114-15318" implying that there are no records available for 1883 with registration numbers lower than 3868. This is, of course, because the records for 1883 no 1001-3867 were incorrectly recorded under 1882.

I have reported this specific error before,, as well as others of a similar kind, and I cannot seem to get the attention of anyone who cares about the accuracy of the documents stored on this site. Errors like this make it harder for researchers to find the relevant records.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

I first reported errors in a collection's waypoints way back in 2015 or 2016. They have not been corrected.

For the curious, some of the errors were in the "Slovakia Census, 1869" (which is actually Hungary's census, but nevermind). There are (at least) three errors in the waypoints, affecting the records from two places:

• The records from Vértestolna, Komárom county (then central Hungary, now near the northern border, a bit west of the capital) have been misfiled in the waypoints as the town of Tolna in the county of Tolna, in southwestern Hungary.
• Some of the records (house numbers 112 to 166) from Vértesszőllős, Komárom county have been misfiled in the waypoints as Keviszőllős in Torontál county (then southeastern Hungary, now Seleuš, Serbia).
• The rest of the Vértesszőllős records (house numbers 77 to 111) are waypointed under the correct county, but they're associated with the Slovak name of a different place (Keszegfalva = Kameničná). (Both Vértestolna and Vértesszőlős are still in Hungary, so they have no Slovak names.)

(The other waypoint errors that I've reported are accompanied by corresponding catalog errors, in the Hungary Civil Registration collection's now-Austrian parts. None of those errors have been fixed, either.)

N Tychonievich

@JamesCobban Currently, the catalog is locked. It is getting a major overhaul and the folks working on it are not taking any reports of errors. We are hopeful that many of the errors, such as the one you reported, will disappear when the shiny new version of the catalog comes out.

https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/how-do-i-request-a-correction-to-the-familysearch-catalog

Julia Szent-Györgyi

@N Tychonievich, I know the poster identified this as a catalog error, but it isn't: the catalog entry has the correct year. It's the waypoint that's wrong. I don't know what department or category that is, but "catalog" is not it.

(I suspect that nobody at FS knows who's in charge of waypoints, either, and that's why they're never corrected.)

N Tychonievich

Thank you, @Julia Szent-Györgyi, for pointing out that the problem in the Canada, Ontario Marriages collection is probably one of waypoints. Sorry I got sidetracked by mention of the catalog.

@JamesCobban We have confirmed that the waypoint when browsing the Canada, Ontario Marriages, 1869-1927 record collection that identifies itself as Marriages 1882 no 1001-3867 is actually opening up marriages for 1883 1001-2484. We will report the issue with the waypoints.

JHanrahan

I have been researching for 20 years. My ancestral line is with the surname KENT. In the early 1600s, there were two families that I found errors in publications for the names of Richard Kent Sr and two men named John Kent. One was the son of Richard Kent born in Newbury, Ma in 1645. The other John Kent was Born in England coming to the colonies as a young boy in 1645.

I have researched them and written a document that provides support to the errors of these people. You can download a PDF copy at:

https://jhanrahan.weebly.com/uploads/1/1/4/8/114828137/john___richard_kent__bad_info_source_references.pdf

This needs to be brought to the attention of the Family Search group to post these errors. People are using these sources as validation of their family tree people. this is incorrect per my document.