There is an error in the list of Church records for Littlehampton. For example in the citation link for my Great Great Grandfather below the record gives the Church as St. John's when in fact the parish church is St.Mary's. All records in this collection for relatives give this incorrect church. How do I formally report this error?
"England, Sussex, Parish Registers, 1538-1910", database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:Q2QQ-GBWM : 11 March 2018), William Sewell, 1847.
@sewella23, it does appear that you have found an indexing error in the Parish registers of Littlehampton. It appears that the index record for your gg-grandfather does inaccurately show the Church to be St. John's when, in fact, the film does indicate that these records are from the Church, St. Mary's.
Unfortunately, such errors are not, at this time, being corrected. Notwithstanding the error, we find that we can successfully search the records for William Sewell and see the Search Result for him in the collection, England, Sussex, Parish Registers, 1538-1910. Thus, the error does not interfere with the ability to search for, and find your gg-grandfather's parish records.
We do recommend , when you add this source to the Family Tree record of William Sewell, that you note the error and provide the correct information. You can provide this in the section, "Reason to Change Source" or "Describe the Record (Notes)."
@Mike357, no, this has nothing to do with indexing. It's an error in the catalog: it says St. John, whereas the film says St. Mary. The index simply took the place identification straight from the catalog, propagating the error.
@Julia Szent-Györgyi, yes, I did see that the Catalog entry, Parish registers of Littlehampton, 1642-1902, shows, as an added author, St. John's church. It also associates St. John's church which the film (DGS) 4428990. I did not examine this film, as it is not the film related to the problem described by @sewella23 which is film/DGS 4428357.
I indicated that this is an indexing error because the index record shows the Christening Place to be (incorrectly) St. John's. Where the index took this information does invalidate that it is nevertheless an indexing error, nor the corrective steps mentioned.
There is, indeed, a possibility that a Catalog error does exist for the Catalog entry, Parish registers of Littlehampton, 1642-1902. This may have been a factor in the error found in the record's Christening Place. Some addition work is required before determining that a Catalog error exists (i.e. verifying the information in the first paragraph above). As you know, the Catalog is locked currently while it undergoes significant modifications.
I appreciate the additional insight that you have provided and agree that a more complete answer might have include the potential Catalog error. However, the immediate resolution remains the same.
The wiki article for Littlehampton also does not mention St. Mary's Church?
So the apparent error should be corrected in multiple places ... I have no way of knowing whether the Catalog when updated will also fix wiki related errors?
This brings up the question whether FamilySearch users/guests can help identifying places by adding them to the FamilySearch places authority - and whether that will help (eventually) resolve some issues with places?
There are two civil places currently listed for Littlehampton, Sussex on the timeline and neither include ecclesiastical parishes (although a cemetery and churchyard are listed as places within). You can Suggest A New Place > Place of Worship "A building used for regular religious worship (includes church, chapel, mosque, synagogue, tabernacle, meeting house..." But I don't know if this is the best way to enter an ecclesiastical parish (or whether there is a reason Places doesn't already include them - besides adding confusion between civil/ecclesiastical 'parish' divisions - or perhaps it's just my confusion)? Looking on maps today it is a little uncertain where these churches/parishes are/were located exactly (at least for me).
I would suggest the correct standard name should merely be "Littlehampton, Sussex, England, United Kingdom" for this period, as there was no other church in the parish except St Mary's. I would only feel it correct to use "St Mary, Littlehampton..." from 1877, when St John's chapel was founded and there then became the need to differentiate between events that took place at the respective churches.
Incidentally, as often is the case with other examples of placenames in the Catalog, the format of the name "Littlehampton" frequently appears (even in a search on the placename) as "Little Hampton". This, too, needs to be corrected once the Catalog becomes editable again, as I can find no official references to indicate the location was ever known as Little Hampton.