I am currently reviewing a batch of Missouri, St Louis Marriage Records.
The person I am reviewing indexed 90 records in the batch, but then jumped ahead five more pages. There are 595 records indexed in this batch. I don't have time to review that many today. What should I do? I could send it in as is with the 90 records in the batch. Will this be duplication of a batch someone else is doing? This person has done a good job. Ihate to trash the exrra 500 receords done.
Best Answers
-
Oh that is so sad. I hope that the moderators will let the department in charge of helping indexers know ASAP about this batch. This person is doing a whole lot of unnecessary work and they need to contact them! I'm going to tag a couple to make sure they see this pronto! @Mirevo @annewandering
Anyway, @randalldwaynefranks1 what you must do is delete the records from 89-528. You probably know the shortcut, but, just in case: make all the fields on Entry 89 blank with the Ctrl + B command. Then use the copy text forward tool (6th from the right) to make all the records blank. Click on the trash can, select all blank entries, and hit delete. Sad...but, must be done or it would be a duplication of many batches and cause alot of confusion.
3 -
Thanks so much Melissa!
1
Answers
-
When you say, "but then jumped ahead five more pages." does that mean they were indexing from reference images?
Would be good if you shared the batch, that would make it easier to give you the correct answer. Post the batch code here with your question.
1 -
US, Missouri—County Marriages, 1806–1969 [Part O][M9L6-G3V]
Yes the indexed from reference pages that have the stamped image on them saying "for reference do not index". This person indexed five additional pages ahead of their batch. I found few mistakes in the batch I have already reviewed.
0 -
This link in answer to Melissa's question only applies to this one line. We are going to report it to see if it is possible to contact the indexer. Thanks for suggesting this, Melissa.
"This situation falls under the 'Adds many more records to a batch than necessary." https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/the-batch-i-am-reviewing-needs-reindexing
0 -
I wouldn't send something like that back for reindexing. My goodness, if you delete the data it will cause someone to have to reindex 90 records. If you keep the data and send it for reindexing, the casual indexer will either be quite confused or think they have to delete the excess entries one at a time, unless they have learned the tricks! That's also the problem with the Reasons to Reindex form. Some things really need to be corrected by experienced reviewers.
1 -
Wouldn't it be nice if it were possible for the Reviewer to fix the issue with this batch and give this earnest and capable but misinformed, Indexer gentle corrective feedback, with no one but them the wiser (no FS Support person involved)? Why not use this same form and make it possible?
1 -
Yes, it would @John Empoliti and I hope the "powers that be" are watching these threads. This could be a super focus group to watch the users in real time and assess the strengths and weaknesses of these experiments. This Reasons for Reindexing form has great potential with some tweaking.
1 -
@Melissa S Himes, I think it would take minimal/modest effort to adapt the existing form for a speedy (“Don’t Let Best Be the Enemy of Good”) release of an Alpha version of a feedback system. Especially for a pilot test limited to “tolerant” individuals. This might make an excellent second semester senior project for a smart BYU Computer Science Major. And it would satisfy an obvious craving among the earnest “Beginner Indexer” community for feedback on their work. I would volunteer to participate - to give and receive feedback and even work to help develop the system. I would volunteer to help organize/ analyze the participant feedback, if that makes sense and is helpful. I’ll do anything I’m capable of and have time for to make this happen. It’s that important to me, and I think, for creating the brightest future for FS Indexing.
0 -
John and Melissa, interesting idea about reviewers contacting the confused indexer. Surely you can see where that could result is distressing issues? Not all reviewers are as kind as they could possibly be. In an ideal world it would be a nice way to deal with this but we live in this world.
Please note that these are my own thoughts not anything from FamilySearch.
0 -
Hi Anne.
I agree that It's not for everyone - Melissa and I also experienced frustration with the old system. And we must tread carefully, for sure, in trying to develop a new one.
But, what other complex system expects novices to become proficient at using it but doesn't provide direct feedback on their work via traditional teaching or mentoring? I guess we're hoping the "Law of Averages" will iron out problems in the long run. I'm worried that bad habits get "ironed in" without correction.
This feedback procedure would only be for willing Indexers and Reviewers (opt-in and opt-out on both sides). So, it might turn out not to be for some after giving it a try, even in the pilot study. But, I believe that a significant number of Beginning Indexers would welcome the feedback. Likewise, I'll bet that there are a substantial number of kind, patient, experienced Reviewers who would be willing to spend some time and energy doing this good deed. It would need to be as convenient and efficient as possible, or it won't work.
Exposing and figuring out how to mitigate these kinds of issues are some of the purposes of a pilot study. The Reviewers involved in this study should expect disagreement on the interpretation of instructions, as sometimes today. I suppose there might need to be moderators of this sub-system.
It appears that Vanilla, the system behind the FS Community, has a polling feature. If FS cares to pursue this idea in any form, I suppose they could conduct a poll to assess the level of interest on both sides (Indexers and Reviewers). I've mentioned it plenty of times, and this is one more time.
I suspect that the number of Indexers who would welcome direct feedback on their work is substantial. Why not try to accommodate them?
1 -
There are actually one on one and classes to be had on the local level and at Family History Centers. There are free Family History online classes at BYU. The Help Center and the FamilySearch Wiki have considerable educational helps. Community has this so questions can be asked. There is help to be had for those who want it.
