Home› Welcome to the FamilySearch Community!› FamilySearch Help› Search

Source indexed incorrectly

Gail Swihart Watson
Gail Swihart Watson ✭✭✭✭
March 3, 2022 edited March 3, 2022 in Search

The link below is to a page of a book containing Revolutionary War rosters for 3 towns in New Hampshire: Deerfield, Nottingham and Northwood. Except for the one edit I made on the index for James Norris, all others listed from Northwood have been indexed with the location Northwood, Worth, Iowa, United states. This, of course, is very wrong .... Can it be fixed?


https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSHS-PSYY-X?i=586&cc=2546162&personaUrl=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQGK1-YXQ6

0

Best Answer

  • Áine Ní Donnghaile
    Áine Ní Donnghaile ✭✭✭✭✭
    March 4, 2022 Answer ✓

    I don't think so, Gail. I tagged the Mod who has been taking the lead on passing these problems to the developers.

    0

Answers

  • cesarfuentesnadal1
    cesarfuentesnadal1 mod
    March 3, 2022

    Hola gail swihart watson estamos muy contentos de que usted este participando en la indexación y no se preocupe claro que tiene solución

    ¿Cuál es la función del revisor en la indexación?

    La revisión es el proceso en que una persona revisa un lote que fue indexado por otra persona. Se requiere que se revise cada lote antes de publicar la colección en FamilySearch.

    Después que un indexador completa y envía un lote, otro indexador con derechos de revisión abre el lote y asegura que la indexación se haya realizado de la manera más correcta posible. El revisor se asegura de que:

     

    • Se hayan indexado todas las imágenes.
    • Se hayan indexado todas las entradas de cada imagen.
    • Se cumplieron todas las instrucciones del proyecto, las ayudas para el campo y las pautas básicas de indexación.

     Si el revisor cambia cierto número de las entradas del lote, el lote se envía para volverse a revisar para ayudar a asegurar que permanezca alta la calidad de la información indexada.

     Nota: Después de indexar 1000 registros, se le concederán los derechos de revisar lotes. El proceso de permiso puede tardar uno o dos días.

    Espero que su inquietud que resuelta y animo usted tambien puede revisor, gracias por todo lo que hace.

    0
  • Gail Swihart Watson
    Gail Swihart Watson ✭✭✭✭
    March 3, 2022

    cesarfuentesnadal1 Hola! No soy indexador ni revisor. Estoy realizando una investigación. Simplemente quería llamar la atención de alguien sobre este error de indexación, ya que se ha indexado incorrectamente más de un registro.


    English: I am not an indexer or a reviewer. I am conducting research. I merely wanted to bring this indexing error to the attention of someone as more than one record has been incorrectly indexed.

    1
  • Áine Ní Donnghaile
    Áine Ní Donnghaile ✭✭✭✭✭
    March 3, 2022 edited March 3, 2022

    Hi Gail,

    I took a look at that resource. Unfortunately, it seems that the "Northwood" records are not the only ones with issues. And it's not just other states showing up - but countries that have no connection to America's Revolutionary War and many that didn't even exist at the time. I saw some with "Myanmar" as the location!

    There is a known problem with the place name standardization program, but I don't know if this database is suffering from that issue. Normally, when that program is the cause, we see "original" on one of the locations in the index, and I don't see "original" on any of these.

    Record set https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/2546162

    @N Tychonievich not sure if this is one that need place review. Thanks.

    image.png


    0
  • Gail Swihart Watson
    Gail Swihart Watson ✭✭✭✭
    March 3, 2022

    So does this affect people searching for records by name? I often wonder. I was able to find my ancestors in Knox County Indiana in 1810 even though the standardized place name was Knox, Marshall Islands.

    0
  • Áine Ní Donnghaile
    Áine Ní Donnghaile ✭✭✭✭✭
    March 3, 2022

    The place standardization program certainly could affect a search when isolating the search to a specific location. And, if you found your family in Indiana some time ago, that might have been before the place standardization program created new places in error.

    Here's a post with some of the background on the place standardization issue: https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/116253/existing-historical-records-issues#latest

    2
  • Julia Szent-Györgyi
    Julia Szent-Györgyi ✭✭✭✭✭
    March 4, 2022

    Yes, these are place standardization errors. See for example: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QG2M-3MVW

    Original: Deerfield

    Standardized: Deerfield, Fergus, Montana, United States

    ...for a page of New Hampshire records.

    1
  • Gail Swihart Watson
    Gail Swihart Watson ✭✭✭✭
    March 4, 2022

    Ugh, not good! Do I need to do anything else?

    1
  • Gail Swihart Watson
    Gail Swihart Watson ✭✭✭✭
    March 4, 2022

    Thank you!!!

    1
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • 30K All Categories
  • 24.2K FamilySearch Help
  • 125 Get Involved
  • 2.7K General Questions
  • 442 FamilySearch Center
  • 461 FamilySearch Account
  • 4.4K Family Tree
  • 3.4K Search
  • 4.7K Indexing
  • 639 Memories
  • 6.5K Temple
  • 322 Other Languages
  • 34 Community News
  • 6.6K Suggest an Idea
  • Groups