On full name review, should I index 'mother' and 'father' under prefix?
I'm not actually certain whether they are just being labeled as mother as in parents, or if its mother and father as in church titles. Either way, I feel like including it makes it so your certain what the gender is when searching the name.
Best Answer
-
@MandyShaw1 @Adrian Bruce1 @maryellenstevensbarnes1 @Mary Rice Please note the instructions on Family Indexing Review.
https://www.familysearch.org/en/help/helpcenter/article/welcome-to-family-review?cid=fs_copy
Here are the instructions for the Full Name Review :
Full Name Review
Step 1 of 4
"Is the full name highlighted?"
"Check for prefixes, suffixes, maiden names, and married names. You'll be able to add or remove highlights in the next step."
The main post in this discussion was about whether to index mother and father under "prefix." Mother and Father are not recognized as prefixes. Mother and Father are recognized as a "relationship" to the primary person. In "Full Name Review," it is important to remember that volunteers are reviewing Full Names. If a prefix or suffix is attached to the full name, the instructions clearly encourage the volunteer to include it in the transcribed record. Same with the maiden name and married name.
In Family Indexing Review, the instructions tell us to "Review the Name, Sex and Relationship." After finding the Primary Person we are instructed to "Verify that the names of the other people mentioned in the record have also been transcribed correctly. Choose the relationship that connects them to the Primary Person. If you cannot see the correct relationship type, select 'Other'."
After visiting with the Engineers for further clarification on the Family Indexing Review, we were reminded that the primary purpose of FamilySearch is to put families together. An issue came up in another discussion as to why we need to include the clergy and the monsignors in the record. The engineers said we do not need to include them, because they are not part of the family. The record will always be stored and searchable, so if someone is interested in finding that information, they will still be able to.
FamilySearch has provided clear instructions for all the issues that have come up in this discussion.
1
Answers
-
@AnthonyHopkins5 Can you tell me what type of records you were reviewing in Full Name Review? Were they Christenings or Baptisms? Was there a possibility that Mother and Father could have been considered church titles?
0 -
I didn't recognize the type, that's why I'm not sure whether it was church titles vs common social labels.
0 -
@dancingintherain (in case your team meeting about these matters hasn't happened yet) it seems to me, because of points like exactly the one raised here, that even if the Get Involved activity being undertaken is Full Name Review rather than Indexing Review, there may still need to be additional instructions provided to the user that are specifically relevant to the image collection being looked at.
1 -
@AnthonyHopkins5 According to Engineers Mother or father would not be part of full name review
0 -
@bjmurph Can you point us at the published instructions/help text for Full Name Review that clarify this, please?
1 -
With my apologies for offending anyone, it seems to me that everyone is making Full Name Review way too difficult by over-analyzing — example — in my extended family I'm often called "Grandma Mary" to help differentiate which grandma is being referred to or being addressed as; but the title "Grandma" is in no way part of my name - given to me at birth by parents or by government/religious entity at any time. BTW some of my grandchildren are fortunate enough to have as many as 8 grandparents, all living! To simple-minded me, the terms "Mother" or "Father" are not a part a person's name and should not be put in the Name Prefix box. The engineers are correct and that's why the published instructions don't mention it.
1 -
Thank you, for your opinion. It sounds like its best to avoid prefixes that aren't universal in relativity toward a single person. Prefixes such as 'mrs' or 'mr' are good, and suffixes such as 'junior' are probably fine given that it means the person's parent has the same name, and such a thing is needed to differentiate the two. however, prefixes such as 'grandma' only work in relation to family structures, and only apply from the perspective of the second generation out from the designated person, and to anyone looking in from the outside, it doesn't carry the same meaning.
So it is best to consider whether or not a prefix or suffix works if a stranger is introduced using it. 'mother' and 'father' only work if its a church title. anything like 'grandma, aunt, uncle, niece and nephew' all only work from a specific perspective and should not be used to identify a person in an official church indexing. (having a record that mentions their place in the family is fine, but putting it as part of their name can lead to misinterpretations) Thank you mary, this helped me think through the issue. Also devs, let me know if I'm wrong at all please.
1 -
@AnthonyHopkins5 Thank you, I always appreciate your know-how with FS
0 -
@AnthonyHopkins5 said "Prefixes such as 'mrs' or 'mr' are good ..."
Assuming that I understand the issue correctly, I would disagree with this because those prefixes do not appear in other source documents such as censuses. Occasionally I'll see them in parish registers, usually suggesting that the man in question was of high standing but it's unlikely to be consistent from birth to death.
I fear that if it's in some indexes but not others, then the search software may get confused. On the other hand, the software might even ignore such words as just noise.
NB "Sir", as in, Sir Winston Churchill, for instance, is fine because it is a formal part of the name in a way that "Mr" isn't.
