Microfilms with no icon
I came across this set of microfilms today that is neither accessible nor locked—there is simply no icon at all. I am certain they were available back in 2015, and they don't seem to share space with lockable records. I am unsure if they were restricted due to new agreements or if this is just a system error: https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/olib:1932273
Thanks!
Best Answers
-
@OmarBudesca
These DGS originated as digital images - not originally microfilmed but digitally photographed. That's why there is a DGS number but no Film number.
Why they are not available, I can't answer. @m how, can you help? Thanks.2 -
Thank you for your diligence in finding and reporting errors in FamilySearch. We depend on you! I have passed this on to the engineers.
2
Answers
-
Well, if that's the case, then it's most likely the organization these belong to pulled back the permissions for whatever reason.
Knowing the area, it must've been that. Thanks though!
P.S. Is there an official way to report incorrect metadata in microfilms, like a wrong year interval or whatnot? I wouldn't want to overping SerraNola, I'm sure she has a lot of work 😅
0 -
@OmarBudesca I passed this one to @m how as it needs to be handled by catalog engineers.
2 -
{pats self on back for tagging m how on this one instead of serranola}
Happy Friday Night!
2 -
https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/623039#Comment_623039
Awesome! Thanks 😄
Also, the first item in this town is labeled as starting in 1634, but it actually starts in 1665. This also happens with the DGS object:
The very first images are an unrelated document from 1734 (not 1634). The fourth image, however, is where the actual baptisms begin (August 17th, 1665).
0
