US, Missouri, St. Louis—Military Records, 1916–1939 What about making an entry for

LarryClark43

https://www.familysearch.org/indexing/batch/35ce9c05-0a31-4753-814e-1decc487d452

As we have now learned that we are to make an entry for the preparer it brings up the question: Should we make an entry for Pay Master and Enlisted by ?

In this batch which is the second half of a roll, an entry for Bunker, Smith and Buckey would then need to be added.

John Empoliti

The Moderators should ASAP, please verify (OR CORRECT) my conclusion because it is only my opinion - but I think we should NOT index those (second image) Paymaster officers Bunker, Smith, and Buckey, nor the names of the (first image) officers who enlisted the soldiers listed in the muster roll. Those officers are part of the record for the principals (soldiers) named in the left image that continue to the right image, and the project does not request that information about those principals.

To put Larry's question in context, below is his Batch image (on the right), and the first page of the 2-page muster roll/ledger (reference image -1) on the left. Per the instructions in the General Indexing Guidelines (GIG), this entire 2-page Muster should be indexed with the batch containing the image on the left (first page), and so Larry should mark his batch image NED (No Extractable Data).

But Larry's question still stands and needs a definitive, timely answer - PLEASE.

See the citation below from the GIG on records that span two images. It doesn't mention marking the second image NED, but that is what you do if that image is comprised only of continuation records - ones that started on a previous image. That is, if every record on the second image is of the first type mentioned below, then the whole second image is NED.

"What to Do When Records Span 2 Images or to View Additional Images

• If the first record on an image begins on a previous image, don't index it. The record will be indexed as part of the previous batch. Start indexing at the first complete record.
• If the last record on an image continues to the next image, index the entire record, including what continues to the next image.
• To see the next image while continuing to index information for the current image, do the following:

1. In the top corner of the image window, in the vertical toolbar, click the Reference Images 
2.  icon .
3. Below the screen on the right, click a thumbnail next to the image you are currently indexing.
4. Index the record while viewing both images at the same time.
5. To exit split-screen mode, in the vertical toolbar, click the Reference Images 
6.  icon ."

Susan Ann Mullen

We have been told to index the names if they are not already included in the actual roster but I will ask for verification of that as applied to paymasters etc.

John Empoliti

Hi Anne.

Thanks for the quick response.

That was a very specific question about the preparer of the muster roll. So are you saying that the Moderators got a more general instruction to capture and make an entry for every name on every image?

If so, then Larry would be charged with capturing the names Bunker, Smith and Bunkey, and the indexer of the first page would be charged with capturing those enlistment officers.

Thanks.

Susan Ann Mullen

We did get an answer to index all names but it was in reference to the person signing off on the roster. I am asking for clarification now.

Susan Ann Mullen

We have a ruling on this.

"US, Missouri, St. Louis—Military Records, 1916–1939 [M9NP-VKH]

This image should be marked NED. There are no names of military personnel shown in this roster roll on this image. This is a continuation of a prior image where the names would have been recorded. It should be marked No, No Extractable Data."

John Empoliti

Hi Anne. Thanks, but that still leaves the question of whether all those extra names should be indexed by the Indexer who pulled the first page.

Susan Ann Mullen

Same ruling. "We would not index the paymaster. That assignment would apply to many rosters of groups, squads, regiments, etc."

Sorry for not giving both parts of the answer.

John Empoliti

Thanks Anne. So no paymaster, no enlistment officers etc. just the “principals” listed in the roster. And from the earlier ruling, the preparer - if shown on the page - even if he’s not listed in the body of the roll or roster.

LarryClark43

annewandering, John Empoliti

Thank you for all of your help!!

John Empoliti

You're welcome, Larry. Thanks for bringing attention to these issues.