Tom Huber said: What you are suggesting is to modify original historical documents.
The source linker is being modified, from what I understand. Whether or not we will be able to eventually make changes to an existing record from a source document is something that I don't know.
The idea of modifying an existing record from the source linker has received tremendous pushback from FamlySearch through their representatives. The two biggest reasons are that
1) you cannot see (in the current source linker) any reason statements that may exist on the original record and
2) you cannot see the sources used in reaching the current conclusion.0
Lee Frances Merritt said: no I wasn't suggesting modifying original documents. What I am suggesting is being able to change the record in FS as you add information from a source rather than having to do it later. I keep to screens up so that I can actually do that but it would be nice to be able to do it as you add the source document to the record. Do you see what I'm saying?0
Lee Frances Merritt said: oh, sorry - I got all upset over the first sentence and responded before reading the rest. However, I still think that being able to add, for instance the maiden name for a woman, a non-existant birth date from a birth record etc. would be a good thing, but like I said I keep 2 screens open so I can do just that.0
Paul said: There have been similar thoughts expressed in a number of previous GetSat threads. I believe it is preferable to carry out this work on the Person page, where you have more time to look carefully at the existing detail and comparing this with that on the recently attached source, before making any new / revised inputs. Sometimes a very similar event / piece of detail can prove to be for someone, or a family, of very similar identity.
Recently, I came across two individuals named Abraham Potter, christened on the same date at parishes 5 miles apart. I could have easily changed places of birth / parents etc. before realising these were definitely two completely different individuals.
I admit I have made a number of mistakes when adding details during the source linking process. Where it currently IS possible to make additions in this way (e.g. adding spouse & children, together with birth details, whilst working with a census source), I have not always found this to be a good idea. When attaching a another census source (say for ten years later) I have found ages and places of birth entirely different for the whole family!0
gasmodels said: I'm in 100% agreement with Paul. Making changes when adding a source is too easy when there are people with the same name. I was doing a search today using the GRO index and found in 1843 sixty that's right 60 James Roberts birth registrations in a single year. You can imagine the mistakes that could easily be created if the wrong source was being used.0
It would be very easy for the FamilSearch development team to allow users to add "clear standardized" formatted source data to the 'Other Information' table of the 'Person Record Page'. Currently this is not done and each user has to go into sources and try accessing each source record and then read each record and then make their own interpretation of each of these sources. True - if a given source is questionalble then contentions with interpretaion could occure. However most sources have already had data extracted and this is what I use to to preformat my 'Other Information' entries. This would aid all other users to instantly spot mismatched source referencing and also help reduce user attachment errors in adding incorrect sources/references. As an aside I have also noted that Tags from sources are inconsistant, often not automatically added - one example is that UK Birth Registration is recorded as Other and not correctly attached to a 'persons' date of birth as proof that this is one source that that person was born on that date at that place. Here are simple examples of adding source records to 'Other Information' and keeping them all standardized:-
Birth Registration <mm-mm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> Reason This Information Is Correct: <fname> <lname> birth <mm-mm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> [<source>; Index vol.<> p.<> rn.<>]
Baptism <date> <church>, <parish>, <county>, <country> Reason This Information Is Correct: <fname> <lname> <if exists birthdate> baptism <date> <parish> <county> <country> <son/dau> of <father name> [and wife] <mother name> [<source>; vol.<> p.<> rn.<>]
Residence <yyyy> <house/street>, <parish>, (<district>), <county>, <country> Reason This Information Is Correct: <father-name> (head age <age> birth <yyyy> <county> <country> <married> <occupation>) <spouse> (wife age <age> birth <yyyy> <county> <country> married) <child> (<son/dau> <age> <yyyy> <parish> <county>), <repeat-for-other-house-members> residence <house/street>, <parish>, (<district>), <county>, <country> [UK Census 1891; RG12/1176/102/p.3]
Marriage Registration <mm-mm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> Reason This Information Is Correct: <fname> <lname> spouse <fname> <lname> marriage <mm-mm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> [<source>; Index vol.<> p.<> rn1.<> & rn2.<>]
Marriage <transcribe as much detail as exists on record>
Death Registration <mm-mm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> Reason This Information Is Correct: <fname> <lname> death <mmm-mmm> <yyyy> <parish> <county> <country> [<source>; Index vol.<> p.<> rn.<>]
Burial <full details>0