Records located in parish Uliak are erroneously linked to Nitra. It causes big problems.
Slovakia Church and Synagogue Books, 1592-1935
- Roman Catholic (Rímsko-katolícká cirkev)
@Lubomir Sestrienka, there does appear to be a problem, in that when one searches the Collection, Slovakia Church and Synagogue Books, 1592-1935, with the Birth Place = "Uljak, Nitra, Slovakia," the Search result do not contain the town name, "Uljak." For example, if we search for Michael Horvath, with a birth place as I just mentioned, we find 2 records with that name: neither person's Search Results includes "Uljak." See the Search Results here:
Selecting either instance of Michael Horvath, we note that the record details page does include the full place name, "Uljak, Nitra, Slovakia."
This appears to be related to some issues that the engineers are already looking at, which is why I am forwarding this issue. As is always the case, we don't have means to indicate when the problem will be resolved.0
There is a typo in both the catalog and the waypoints (it's Újlak: új- "new" and -lak "residence, place, ville"; with the j and l transposed, it's meaningless), but Nyitraújlak was in Nyitra county, so I don't see any error there. Yes, Dvorzsák's gazetteer lists an alternative name of Abaújlak for it, which is confusing, because there is an Abaújlak which used to be in Abaúj county and is now in the combined-remnant county of Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, but it's not an error: before the Great Placename Disambiguation Project that took place at the end of the 1800s, placenames in Hungary could get awfully confusing. The records are from the place near Nyitra/Nitra, now called Veľké Zálužie, Slovakia, and except for the typo, they are correctly labeled as such in both the catalog and the waypoints.
Sometimes multi-part films like this throw FamilySearch's processes for a loop, because those processes expect a single placename to go with an entire film, but this common source of errors does not appear to apply here: all of the index entries that I checked from parts 3 and 4 of film 5219606 were correctly shown in the index as Ujlak. (Except for that ubiquitous typo: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVN4-ZY6G.)1
No, no, no.
Put a parish name "Ujlak" into Birth Place for country Slovakia. You will recieve "No Results Found".
People from Uljak are shown only when putting Nitra.0
Even without the current autostandardization flustercluck, searching by placename so seldom works correctly on FS that I never actually use it. If I want to restrict my search to a particular church's registers, I find the film number(s) in the catalog.0
In a search result table in column Birth Place it is NOT displayed Uljak, Nitra, Slovakia.
It is displayed only Nitra, Slovakia. Please check it.This is the BUG.0
The search results list has taken to pulling placenames out of a hat of late: it looks like it's standardizing "on the fly", badly. What shows in the results list is not necessarily what shows when you look at an individual result. For the Michael at the top of your results (https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?count=20&q.anyPlace=Uljak%2C%20Nitra%2C%20Slovakia&q.anyPlace.exact=on&q.givenName=Michael&q.givenName.exact=on&q.surname=Horvath&q.surname.exact=on), for example, his detail page (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVN4-ZY6G) has "Uljak, Nitra, Slovakia" for his Baptism Place.
There have been several other threads here in Community mentioning this problem, but I don't know if the engineers are aware of it, amidst the ongoing utter chaos caused by autostandardization.
As I said back in April: placename-based searching on FamilySearch is broken. It is completely useless to type anything into any place field in searches, and you cannot believe anything that the results list shows you about "where". The only reason all of it is at least on the correct planet is that we only inhabit the one Earth.0