0 -
Whenever 'mr' or 'mrs' and their variants are used, they give a definitive arrow toward their gender. I think its important to include them because it doesn't matter who you are looking in from the outside, the details are fixed. 'that person is a man' or 'that person is a woman', which can be used as concrete evidence of their gender when it transitions from indexing to the next stage when you manage the web of names on the internet. They are both considered 'prefixes' as the rules of English stand, so I feel they should be included. (Again though, I am happy to defer to the devs if they feel differently)
0 -
@AnthonyHopkins5 said:
" … Whenever 'mr' or 'mrs' and their variants are used, they give a definitive arrow toward their gender. I think its important to include them because it doesn't matter who you are looking in from the outside, the details are fixed. 'that person is a man' or 'that person is a woman', which can be used as concrete evidence of their gender when it transitions from indexing to the next stage when you manage the web of names on the internet. …"
Although the counter-argument to that is that if we're talking about indexing an image, then the researcher should always consult the image and not rely on the index, which is only a finding aid, not the answer.
1 -
I'm flummoxed that Mr and Mrs or Señor and Señora, etc are even an issue. When did it become an issue after 20+ years of computer indexing? I've indexed in 45 countries, at least that's what "Your Worldwide Contributions" tells me. I've never been asked for a Prefix or Suffix to names or any other indication of gender except currently in Family Indexing Review. I rarely have had difficulty deciphering the gender if needed at all in previous Indexing/Reviewing projects. Has it become an issue because of the current issue of multiple gender identities, same gender marriages, banning of transgenders in sporting events, etc? Is Family Search's declarations of gender seen as legal issues in the future? Help me please in understanding what is happening with the seeming controversy in this community about gender.
0 -
Its not controversy about gender identity, its more wondering what to index and what not to index. The categories are there for a reason, and my impulse is to put whatever fits into them. From what I'm understanding from our arguments here, the prefix section sounds like a place to put prefixes of status identity. Rather than making sure to index anything pertaining to gender, indexing less common prefixes such as those that pertain to army ranking, profession, ect. This is what I'm understanding from what people are arguing with me anyway.
Again, would love to hear the mod's opinion. If your responding and your official, do let me know please when you type out your statement.
1: should we index prefixes having to do with gender identity?
2: should we index profession and army prefixes? (such as doctor, sergeant, ect.)
3: are there any prefixes that we should make sure to include that I haven't mentioned?
I'm not here to argue, I merely seek clarification from official sources. A thousand people devoting their time can argue about their individual opinions eternally, its why we need to hear from the leaders of the project, so that our opinions don't cloud what should be done.1 -
Flagged for moderator intervention
0 -
@AnthonyHopkins5 Per the FamilySearch Indexing: Indexing guide Page 8:
Name Titles and Terms Names are an important part of an index. As you index, type actual names in the Given Name and Surname fields. Do not type: Titles, such as Jr., Sr., Mrs., Señor, Señora, Don, Doña, Captain, Dr., and so forth. Terms, such as not named, unknown, stillborn, twin, infant, and so forth. Review the project instructions. Some projects have a Titles and Terms field for this information. Other projects may specify that titles and terms are not included in the index.
I do not see any further instructions on this matter.
0 -
@sc woz - thanks for having the decency to look. I would actually agree with the text that you quoted.
The problem is that if I go through a Full Name Review, then Step 2 (of 4) has this on the right hand side of the screen:
Add or remove highlights to complete this person's full name.
Remember to include any maiden names, married names, and prefixes or suffixes, such as "Mrs.", "Mr.", and "Jr."
And note that this says "include … prefixes or suffixes, such as "Mrs.", "Mr." " (my emphasis).
I confess to being very worried about this because there seems to be an inconsistency between the original instructions for pre-AI indexing quoted by Sc Woz, and the AI "indexing" instructions found on the screens of Full Name Review. Will this inconsistency result in issues when searching for the relevant record? E.g. if I search for "Albert Trotter" (fictional example), will it push an index record with a Full Name of "Mr Albert Trotter" down the matching hierarchy as an inferior match compared to (say) "A Trotter"?
It could be that the matching algorithm ignores prefixes and suffices on the index file but (a) we don't know and (b) it's all a bit strange when we compare pre and post-AI instructions.
On a purely personal basis, I would regard prefixes such as "Doctor" as being part of the full name (e.g. "Dr John Smith") but not "Mr" or "Mrs" or … (i.e. the full name of "Mr John Smith" is just "John Smith"). Somehow "Doctor" seems appropriate to be a part of the name but "Mr" and "Mrs" (maybe weirdly) don't feel like part of the name.
