How to "not" Index a widowed spouse
From the city directory instructions for the City Directory project.
If a spouse is listed as deceased by the words "wid" or "widow of," do not index the spouse
Example:
Seeds, Elizabeth M., wid Geo W
Two points here
1. Please do not use the term Wid, or Widow as a prefix — treat just like Jr which is also not a prefix - neither is to be used in the appropriate for the City Directory project.
2. For Elizabeth, do not include Geo W as a spouse as per the City Directory Instructions.
Best Answers
-
This (again) is a result of people either not reading the project instructions or not reading them completely. This happens with every project. There's a laundry list of issues from this, from indexing/not indexing something to using special characters that aren't supposed to be used to indexing suffixes. The only thing we can do as reviewers is to correct mistakes. If there are ≥20% mistakes in a batch, that batch goes for a second review.
3 -
I like the test idea. It could take longer to make new projects available, so that someone can create the test, but it may be worth it.
I think that in some cases it may be better to say "Index this part of the test image, then move to this part of the image (or next image)" rather than "Index the whole test image", because that way you can fit multiple record types into the test without it getting tedious. You could also use that approach to instruct new indexers (or just those new to the project) on different situations they may encounter without having to go through too much that has already been taught to them, i.e. not having to go through half of a city directory before learning not to index companies. Since the person making the test would have presumably already indexed the images in question in order to get the correct answers, it isn't necessary for the "student" to index every name in that instance.
1 -
I totally agree. Thank you for the time to provide feedback.
0
Answers
-
Just gentle reminders, not being a nag (at least not the intent). Thank you for your support!
0 -
I get the need to help. That's what started me back in 2014 (or maybe '15?). At that time, there was desktop indexing. When that was the case, if you made mistakes on a batch, the reviewer would leave instructions on how to index it correctly.
Ex: my very first batches were WWII draft cards from Alabama. We had to index height and weight with the entries. I would put something like 6'1" and send the batch off. I can't remember exactly how it was set up, but I think there was a "Feedback" tab on it, but the reviewer would say something like "The height is indexed as 6 1." I ended up writing down in a notebook that this is what I did wrong and this is how I fix it. I kept it for years. When FS made the switch to 100% web indexing, that feature did not make the switch, since apparently, there were bad feelings surrounding the feedback. I sort of wish that was a feature so we can reach out to the indexer and say "hey, it's X and not Y."1 -
When. teaching the review process, I would find a batch that had lots of opportunities to make errors, then after the student submitted their "test" I would review each item with them. I am going to suggest that the instruction writers consider such "test" that every one would do as the first batch when doing a new project - I'm confident that a "scored/corrected" batch could then be sent out to the test taker to truly teach rather than just assuming folks would read. Small batches wouldn't take much time and could save hours and hours of correcting obvious errors. No body would know what the test taker scores except for them.
1 -
There should be something, either a test image or feedback or having to watch a video on how to index before being able to index that project. I tell people sometimes that 98% of the issues can be resolved by reading the PI and examples. I still do both 10 years in.
1 -
The idea of a "test" for each project has been suggested off and on for years. I think that family search figures that even with the errors, the records will be found, except in rare circumstances. And since there are so many different types of documents within different projects, it wouldn't be possible to have every scenario a person could goof up on. Correcting the errors really doesn't take that much time, and when a particular batch has so many errors that the reviewer is spending too much time on it, the batch should be sent back for reindexing so the reviewers can do the job of reviewing instead of reindexing.
2 -
Thanks for the tips.
0 -
The heading at the top of the pages mentions how NOT to index a widowed spouse. Yes, the instructions tell us not to index a widowed spouse. I have a problem with this. WHY, don't we index the widow ??? With so many duplicated names, it seem it could be much more accurate to include the widowed spouse as a means of identification. I spent several years in the consumer finance business. I sure learned that much of the collection efforts could be reduced with more complete information on the credit application. Similar things can be applied here " the more information, the easier to identify. So, again,, why not index the deceased spouse ??? I have asked this questions a few times before,,, no answers. !! Looking for a commopn sense answer !! Donald Robinson95
0 -
Simply put: it's what the record owners want. The original Directories project had us index the spouse, no matter what. That was back around 2020/21. Then when the Diectory project came back earlier this year, we indexed the spouse, no matter what (along with the directory year) for the first few parts. I think it was changed in Part C to where the deceased spouse (and the year) were no longer indexed. It also goes to that we have never indexed everything on every document in every project. The researcher will be able to see the deceased spouse (or the age of a Naturalization applicant or where a solider served on WWII discharge records) when they view the document.
2 -
@DonaldRobinson95, you DO index the widow. You don't index the deceased spouse. (Short version of the instructions: was the person living? If yes, index him or her. If not, do not index.)
Keep in mind that you're not transcribing the directory. You're just creating a method of finding entries in it.
1
