Mismatched index information to source showing erroneous info from previous century
"Deutschland, ausgewählte evangelische Kirchenbücher 1500-1971," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-C398-K9KP-G?cc=3015626 : 18 October 2019), > image 1 of 1; Records extracted and images digitized by Ancestry.com. German Lutheran Collection, various parishes, Germany. Film # 105484218. Index is showing burials in the 1770s and marriages in the 1850s (both) at the bottom of the same image. I am sure noone added 1850 marriages interspersed with 1770 deaths.
Issues: 1. So difficult to know if EITHER is for this specific source as the bottom index is NOT for the specific page/image since the source record has poor image quality. (as I found in other sources, the bottom index could be on the preceding page but TRULY for the next page or next 2 pages. I have reported this problem MULTIPLE times.) WHY is it so difficult to get the image to be the correct one for the specific page's true vital record data?
2. Is there no why to get indices to properly show the related data for a specific source. As in this case, I believe the data for film # 105484218 is for 1850s so WHY is there any information in the index for the 1770s? Isn't there an IT methodology to ensure data that is nearly a century old is not inadvertently added to the specific source film #? If I needed the 1770 record, all I would get is the index and NOT the corresponding written source record.
I would hope there would be more care in adding index information for a specific film. The date range of the specific film should be accurately identified and then the proper index applied. If the above is the result of AI technology, maybe something else is needed by ancestry.com to properly EXTRACT record data from the digitized images to generate an accurate index.
Answers
-
Records extracted and images digitized by Ancestry.com. German Lutheran Collection
That means the index for this record set was created by Ancestry, not FamilySearch. The issue likely needs to be addressed on the Ancestry side.
1 -
I would think you should have quality control procedures for this 3rd party (ancestry.com) and would have some contract in place along with ancestry.com contacts that would be better than me calling them to report it. First I should not even have to report it since it should have been correct. If you want contributors to assist with this world project then I would hope these data issues would be fixed.
-1 -
@mar60 I'm not a FamilySearch employee or even a mod. I'm not even a member of the LDS Church. This Community is primarily composed of users of the website from all over the world.
2
