South Africa—Dutch Reformed Church Registers, 1660–1970 [Part D] [M3FV-DZN]
Answers
-
The film roll (or image group number) says baptisms
(you get that film number from Batch> About Batch)
I don't know if that means the Project will/should already have that field entered - otherwise I guess you have to ask here in Community and someone can indicate.
I believe this image is an index of the baptism records (showing Book No. and BL - book entry/line?) and thus according to the instructions:
- Mark all other images, including indexes, in Step 1: Images as No, No Extractable Data.
- 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.
Which is a bit puzzling - because if the entire Project/batch is the film for the index book - then shouldn't they all be marked that? But they do include date - so maybe that is why they are being indexed... Maybe Project management should indicate whether they want them indexed or not - but the Project is there - which indicates they do...?
0 -
I don't know any Project Managers but I assume there is an Indexing person who has all of our answers. I don't think they are part of this Indexing Community Discussion.
Yes, the film rolls currently being marked SA DRC Baptisms are Registers with name, date, and place, taken from the original. If you will count backward from your particular image ie 405 or 912 or 399, etc, you will eventually come to the First Image in that group which shows Table Headings usually very poorly written, that show that although these are Registers of Baptisms, the Registrar has entered the Birth Date rather than the Baptism Date from the Baptism record. This is the cause of much confusion when reviewing as many people are entering them as Baptism dates when in fact they are Birth dates. Also, the Project Instructions are incorrect saying to record them as Baptism Dates.
I have given feedback several times on the batches I review, (Click on the Feedback button at the bottom right side when the batch is open) to Family Search and have gotten the answer that these types of errors on the Registrar's part, are called Metadata. There is a Metadata team whose sole work is to go through thousands of these Batches, Registers, Memberships, etc and correct them. Patience is asked for by Family Search. I don't have too much of that anymore because it is causing incorrect indexing and then Batches being sent back for Re-Indexing, and then Reviewed again. But I have been going into the ABOUT BATCH information and pulling up the film with a specific batch to see what the information really is. It's time consuming.
0 -
I just added 3 of the same batch. It is confusing. I haven't seen these batch types for more that 3 years and I can't remember what we did with them. I would like to know what we should do with them.
0 -
The instructions say they are baptisms
0 -
Some indexers are entering these type of records as church membership records. Is that exceptable?
0 -
@Mary Rice I'm not sure if you mean the following registers - but the ones I referenced (for the specific Project the question is being asked about) are indexes only. I don't know where the original books/film rolls -from whence the index was created - are (?). And I'm not seeing other registers for the dates the index covers...maybe looking in the wrong place...
If I search the published record collection I am not finding the baptisms this particular batch to which the index book Project is referring - so can only assume the Registers from which the index was created are not included in this collection.
1 -
@genthusiast Yesterday I realized that there are some registers that are Church Memberships. These batches do not have a Place. Did you go through About batch to find the film for that batch? Sometimes this is more helpful than others. If I cannot find the specific place for the batch I put "Cape Province, South Africa." I googled what South Africa was called in the 1880s and that came up the most, but it was called a few different things by different groups.
I have not searched the published record collections which is a good idea.
0 -
@Mary Rice yes the first link in my first post references the collection the batch is from.
1
