Correcting records - Can't edit Marriages in New Edit screen

GinaBx

To begin, I am working in German language records, translating as I go, and many have only the month and day listed, but no years since they are at the top of each page. They are very difficult to locate like this in a search, so I've been adding the correct years when I can. The new Edit functions are great for births and deaths, the dates are in the Essential Information and are easily added to. However, the marriage date is not available to correct in either the bride's or groom's entries. I can't find the date anywhere to edit. When I add a date, by adding an event, I'm still unable to use the date when attaching the record to a person in the tree. There is a dropdown box of unusable corrupted dates. I will post a link to an example record. I added an event (marriage) date to Heinrich Gottlieb Both here, and entered the entire date. It doesn't transfer to his wife. You can see that everyone on this page has a date entered, but the years aren't included - and you cannot edit the date in the index, at least as far as I can see. Can anyone help?

check the following link's dropdown box for the marriage date: Nov 2010, Nov 1910, Nov 1810, Nov 0010, von 1589 bis 1808 (that last one is for the collection itself) [it is currently indexed as "Nov 10" with no year, my added date is not here] and then step through trying to correct it. The old edit screen allowed me to fix it.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QPJV-TNC2?cid=fs_copy

if you view the source linker, the date there is November 2010 rather than November 10.

I'm not sure if this is a bug, or if I'm missing something. I do several of these each time I'm doing a session, so I've just had to stop fixing them since the Edit functions changed. Thanks for your help.

Gina

GinaBx

I'd like to correct my post - the date I entered is there on the record page as "marriage date". The "event date" is still wrong, however, and that's the only date that the linker wants to use. It's that "event date" that needs the year added but I can't access it.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

Link rescued from the Community's ever-so-helpful URL mangler: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QPJV-TNC2.

I think there are two errors/problems combining here. First, someone needs to tell the autostandardizing bot that a single number in a date isn't necessarily the year. FS needs to not even try for any sort of automated process on incomplete date fields; they cannot be standardized based on just the indexed contents of the field. All of the bot's guesses are dead wrong.

Second, the results of rushing the index-editor-and-image-viewer out the door continue to rebound badly, years after release: it's still not communicating properly with the database. As you noted, there is no sign of the event date or place anywhere in the edit panel; it only shows the "Marriage Date", which is not what Source Linker tries to use.

I think the best you can do is to try reporting the editor problem using the Feedback tab. (You could include a link to this discussion.) Perhaps if they get a sufficient number of such reports, they'll figure out where the problem lies. (I hope they're not assuming it's all user error.)

MandyShaw1

The underlying (record JSON) data has the Marriage Date against the Persona, but the Event stuff against the Relationship, and it looks to me as if the two are handled separately.

The Persona bit has this:

label	text
FS_SORT_KEY	0000000102700062_00248_00000_0000106379816251_000
PR_MAR_DATE	10 November 1789
PR_MAR_EVENT_TYPE	Marriage
PR_NAME	Heinrich Gottlieb Both
PR_NAME_GN	Heinrich Gottlieb
PR_NAME_GN_ORIG	Heinrich Gottlieb
PR_NAME_ORIG	Heinrich Gottlieb Both
PR_NAME_SURN	Both
PR_NAME_SURN_ORIG	Both
PR_SEX_CODE	Männlich
PR_SEX_CODE_ORIG	männlich

The Relationship bit (below) does know the 10 is a day (see EVENT_DAY), and that the event took place somewhere in an enormous range of years (perhaps the years spanned by the collection); but there are two EVENT_DATE_ORIG values listed that talk about the 10 as a year, so some of the flaws here may not be down to FS but to the metadata's original source.

