<UNKNOWN> Census Records
What's up with so many census record source titles with "<UNKNOWN>" listed as the name? I thought I might be able fix it by maybe just editing the source title myself, and the field wasn't locked so I entered the name and hit save. Unfortunately, the save doesn't seem to work and the source title defaults back to "<UNKNOWN> every time.
Answers
-
I have also encountered the <Unknown>.
2 -
As the <Unknown> only shows on Tree sources, we are moving the discussion to the Family Tree category so someone over that area can see about getting it fixed.
0 -
In my case, I've noticed that a record I've edited will show up as <Unknown> when I view it later. It appears to be an interim step between the indexed name and the edited name appearing.
In this example, from the 1905 Rhode Island census, Bridget Donnelly Mullen was enumerated with her nickname, Delia Mullen. The indexer entered ?elie Mullen, and she was VERY hard to find. I finally found the record using just her married surname, and then I edited it to read Delia Mullen. You can see the name in the source shows, right now, as <Unknown>. If it follows the pattern I've noticed on other records I've edited recently, Delia should show up fairly soon.
I've had the same experience recently in the 1950 census on members of my family.
0 -
The UNKNOWN issue is becoming an issue! People are going in and attaching records when the people aren't even alive. Example, 1900 US Census, person is widowed or marked as widowed and now there is an attachment box for "unknown" and people come along and attach it! So you can't easily approximate between which census years they died. Takes A LOT longer! No question here, just commenting about what an inconvenience it is and I don't see any purpose in it! It needs to go away!
0
