Home› Welcome to the FamilySearch Community!› Ask a Question› Get Involved/Indexing

Standardizing Towns and Place around the World

Peter Kaiser
Peter Kaiser ✭
December 27, 2021 edited August 19, 2024 in Get Involved/Indexing

What Happen to the Australian Atlas?

Currently Australia has American References not Australia

Ratio - One Australian Reference to Fifty American References

Zion is not only America it is where we live outside of America

Stop wasting Volunteers time by sending incorrect information to work with

🤔

Peter Kaiser

Indexer / Reviewer Consultant

Australia

0

Answers

  • Brett .
    Brett . ✭✭✭✭✭
    December 27, 2021

    @peterkaiser

    Peter

    I am just another 'lowly' User/Patron ...

    [ And, I happen to be an "Aussie", from "Downunder" ... ]

    The 'Places', in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', is an ONGOING 'Work in Progress' ...

    [ That will, most likely, NEVER end ... ]

    And, certainly, one particular Country, that NEEDS a LOT of work, is "Australia".

    And, plus, the SAME also applies, to our "Cousins", from across the 'Tasman', in "New Zealand".

    It certainly WOULD be GREAT, if 'FamilySearch', had MORE Users/Patrons, from both, Australia; and, New Zealand, 'volunteering' to work, at address/fixing the 'Places', in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', for two OUR Nations.

    On a number of occasions, I have offered my services, for such; but, alas, my offers have NOT been taken up...

    As an aside ...

    As, you indicate, that you are particularly an "Indexer"/"Reviewer" ...

    What makes things even worse, is that, from a recent post, in this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum ...

    It would appear, that the "Indexing" Part, of 'FamilySearch', DOES NOT appear to INCLUDE, "All" of the relevant 'Place', that appear in the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch'; OR, in the least, the "Synchronisation" between, the "Indexing" Part, of 'FamilySearch'; and, that of the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch', is questionable.

    ie.

    One Indexer/Reviewer suggested, that a 'Place', needed to be added, to the "Indexing" Part, of 'FamilySearch'

    Whereas, THAT (actual) 'Place' ALREADY existed, the "Place Names" Database, in 'FamilySearch'

    That seem somewhat ODD ...

    [ How about that in the mix ... ]

    Just my thought.

    Brett

    0
This discussion has been closed.
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 43.1K Ask a Question
  • 3.4K General Questions
  • 572 FamilySearch Center
  • 6.8K Get Involved/Indexing
  • 645 FamilySearch Account
  • 6.6K Family Tree
  • 5.2K Search
  • 1K Memories
  • 2 Suggest an Idea
  • 479 Other Languages
  • 62 Community News
  • Groups