Whatever, the way the information is presented to users seems sub-optimal here.

label	text
EVENT_CHURCH_ORIG	Evangelische Kirche Emleben (AG. Ohrdruf)
EVENT_CITY	Emleben
EVENT_CITY	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_CITY_ORIG	Emleben
EVENT_CITY_ORIG	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_COUNTRY_ORIG	Deutschland
EVENT_DATE	10 Nov 1589-1808
EVENT_DATE	November 0010
EVENT_DATE	November 1810
EVENT_DATE	Nov-10
EVENT_DATE	Nov-10
EVENT_DATE	von 1589 bis 1808
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	10 Nov 1589-1808
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	November 0010
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	November 1810
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	Nov-10
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	Nov-10
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	von 1589 bis 1808
EVENT_DAY	10
EVENT_DAY_ORIG	10
EVENT_DISTRICT_ORIG	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_MONTH	Nov
EVENT_MONTH_ORIG	Nov
EVENT_PARISH_ORIG	Emleben
EVENT_PLACE	Emleben, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Sachsen, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE	Emleben, Ohrdruf, Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE_ORIG	Emleben, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Sachsen, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE_ORIG	Emleben, Ohrdruf, Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha, Deutschland
EVENT_PROVINCE_ORIG	Sachsen
EVENT_TYPE	Heirat
EVENT_TYPE	Marriage
EVENT_TYPE_ORIG	Heirat
EVENT_TYPE_ORIG	Marriage
EVENT_YEAR_ORIG	1589-1808

Julia Szent-Györgyi

My sister's the database programmer, not me, so I may be getting the concepts tangled, but it looks to me like the index editor is not accessing the relationship section of the index data at all. It doesn't show any of those details anywhere and hence doesn't allow editing them.

I can sort of see why the information is missing: in the current structure, I'm not sure where it should go. It's all individual personas. You can link personas with relationships, but those have a single feature (the type of relationship), and I have no idea whether they could have more (such as the event date and place). And even if a relationship could "hold" that information, it would create an inconsistency in the display/structure between the indexed event versus events added to individual personas.

I'm afraid the best solution is never going to happen, because it would involve going all the way back to the drawing board and greatly simplifying the whole thing into a limited database editing interface.

MandyShaw1

It would help if, for each collection, FS documented the metadata structure, where it comes from, how it splits between personas and relationships, to what extent index editing is allowed, and how the metadata is manipulated both on import into FS and on the various relevant user interfaces.

Great insight that only persona metadata is editable @Julia Szent-Györgyi.

GinaBx

The event seems to be in the relationship data, and I can’t find a way to edit that at all now. The one labeled “marriage date” I entered manually, but the “event-date” isn’t available for edit :(. On the old editor I could edit that.

I’ll try sending this to feedback.

MandyShaw1

Julia has identified that the relationship data is not editable by users, only the persona data. Was the data you were editing previously definitely treated by FS as relationship rather than persona data? The boundary seems pretty counterintuitive to me. (Some records do have persona event dates, e.g. births.)

GinaBx

I believe so, I’d correct the date and then re-attach to the parties involved with that correct date. I know I was doing marriages because I had to jostle the linker around to attach to bo5 the bride’s and groom’s fathers.

MandyShaw1

May vary between collections, otherwise I guess the logic does change over time (or it could be that the record custodian has tightened their rules).

Áine Ní Donnghaile

According to a discussion I had yesterday with one of the mods, FS has recently changed what we can edit. As I understood it, the change was in the other direction - more edit options, rather than fewer.

GinaBx

Here’s one from this collection that I worked on in August. It looks like I updated the year then and attached it. Hopefully this is a good example, otherwise I can find a different one. I can’t actually see what I updated…

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QPJK-SHCF

MandyShaw1

So, interestingly, this one doesn't have a Marriage Date at all (maybe it used to have one??), only Event Dates (which are in the Relationship part of the data).

