PLEASE - Re-index 1860 Tolland, Tolland, CT census
Will FamilySearch please re-index the 1860 US census? Entries have been indexed as "illegible" on FamilySearch.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MHRC-LKK
The images are legible and searchable on Ancestry.
https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/16724872:7667
Answers
-
Hello @Linda Richards Chappell,
We have moved your question to the Indexing section of the Community where more help may be available.
Thanks!
0 -
Thank you, wasn't sure where to post now that Get Satisfaction has moved.
0 -
@Linda Richards Chappell How terribly sad that this perfectly legible and entire page of the 1860 Census has been improperly indexed! 😪 I am tagging @Melissa S Himes because she will know exactly who to contact for an answer - maybe a pop-up warning can be devised for researchers using Family Search to always view the Original Document whenever possible. And we can re-iterate to our indexers and reviewers to always, always take time to read instructions. Thank you for bringing this item to our attention.
Best Wishes, Mary
0 -
Thank you for the tag, @maryellenstevensbarnes1, though you put too much faith in my abilities. I am just a volunteer who knows alot about indexing and data entry, a little bit about computers, and a tiny bit about genealogy. I did view the link and saw that many of the entries had been rendered Illegible. I think it might be a computer glitch since the other census records for Connecticut and every other state seem to be readily available, except for Tolland. Images 1 and 2 are okay (not well indexed, but not ALL illegible) then at image 3 something weird happens and it seems to get stuck.
Hope that helps. But, it isn't an indexing question or problem, so maybe a moderator can notify the Indexing Ops department that there might be a problem with this particular file.
1 -
@Melissa S Himes Thank you - 😎
0 -
@maryellenstevensbarnes1 Yes, it is sad. What I do for the people I work on is to make a copy of the image and post it as a memory, while still putting in FS the year and place of residence. I then do this for the entire family. If it was just one page, I might consider doing it for everyone on that page, but this was a bigger problem than just one page. I thought it best to bring it up for discussion.
I'm aware something could/should be added to the wiki page that could take someone over to Ancestry, and perhaps it has already been done. Newer users to FS might not look at the wiki page for Tolland County, CT. Thank you for referring up the chain of command.
2 -
Hello @Linda Richards Chappell,
A person from Indexing said this should move to Search instead.
So sorry for the inconvenience.
0 -
Hello @Linda Richards Chappell,
I found a blog article about how to edit names in a record. If you edit the one attached to Michael D O'Brien1822–1870 • 9N29-6D4, you may also get a message asking if you would like to update the other people on the record (at least for those who have the same last name).
Hope this helps a little :)
0 -
It's an idea to try editing, but, it would be like 32 pages of a census. That would be quite time consuming. I think it would be better if someone let the people in charge at FamilySearch know there is a problem with the file. Surely there must be some way for moderators to connect with the "higher powers".
0 -
I actually started this thread in general and it was moved by a moderator to indexing. As for editing a name, that's pretty straightforward on records owned by familysearch. What I tried to do here was to find the right page of the census and the right line on that page and connected the census in that way. However, as a researcher - I know others with less experience might not ever attempt that.
As for linking everyone on a particular census page, I've done that before. I did that for everyone in my home town - but I could "see" the images. As for Tolland, I was able to access the Ancestry.com page. Not everyone had an Ancestry subscription and those are the people that are really hampered when looking for a Tolland 1930 record.
I think what I will do, while waiting for FS to get this reindexed, is to post a message on the Tolland County, CT wiki page. Several years back I attended a meeting about how detailed the process was to get something to the point of being indexed. From ownership of the record, to scanning (or rescanning), to blocking and then batching the record. It's not a quick process.
Thank you each for your suggestions and comments. It is nice to know that messages like mine get read and receive thoughtful answers.
1 -
The same exact problem happened for Jackson Township, Jackson County, Ohio in the 1860 census. Several pages of the township have records labeled "illegible". On page 5 of this township, it's not possible to edit each name individually because the page has 39 people but only 10 records: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GBSD-9GJG
This is absolutely something that needs to be escalated because it's not possible for volunteers to correct for technical reasons. However, when I tried to call support about this, I got redirected to several departments; the final one told me "well, you should click 'submit feedback' for the image". Doing so sent me to the main community page. Helpful.
0 -
@N Tychonievich is this the sort of thing that you can escalate? Sorry if I've tagged you in error, but you seem to have a good handle on other technical problems such as the ongoing issues with the 1900 census.
0 -
This Ellington, Tolland, Connecticut, United States 1860 census record marked [Illegible] is a bit of a mess. The scanned record at Ancestry is very clean, and properly indexed.
For reference in the comments below, here is the person who I have added 1860 Census Sources for: https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/K841-9WZ It also has a link to the Ancestry record.
I can browse to the FS version from https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/1473181
arriving at https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GY1C-WK4
My person was on image 10, line 3. So I clicked the 3rd Attach in the Image Index and was able to attach to my person (after detaching it from another person - see below) . BUT from the now attached record IF I (right click new private window) VIEW ORIGINAL DOCUMENT I arrive at a totally different place, which appears to be a new computer indexing. That place is Image 307 of 614 https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GY1C-WDH AND my person is NOT there on that image!
I find my person later in that collection of images on image 314 of 614, line 3.
Backing up to arriving at https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GY1C-WK4
My person was on image 10, line 3. IF I now click (right click new private window) on the 3rd Record icon I see that I have successfully attached my person to the record. BUT If I right click (new private window) on the Image, again I am taken to the incorrect Image 307 of 614. My Person is Not on the listing of persons [sic] all are Illegible. This is true for the 1st pane on the right Computer Indexed Data, and the one selectable by the ">" following CENSUS | PRINCIPAL. If I go to Image 314 again my person's name has not been added. I checked adjacent images 305 (page highlighted!), 306-309 and 312 -316.
On image 314 at Computer Indexed Data If I "Select a name to continue" I do not seem to be able to Drag Names, or "+ NEW RECORD GROUP"
Since there were no family groups I decided to add his wife, who was listed on the next line. So I clicked the 4th Attach in the Image Index. I find that it is currently attached to 9N67-B73
From https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/sources/9N67-B73 I (right click new private window) VIEW ORIGINAL DOCUMENT I arrive at image 308 of 614 where there is a Henry Gunn of the correct age on line 32
This time I chose NOT to detach, and abandoned the operation. When I earlier created Marvin D Harwood's record from the line above it had been attached to Joseph Ridgeway Gunn which I then detached on Aug 3, 2023. https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/changelog/LDXL-1H4
So I gave up for now and submitted this note. I was ok in detaching the first one since it went to an incorrect image, but the second time that was not the case, even though neither person (both coincidentally named Gunn, and related) was not on my page's record found by browsing. Assuming the [Illegible] lines in the page index maps to the lines on the census page is not a good assumption.
@N Tychonievich I have communicated with you before so I assume that I have tagged you and that you will know where to forward this. I hope my comments will help the engineers fix the mess.
Thank you.
0 -
@LMC helper Thank you for your detailed reports of problems with the 1860 US census index. I will pass them on. Unfortunately, the group that handles this sort of thing has a significant backlog. I have no way to predict how long it might take for things to be corrected.
Meanwhile, I'd suggest using the census images as sources. The images are opening in the new viewer which has an Attach to Tree button as well as a Source Box button. If you use the Attach to Tree button, it would be wise to first go to Tree and copy the IDs of the people to whom you want to attach the image. Or stick the image in your Source Box and attach from there.
1
