This entire census record is all indexed wrong!!!!
@Michelle Smith_44 I have looked at this census. Could you please specify what you believe is wrong with the indexed version?
I see that the Image Index tab only has a dozen names on it. They're all correct as far as I can tell, but I don't know where the rest of the people on the page are. It's possible that they're indexed, but haven't been properly associated with the image; I haven't checked.0
As I suspected, the page is correctly and probably fully indexed; it's just the Image Index tab on the image that hasn't been correctly populated with all of the associated index entries. For example, here's the Lukow family, from lines 28 to 31: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:K4VH-9BP.
@Michelle Smith_44, why do you believe it to be "all indexed wrong"? All of the names on the Image Index tab are actually found on the page, and I don't even see any obvious misreadings. Except for the missing names -- which aren't actually missing from the index -- it's all correct.
Is the problem the fact that they're out of order on that tab? Even when the tab is fully and correctly populated, it's often in a mostly-random order. This has something to do with how the records are entered into the database, and doesn't affect how index entries are displayed or the relationships between them. It is not an error.0
I have never had a census record indexed like that!! I mean't to send this to family search directly so they could fix that. It makes looking up people on the index and attaching them to the proper people is very difficult this way.0
@Michelle Smith_44 The incomplete image index of the 1940 US Census is a known issue. Engineers have found a solution but, for reasons I do not understand, we won't see a fix until they completely publish the 1950 census. Somehow the 2 censuses are tied together somewhere on the back end.
While we wait for a fix, you should be able to the 1940 Census collection and find the names or which you want to see the indexed information.0