US, Virginia—Vital Records, 1715–1901 Part B. index?? M3R1-J2Z

LarryClark43

There seems to be many batches coming up in this project that are actually indexes for the registers. This is an example. The PI say:

• Indexes are images with only a name and reference information, such as page or volume number, with no other information, such as dates, available. Indexes should be marked as No, No Extractable Data.

This is obviously an index but there are dates available to go with the names, (year only). For this reason, the date being available, I have indexed some of these batches.

Is there an official directive concerning this?? Should I Index or Not??

genthusiast

@LarryClark43

Disclaimer: Not an official response/FamilySearch representative.

Your batch image:

https://www.familysearch.org/records/images/image-details?imageGroupNumbers=7579024&rmsId=TH-1951-40062-3292-44&imageIndex=245&singleView=true

Take your first line person - MIller, P - page 63, line 354:

https://www.familysearch.org/records/images/image-details?imageGroupNumbers=7579024&rmsId=TH-1951-40062-3292-44&imageIndex=302&singleView=true

So my opinion - yes you got an Index page image and it should be marked No, No Extractable Data - because the later image will be the actual record - at least for that first person.

My opinion assumes all the people in the Index indeed do have a later record/image - if there are Index mistakes or matching record mistakes - it might be good to index the Index pages so that someone (FamilySearch) can compare and verify the index matches all records. But the PI certainly seem to imply indexing the Index is not needed.