Why no instructions on name review?
Why are there no instructions for reviewing names?
For example, I had to figure out "transcription error" by myself.
If the whole name is highlighted, do we type all names or should they be just first and middle or surname? Is that an error?
The computer corrects abbreviations Jno to John and Wm to William. You would never do that in indexing. Should we correct it to what is shown on the document or leave it as is?
I will not be suggesting people in my stake (where I am over indexing) try this until there are clear instructions!
Answers
-
This is how FS rolls. By talking about the feature here we "early adopters" are helping to develop the instructions. Also, the feature may be changed, in which case instructions would be premature.
0 -
I guess, but it sure leaves those of us who are careful followers of instructions without a place to find out what is correct.
1 -
It would help to have a separate button for "Not at Home" -- it's so common but not clear how to handle.
2 -
@Scurryn , if you are reviewing the 1950 US census and come across Not at Home, click Transcription Error and select Not a Name. You can find additional FAQs for the 1950 US census here: https://www.familysearch.org/en/info/1950-us-census-project-frequently-asked-questions (Note the section about reviewing the index.)
You can view FAQs for the Get Involved Names Review (other records besides the 1950 US census) here: https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/review-names-faqs
1 -
yes, thanks — that’s what I eventually figured out.
I guess the bigger point is making this clearer to people volunteering because it’s not intuitive.
And there a LOT of “Not at Home”s so it’s going to come up a bunch.
clicking “transcription error”, unclicking “not readable”, clicking “Not a name” then clicking Submit is a lot of extra work for such a common task — especially when you seem to have to do it x2 for each occurance.
0 -
I stopped unselecting "not readable". Too many clicks and it may have been selected by default for a reason.
0 -
Thanks for taking my suggestion & putting "Not a Person" at the top level!
0
