UK Crew Lists duplicates
I am reviewing this batch and confused. Image 2 has the same names as image one, but some extra names at the bottom. Was this indexed correctly, or the other names added to the first image and the second image marked NED. TIA
https://www.familysearch.org/indexing/batch/965907fa-9b08-4bda-a83a-6e0a06dfaf1a
Answers
-
This one is tricky. I would index the first image as image one, and then index the second image as image 2. I would do the names again for image 2, adding the new names to it. Also I found this in the project instructions.
- Documents were often filmed multiple times, with different sections of the document cut off from the image. Do not mark images as “Duplicate Image” unless they are exactly the same.
So I would not mark image 2 as Duplicate, or NEC. Maybe we can get someone in here to give some more insight on what to do.
1 -
I would add Constance Augustine before the 1st record on Image 2 and review the remainder of the names. In the past we have indexed all the names on EACH image as @Ksalers advises. But, in reality that is a huge waste of time and leads to duplicate records of the same image. By indexing this as two separate images, as the indexer has done, the goal is met; the researcher will be able to find their primary individual on the image.
1 -
I've got a batch which is two pages but I've now noticed that the second page is just a different photograph of the same document, with the top cut off and slightly more of the right-hand edge visible. Should I mark all of the fields as 'blank' for the second page? The instructions say you shouldn't mark it as duplicate unless it is exactly the same photograph (rather than just the same document photographed differently).
There were lots of records on this document so I really don't want to have to type them all in again. What should I do?
0 -
According to the general guidelines, because it is not an exact duplicate of the first image, it should be indexed. This creates alot of unnecessary work and duplicate records of the same image.
I would carefully check to be sure there isn't more information to be seen on that second image, like more names at the bottom that need to be recorded, and do those.
Maybe a page moderator could get a final answer on how to handle this since this is the second question about the same issue in a matter of hours.
I'm going to tag @MaileLoveland on this and the other post since I've seen she is a moderator. Thanks in advance!
0 -
This batch contains two images. The second image contains additional records, but they are otherwise identical. Should I add the additional records to the records for the first image? Should I treat them as completely different images and reindex the records from the first image with those from the second image? How do I mark the images in each case? I have reread the instructions a couple of times.
0 -
You are not the first to ask this question. It seems these batches contain many images like this. The project instructions do not give an answer on what to do when you get a batch like this. If it were me, I would index all the names again adding the new names. However, that is an old way. Surely they will come up with a new way on how to index these. Hold onto this batch.
1 -
Hey guys. Yes, I am a moderator. Just a heads-up, I merged three conversation here. This caused some repetitive posts that I edited or removed. If you answered twice and want to remove one of them, flag it and ask for it to be deleted.
When it comes to indexing, I know just about as much as you do. I can see where redoing the indexing for a second page is time consuming. I do not have an answer for what to do right now but I will certainly see who I can get to help on this.
0 -
@MaileLoveland Thanks for working on getting an answer to this question.
0