0 -
There are many indexers and reviewers working in a vacuum with no understanding of the instructions. This is especially true of the ones who have no connection to the Church, would never venture into a FHC, and know nothing about BYU much less the BYU Linking Lab or Computer Sciences Department. They also don't know about the videos on you-tube and the Indexing tutorial is very basic.
I know all about that vacuum, because I was one of those indexers 8 years ago. It took me a couple of days to find the Users Guide and the then 52 page obit indexing PDF. I wouldn't have even known to look for them if I hadn't been computer saavy enough to understand arbitration and had the curiosity to figure out why I was getting a grade of 8% on my work. (Now they don't even know they are getting "F's" because there is no feedback).
Of course those of us who were involved in the arbitration process know that many indexers never looked at their results and the arbiters weren't all reading the instructions either! It wasn't until I found the Share Batch Indexing ETC group that I really started to learn! It was also there that we had numerous discussion on horrendous arbitration results. At least then we could push a button and give FS feedback on the arbiters when they were wrong. I kept a running tally of their arb numbers because we could also see those back in the day. It was actually the rare occasion that out of the 100's of numbers I recorded of "mis-guided" arbs that the same ones appeared more than once. So, John and I are quite aware of the distress of arbitration.
I think your idea of a pilot study at this point is wonderful, John. But, I also think we don't have enough information on the accuracy of web-indexing. Maybe the model works, despite its limitation for teaching, and they are quite content with the system. I always try to keep in mind that dealing with errors in the records of the dead probably doesn't need the kind of quality control that we were used to. Good enough is good enough????
1 -
To your last point, Melissa, you could be right. The 20% error rate that the current system purportedly ultimately delivers might be "good enough."
To your first point, Melissa (which speaks to Anne's point), and others you made. What worries me is the very many folks are out there who don't come to the Indexing Q&A forum, don't have access to the resources that Anne mentioned, and are "suffering in silence." And, for those who do come to the forum, I think we could do a lot better job of organizing, promoting, and more obviously presenting the various existing indexing resources that you referred to that would allow for self-help/ self-study. I don't know the magic formula, but I'm pretty sure we're not there yet.
The Project Instructions and Examples could be better. I like and enjoy using the current Web Indexing program, but it could probably be more intuitive and self-documenting. Those areas might benefit from consultation and collaboration with experienced non-software-engineer users.
No pilot project of any sort will proceed unless enough Indexers and Reviewers wish it, and only then if FS concurs.
I'll rest my case and leave it with the "jury."
Thanks for listening.
1 -
Agreed, and, I think FamilySearch took two steps backwards by ending the Indexing Chat group. We had a vast amount of learning tools and indexing resources, many created by you and others, as well as links to various websites. All of those resources are now in the trash-bin. To me, this forum doesn't seem to work as well as the years spent on Indexing Chat. And, I don't think there are as many participants or questions being asked. All very unfortunate.
3 -
As an Indexer/Reviewer I would certainly participate in such a pilot program. When I started indexing it was such a delight to be able to have my work reviewed and mistakes pointed out. It made me a better indexer and reviewer because I wanted to keep my correct percentage up and it made me feel that somebody cared about the work I was doing for those who are no longer here and for me. It really gave me the incentive to keep going and earn, truly earn, the reviewer status.
I've seen many who just come to index 1,000 names, which is too low, in my opinion, so they can become a reviewer. But with that step-up comes greater responsibility and that's something that should also be made clear. When I see people ask that question I feel as if they seem to think this is a "game" or some type of competition. I am sure there are those who volunteer from the heart and take this seriously while giving their time. I do hope FS is seeing and listening.
2 -
Hi everyone, I would also hope that some of these conversations are read by the right people.
As someone who has just recently started trying to help with this endeavor and is also not that familiar with computer operation I feel I should add my comments and feelings.
I found it somewhat difficult to get started with indexing and still have many questions as I strive to do this work correctly. I would have loved to have been able to request that I be given the results of some reviews of my work. I did not find it very obvious where or how to get help or instructions. I felt the tutorial was good but would have preferred a bit more in depth version.
Maybe the option to request feed back on a few (2 to 5) batches as one starts out could be arranged. If one is willing to sign up for the feedback, then corrections would be expected. I feel that option would have been of great value to me. Even after many many batches I am not sure if I am doing certain things correctly. I would love to be able to click the button that says, let me see the results of the review.
Maybe this could be available as one starts on any new project.
Hope this is helpful
3 -
LarryClark43, Others have posted their Shared Batch codes on here and asked for others to critique them. That is always an option. You can also index with friends either in person or with shared batch codes. There are a number of ways to get feedback and to ask questions!
I remember doing Ellis Island records or was it 1940 census? There were quite a few Slavic groups of people. And officials with really bad handwriting. We did have feedback if we looked for it. It was pretty useless because they would mark it wrong but not say why. A lot of those were opinions on handwriting that did not agree with mine but there was no actual interaction. Here in Communities you can get both feedback and interaction. I consider it an improvement over the old ways.
0 -
Hi annewandering,
I have posted batches and have received much help over the past few months. I do understand your point about the problem with it only being someone else's opinion that may or may not be correct,
I guess part of my problem is that I feel like I am imposing on someone to do a review of my work and then the review will still have to be done. Does that make sense?
I do really appreciate all of the help I receive and I try to read through these questions often to see what I can learn from others Questions.
Thank you
Larry
0
