Duplicated records
I can't understand why I keep getting Research Help showing records that are already in the Sources list. Accepting new records ends up with lots of duplicated records. Is there a way I can clear The Research Help records, if I already have them? It makes the records so confusing.
Answers
-
Dear Carol:
It is because they are from different sources. You can delete the sources from the list, if you like. PaulaAnn
1 -
can you provide the PID of a specific person as an example?
0 -
Here's an example of one person with 3 copies of a baptism record. Two are from what looks like the same source
Valentinus Bryk G2JX-1T5
I add them all so we don't wind up with duplicate people but it's annoying adding the same baptism 3 times.
0 -
@ParkerPendzuk, I looked at the two sources on Valentinus that have identical titles, and while they're undoubtedly indexings of the same event, they're from different films. This accounts for the different event places in the index entries: one film is cataloged as Zassów, the other as Borowa. (The one film is not online, the other only at FHCs, so I can't check them to see which -- if either -- of those is the correct place.)
The third source, which is the entry with the more complete names, is from the same image of the same film as the one that's cataloged as Zassów (the one that's not online), but it has a 2018 date in the auto-citation instead of the 2023 in the other one. If those dates are to be believed, then it appears that the film was re-indexed recently. (I haven't a clue why, especially given how the new index is so thoroughly inferior to the old one.)
So, in other words, the three sources for the same event on Valentinus's profile demonstrate two of the possible causes of such (apparent) duplicates: re-filming and re-indexing. Or, well, the first may be re-recording (such as in a bishop's copy) rather than re-filming; without the actual images, I can't tell. You were right to attach them all: they all have different URLs, so for the purposes of FS's hinting system, they're different sources.
2 -
Yes, this multiple indexing of what is often the exact same record can cause annoyance through the clutter it can help cause in the Sources section. (I have had up to five "versions" of the same event.) But please don't suggest one or more of these records are "retired". As Julia has found, one of the sources might have more data indexed than another and, unfortunately, in the past FamilySearch has chosen to retire the record containing the lesser amount of information in these cases!
2 -
Let's hope that they stop indexing the same events then lol
0 -
I just noticed the incorrect / confusing expression in my previous post. I meant to say, of course:
"... in the past FamilySearch has chosen to retire the record containing the greater amount of information..."
2 -
In my experience, the vast majority of sources that people may initially think are duplicates are not duplicates at all. You certainly can't look at titles that are similar or even an exact match and assume that the record hints or source is truly a duplicate.
For one thing, even if two sources refer to the same event (for example, a marriage on a particular date), the images associated with the sources might be different (for example, a marriage license vs. a marriage certificate). The indexed information might be different, but even if it's the same, the images might be different. Only close inspection will determine if the images are precisely the same.
Failing to attach a source because it superficially seems to be a duplicate may lead to important information being lost -- information that is only found by careful examination of the images. So it is best to attach all sources that truly apply to the persons in the Tree.
1 -
For parish (and other) records relating to England, the majority of FamilySearch records do not have any attached / linked images. There are, however, certain counties for which multiple indexing of the same records have taken place. Or, if multiple indexing is not the factor, the post-indexing process has certainly caused duplication - not only of subject matter but of the exact content. Like most other experienced users I see the importance of adding all these records to the Source boxes of those to whom they apply, but do wish FamilySearch would be a little more careful in keeping logs of its indexed material, so the problem of truly duplicated material can be avoided. Resources are surely limited enough without employees / volunteers having to spend time in working on the same records again and again, when their time could be far more usefully spent in producing sources that are completely new to the site.
In spite of that, I would be far happier not to find certain "duplicate" records being retired - especially as someone (or a computer program) seems to be choosing to retire the record(s) containing the more valuable data, in some recent instances .
3 -
Agreed. I have a case where the good record says "This record was a duplicate and has been retired. We recommend using the most current copy." But when you click on the 'current' copy there's no image available, while the duplicate/retired version DOES have an image.
2 -
These might be better examples. The only thing different is one says
(https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:Q2MJ-9ZYT : 18 March 2018)
and the other says
(https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QV9J-YXYC : 17 March 2020)
Were they indexed 2x?
0 -
@ParkerPendzuk, those entries are from different images on different films: the 2018 one is image 889 of film 101276929, while the 2020 one is image 1858 of film 7595419. The latter number is not in the Catalog, so even if they weren't Illinois, I wouldn't be able to see if it was two filmings of the same images, or different records about the same event; either is possible.
0 -
Both are Cook County death certificates with the same number. What I've often found, in my Chicago research, is 2 filmings of the same series of certificates. One series is white on black (old photostat copies) while the other is black on white. Same certificate, even down to handwritten notations, but 2 filmings. Those are viewable at Affiliate Libraries and FSCs.
0
