How can I start a project to re-index the 1840 Perry Co. TN census.
Answers
-
refers you to:
Previous posts to FamilySearch regarding needed correction to glaring Census index problems - resulted in a response indicating 'this is not a high priority and will not be handled anytime soon' (understandable from the perspective of 'limited resources and time' to address all needs of correction to existing published collections and considering where resources are being placed to move along the current myriad of changes being implemented). So perhaps these above links to USGenWeb project is the best way for you to focus immediate desire to correct this collection?
Hopefully in some near, more 'perfect' future - indexes can be compared/combined to produce a more perfect industry resource for researchers to locate ancestors.
0 -
Questions or reports on Errors of transcription or indexing are handled by Search and not by Indexing. Therefore we are moving this question to Search.
0 -
Yes this is a report of 'indexing errors/problems' - but was more of a request to open an 'indexing project' - thus it was also appropriately entered under Indexing category? Perhaps a heading announcement/post from FamilySearch concerning a current status of 'not accepting Community Indexing Requests' would deter these requests (not likely since I doubt many read or search categories before asking the immediate question)?
0 -
Right, it seems to be that Jerry reports errors of transcription with an expression to correct these errors by starting a project that probably was indexed already.
If I am not wrong, Familysearch is working on providing the function of Edit to the Index cards to records with errors so the researcher can correct errors on names, place and dates.
0 -
I have not looked at the referenced collection to see if Edit is available - but usually Edit - if available - is limited to a few fields only - and adds an additional index contribution. It does not remove the 'original' problem index. This allows Search to find the correction but does not remove the error - so fulfills the purpose of indexing (locating the record correctly). If Edit is available for these records - by all means users should take advantage of it (excluding further Edit issues - as referenced below).
There is a problem of [illegible] fields being crosslinked and not allowing individual edit of fields (again as @Melissa S Himes suggests - the specifics referred to another provider having done the original index). Additionally - it is concerning when - AI autoindexing processes are run post-publication of Web Indexed collections (such as mis-standardization of place names - which DOES appear to overwrite those original indexes?). It brings into question post-indexing/pre-publication completeness processes.
0 -
It looks like this either belongs to Ancestry or was done as a US Gen Web project. I'm guessing here, but, FamilySearch probably can't allow editing of records they don't own. And ... they may have never been indexed by FamilySearch volunteers.
You might message Russell Anderson as the Coordinator of the Tennessee Gen Web project and offer your assistance to him.
1