Persona:

label	text
FS_SORT_KEY	0000000102700062_00197_00000_0000106380809430_000
PR_NAME	Andreas Martin Bothe
PR_NAME_GN	Andreas Martin
PR_NAME_GN_ORIG	Andreas Martin
PR_NAME_ORIG	Andreas Martin Bothe
PR_NAME_SURN	Bothe
PR_NAME_SURN_ORIG	Bothe
PR_SEX_CODE	Male
PR_SEX_CODE_ORIG	männlich

Relationship:

label	text
EVENT_CHURCH_ORIG	Evangelische Kirche Emleben (AG. Ohrdruf)
EVENT_CITY	Emleben
EVENT_CITY	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_CITY_ORIG	Emleben
EVENT_CITY_ORIG	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_COUNTRY_ORIG	Deutschland
EVENT_DATE	21 Okt
EVENT_DATE	21. Oktober 1684
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	21 Okt
EVENT_DATE_ORIG	21. Oktober 1684
EVENT_DAY	21
EVENT_DAY_ORIG	21
EVENT_DISTRICT_ORIG	Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen
EVENT_ERA	AD
EVENT_MONTH	10
EVENT_MONTH	Okt
EVENT_MONTH_ORIG	10
EVENT_MONTH_ORIG	Okt
EVENT_PARISH_ORIG	Emleben
EVENT_PLACE	Emleben, Emleben, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Sachsen, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE	Emleben, Ohrdruf, Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE_ORIG	Emleben, Emleben, Lleben, Pferdingsleben u. Schwabhausen, Sachsen, Deutschland
EVENT_PLACE_ORIG	Emleben, Ohrdruf, Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha, Deutschland
EVENT_PROVINCE_ORIG	Sachsen
EVENT_TYPE	Heirat
EVENT_TYPE	Marriage
EVENT_TYPE_ORIG	Heirat
EVENT_TYPE_ORIG	Marriage
EVENT_YEAR	1589-1808
EVENT_YEAR	1684
EVENT_YEAR_ORIG	1589-1808
EVENT_YEAR_ORIG	1684

GinaBx

Exactly - That one I didn’t add a field like I did in the first example, I just corrected the existing date (which apparently is an Event_Date_Orig). Once I updated that existing Day-Month to include a year, it then began to show up in the searches. I can’t do anything now, with the new editor, to correct the record and make it appear if searched. ::sad::. I used to correct entire pages of people to add the years.

The births and deaths I can still fix, even able to add an Event_Year and highlight, as well as the complete date.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QPJ2-X12H

Julia Szent-Györgyi

Even just within a single collection (Hungary Civil Registration), different index entries are structured differently. Sometimes the event type is correct, sometimes it's not (registration instead of vital), some are affected by that highly-ill-advised process that makes married women consanguinous with their husbands (by adding his surname to hers), sometimes Source Linker sticks a copy in the relationship section (even when it's not a marriage, or not the marriage of that couple), and so on. I think it's at least partly due to changes over time: we started indexing civil registrations back when online indexing was brand new, and are still at it currently. Plus, in the last few years, new entries show up a few times a year without ever being seen over in Indexing, meaning that there's some other group or entity also doing these, and who knows what its pre- and post-processing does to the structure.

Because of the permission-eating gremlin and other such major problems, I stopped bothering with index corrections a while ago now, so I don't know what the current state of affairs is. I did notice just now that there are changes in the interface, but I don't know if that's just cosmetic or what.

GinaBx

I just received this after a few go-rounds that I'm not talking about editing the Family Tree, etc. I did link to this discussion:

"Thank you for contacting FamilySearch Support about resolving your issue with editing dates, adding dates, and finding incorrect dates when using the Source Linker.
 
This type of issue does not work well to try to resolve via emails.  We will need to speak with you on the phone to resolve this issue."

But there is no direct number, I'm simply linked to this page:

https://www.familysearch.org/en/fieldops/familysearch-support-contact-us

Any thoughts? I'm tempted to just give up and leave the records to be messed up. :(

MandyShaw1

If I go to that link and click on my region's map (Europe) I get a support 'phone number, does this not happen for you?

GinaBx

We've emailed several times, they're still trying to understand what's wrong. So if anyone is following this, I'm still working on it.

GinaBx

In case anyone was following this, they weren't able to help me. After a lot of communication they realized they could not update those marriage records either and I wasn't crazy. I was asked to submit a feedback report on the page, so I selected a "sad face" feedback and a brief report. Very disillusioning experience.