Will these 19th century records become available for viewing again?
I've been working with a record set from Armenia in the 19th century when it was part of the Russian Empire that has become unavailable for viewing online. I've looked at questions others have asked, so I understand that FamilySearch is updating access to records based on contractual obligations to restrict access, and that's all clear. I'm just wondering if there will ever be a change in access for this particular record set as it's so old.
The records I was working with were dated 1845-1888, film 2330137, Items 2 & 3 / Image Group Number (DGS) 7777084: https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/koha:1567818
Item 1 of this film covers different subject matter (20th century refugees in Armenia) from Items 2 & 3 (19th century land records, covering migration of ethnic Russians to settlements in Erivan Gubernia). I think the status changed because of Item 1, as the other records Item 1 is cataloged with are also not available for online viewing (the group is cataloged together here: https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/koha:1010974). I'm only interested in items 2 & 3, and other similar records are available for online viewing elsewhere (like DGS 7777083).
I saw another question on this forum alluding to the fact that some films that cover different subject matter, where one item on the film needs to be restricted whereas another does not, will eventually be split so that the unrestricted images can be viewed. Does anyone know if that will eventually happen to this record, and if so, if there's any kind of timeline for that? If the only other way to view the records would be through the state archives in Armenia, I understand that, but I don't want to engage in the time and expense of figuring that out if a change in access is forthcoming (even if it's years away).
I'm so grateful for the access to records here on FamilySearch and for all the work that has been done to make records available, so thanks so much for that!
Best Answer
-
FamilySearch must use diplomacy about why records are restricted due to legal or contractual confidentiality. We know how painful it is to lose record access; it is believed that the cautious approach helps build trust with record custodians over time and may pay off with an even larger access in the future. The goal is always to make as many records as possible freely available to everyone. FamilySearch hopes to have access to all of these records in the future. In the meantime, keep trying to see if access has been restored.
Have you tried WorldCat for these records to see if they are possibly in a library outside of FamilySearch? Many of the other research websites, such as Ancestry.com or FindMyPast.com, may not have the same restrictions as FamilySearch, among others, and are worth trying.
1
Answers
-
Thanks very much for your answer!
I'll keep trying other routes and check back to see whether access has changed.
1 -
@sc woz @SerraNola @Sam Sulser given the volume of this sort of thing that is going on at present, would it not be possible to pin a thread listing new restrictions / removals of restrictions, with reasons where you are able to share them, e.g. re changes in legislation, and with 'for confidential reasons' or similar where you aren't? That would avoid end users having to keep checking back, because they could just subscribe to the pinned thread, and it would hopefully reduce mods' overall workload.
0 -
@MandyShaw1 I love the idea but the reality is this would be an a very difficult task. The scope is huge. Our record collection is massive and involves thousands of archives and locations with billions of records. Tracking this info internally is a big database. Even if we could pull it off, it wouldn't fit in a thread. It's too big and there are too many changes. You would be so overwhelmed. But we do try to find out what we can about collections you ask about and we'll continue to our best with that. Sam 😊
2 -
@Sam Sulser maybe the really wide scope/legislation related ones (e.g. Sri Lanka, Peru)? Or could the engineers sort this themselves via the wiki maybe? (Just one extra little step in their process that could lead to loads of better informed, happier users?)
1
