Verifying that this register of names does not qualify for FIR Indexing Review
@dancingintherain I have seen these types of registers a few times under Indexing Review and send them back because they are single names without any family members to connect them with. Is that correct?
Answers
-
@Mary Rice I can't seem to get your link to work for the registers you're referring to. I just get a "Something went wrong" prompt. Maybe next time send a screenshot. I don't think I have ever come across a register with a single name w/o any family members to connect it to. Did the records you were reviewing have a record detail (transcribed record)? I will ask our team about this and see if I can find answers for you.
1 -
@dancingintherain is the Indexing Review stage perhaps required as the final 'confirm indexing correct' Get Involved step on /any/ Record, whether or not there are Relationships/multiple individuals present? That would make sense to me, although it is not what the documentation currently says. (I slightly wonder if this might be why the name was changed from Family Review to Indexing Review.)
0 -
@dancingintherain @MandyShaw1 This is what I mean by Registers, it might be the wrong name for these.
0 -
@Mary Rice This makes more sense. Thank you for posting this. I have never done a register in Puerto Rico before. Since there are no relationships, it seems that each person should be a separate record. Like @MandyShaw1I am curious to know what the reviewed record looks like when you get to the submit stage of the review. It looks like this record was transcribed, since it has a "Records Detail" at the top, next to the instructions tab. I am curious to know what the transcribed record says. That said, I have found some transcribed records with errors, so I don't always trust what they say. I am going to take this to my team and ask more questions. I thank you again for posting a screenshot; this should really help.
0 -
@dancingintherain Well now I'm embarrassed. I just took another look at it and see that these are marriages. At first I thought they were simply single names. I imagine since there is a "family relationship" that they possibly should be Reviewed. I actually have not gone through the review process with these so I have no idea what a reviewed record would look like. I imagine they are short with only two names, but each the Record Detail would have to be available. I will give it a try next time one of these comes up and see what happens.
I will be curious what the team comes up with.
0 -
@Mary Rice I am so glad you shared this, because it gives everyone a chance to learn. I popped into Family Indexing Review in Puerto Rico, hoping I would get a record like that. No such luck today, but I have lots of questions about this to take to the team.
0 -
@dancingintherain Upon closer inspection it seems some or all of the first names on each line are slaves of the second person on the line. After some of the first names the abbreviation escla or Adulto indicate a slave to the second name. I would need to know what the other abbreviations are like h v or h l as I have not seen those on Index Review of the usual slave baptisms. So these are not marriages as I had believed yesterday. They seem like a list of slaves in a household or plantation? Some of the numbers to the right have more than one slave to the same number. Someone with more español than I would need to translate the abbreviations.
0 -
@Mary Rice Thanks so much for your dedicated service. FIR is a real challenge at times. I actually love the challenge of it. I am still learning, and I am thankful for your posts. I keep hoping I will run into a registry like that so I can really experience what you are seeing. I remember Ada Luque Nelson, in her video, taught us that we could get back to that record. If we go under "Information," we should be able to see the image number and the DGS number. Have you tried that? So if we wanted to study or share a problem record, we can get back to it.
0 -
@dancingintherain These types of lists or registers don't come up very often, maybe once every 50-100 names that I do. I'm glad that you enjoy them for the challenge as I like them also for that reason. They are keeping my "gray cells" alive as well as my critical thinking skills. I do remember from one of Ada Luque Nelson's videos, maybe Part 2, she had shown how to return to a record with the image number and the DSG number and I may even have written notes on that. I haven't tried it yet though. Studying it would be interesting.
0 -
@dancingintherain Just an update to what I decided that might help me with these Alphabetical Baptism Records from Puerto Rico. Since I couldn't translate the h.l. or h.n. after some of their names I decided to email Ada Duque Nelson at the email she had posted on her Part 2 Webinar for assistance. I included a screenshot of the beginning image of the DGS group which I found that included the Title, most of which I couldn't translate. I asked her for help translating the title and also to translate the two abbreviations above. If she's unavailable to help maybe she'll tell me who else might assist me.
If you're interested the Image and DGS numbers for the Title Page are: Image 350 DGS #004553785
So I did happen to get another Alphabetical List Name last night and I did attempt to Review it but became bewildered after I confirmed the Primary Person's name. The rest of the names listed below the PP name were all the rest of the names, both first and second names, on the page! or both pages! That's approximately 60-100 names. Yikes! I had no idea what to do after that. They would not be added as Primary Persons, if the first on each line, nor as family members or slave owners if the second name on each line, but rather as No Direct Relation. This made no sense to me. AI should have coded each line as a new Primary Person instead of just adding each name as "related to" my current Primary Person.
Maybe I am just not doing the Review properly but I don't know how else to approach it.
The one I received last night is Image 372 DGS #004553785 (the same DGS as the one above). I will need to return that page to start a new Review, or perhaps I can just open a new Get Involved Page on a new tab and continue that way. I'll give it a try.
0 -
@Mary Rice Are you telling me that all the names on the record were listed as Primary Persons? If so, we'd better take a look at it. There might be a problem. Thank you for including the Image number and DGS.
0 -
@Mary Rice I looked at Image 350, DGS #004553785, and studied the record. The hn and hl appear to determine the legitimacy of the child. Like, hn means hijo natural, which means an "hijo (masculine) or hija (feminine) ilegítimo," meaning the child was illegitimate. hl means hijo legítimo, meaning the child was legitimate. I noticed that sometimes there is an h with a small "a or o" above it, which would indicate the gender of the child: hija (daughter) and hijo (son). The parent or parents are listed after the name of the child. So, since this is an alphabetical list of baptisms, it would make sense that they are all the primary persons in this record. If you click the right arrow next to their names, you will see the parent listed under their names on the transcribed record.
0 -
@dancingintherain Good for you! I figured the l meant legitimate but you figured out n for natural. That makes sense. It is disappointing that not all of the h letters have an O or A superscript which would make the gender obvious. We could always enter UNKNOWN if we are unsure whether the given name is male or female.
I keep a tab open which has the subject "is _________[name] a male or female name in ________[date] Puerto Rico" It almost always has the name/spelling that i'm looking for. The country can be changed too. I also have a tab open for Surnames with subject "is ________[name] a surname in _____date Puerto Rico. This is a little trickier as handwriting, spellings, and multi-country immigration made for lots of different surnames.
I only found one Primary Person on Image 350 who was enslaved [esclavo] Agustina, sixth down, and h n of Luisa who was enslaved by [Don] Manuel Andino.
A second PP is Antonio Manuel Adulto esclavo to [Don] José Aranha. Both of these slaveholders would not be listed as parents.
I will send another comment about how all of the names are currently not listed as Primary Persons. Sorry I did not get to FamilySearch until late this afternoon.
0 -
@dancingintherain I have tried Indexing and Reviewing the first Image 372 DGS 004553785 and entered María Manuela Espiridion as the Primary Person along with her parents Faustino and Petrona Rodriguez. Then going to Record Details and then Edit, and then to Managing Indexes below is what comes up. ALL of the names on both pages! The father's name, Faustino, that I had entered is above María for some reason.
If I click on any of the 100 or so names it just show their name and says "No Relationships Added Yet."
I don't think any names can be made Primary Persons the way it currently is AI coded. To just complete María Manuela's name would mean deleting all of these names except for her mother and father. Too time consuming isn't it? Not practical. Furthermore there are no Dates nor Events nor Places for us to enter.
I translated as best I could the Title to Image 350 and came up with Alphabetical Index of Baptisms of the Parties at the Current Date and Which Book [Number].
0