0 -
Please note - the Indexing Guide is from 2010, years prior to Full Name Review and therefore has no application to Full Name Review which is a different process — I would call FNR a quality control process
1 -
@maryellenstevensbarnes1 - exactly. I would have assumed that the two processes would have ended up with the same end product. Yet there appears to be a difference. It may be that the difference is dealt with further down the line, or is actually functionally irrelevant, but I remain concerned in the absence of an explanation.
1 -
There is no clarity on the exact purpose of any of the Get Involved activities except the Places one, as far as I can see, and the (presumably still valid) indexing instructions, both generic and collection specific, appear to be ignored completely.
I asked this question
back in early January (as part of a conversation
that had started last June), and it's been escalated by FS staff here (including Sam) at least three times, and even kindly raised at a meeting they had with the engineers about Get Involved, but with no response whatever.
Meanwhile I and at least one other poster here have encountered CAI whose standard is so low that it's absolutely clear no human reviewer can have been near it.
I just don't understand the position we are in here.
1 -
@dancingintherain said "… FamilySearch has provided clear instructions for all the issues that have come up in this discussion."
I beg to differ. I am assuming that "the Full Name Review" which you refer to, refers to "Indexing Review" under menu item Get Involved / Opportunities. Since there are no English language opportunities currently available, it's difficult for me to investigate. However, based on the link that you provided, one thing strikes me immediately, namely that all 3 opportunities (Quick Name Review, Full Name Review, and - apparently - Indexing Review) ask us to review the name. Why? Given that the first one of those simply says Name, it's hard to see why any further steps are necessary. However, Quick Name Review basically has no instructions beyond buttons for Match / Edit / Unsure / Not-a-person. Obviously this first step is just the first part but it's impossible to know how far to go with the edit for Quick Name Review (say) unless you also have Full Name Review and Indexing Review instructions to hand and an overall understanding of what each of the steps does.
As @MandyShaw1 says "There is no clarity on the exact purpose of any of the Get Involved activities".
Another issue, as you say, is "whether to index mother and father under "prefix." " To which you say "Mother and Father are not recognized as prefixes" (which I would agree with, by the way). The issue here is that there is no list of what words are prefixes and what aren't - at least, if there is, it's not obviously linked to the forms. Hence if we have text like "Mother: Mary Smith" in a full text baptism, it's tricky to point to some instructions that exclude the "Mother:". (Again, let me emphasise that I agree it should be excluded, but that's my gut feeling, which isn't accessible to all).
We also have the issue of whether "Mr" or "Mrs" count as prefixes. Long years of indexing for many people lead to the automatic answer, "no", but the instructions on Full Name Review suggest otherwise without, as I said above, any reassurance that we are not creating issues if we do add "Mr" or "Mrs".
1 -
'FamilySearch has provided clear instructions for all the issues that have come up in this discussion.'
If FS has provided clear answers to the points in my questions list quoted above, please point me at them, as I cannot see them anywhere.
And to reiterate, we still don't actually know the specific /purpose/ within the indexing process (CAI and/or Full Text) of each of the 3 Get Involved indexing tasks. I assume the engineers do have this overall picture (well, it would be deeply concerning if they didn't), and that they could therefore share it with us.
And what does 'the record will always be stored and searchable' mean in relation to the clergy question? You can search for the clergy, but only via Full Text Search? Many existing collections have officiant etc. metadata.
Thank you for all your efforts to help us, if I sound frustrated it is with the engineers' approach to communicating with their user base (volunteers, many of whom have spent hours a day for many years helping with indexing and who, I would suggest, deserve to continue to know how what they are doing fits in to FS' indexing strategy), not with you.
1 -
P.S. In my collection of metadata I can see the following 'non-family' people identified (at least):
displayLabel
collectionType
Baptism Officiator's Name
Miscellaneous
Baptism Officiator's Name
Roll
Certifier's Name
Marriage
Defendant's Name
Legal
Departure Contact Name
Migration
Employer
Military
Employer Name
Military
Funeral Officiator
Death
High Priest Ordination Officiator Name
Roll
Officiator's Name
Marriage
Officiator's Name
Vital
Plaintiff's Name
Vital
Setting Apart Officiator's Name
Miscellaneous
Witness 2 Name
Marriage
Witness 2 Name
Vital
Witness Name
Marriage
Witness Name
Vital
0 -
To get back to the original comment and concern, Mother, Father is not considered a prefix. We will work to update our instructions so that they reflect this and provide more clarity for those working in Get Involved. Please have patience as this may take some time.
We would like to remind everyone that we appreciate engagement and feedback from our community. At the same time, we expect comments to be respectful and kind. Please keep discussions constructive and mindful to the specific concern of the original post so this remains a safe, welcoming and constructive space for everyone.
1
