Question? FamilySearch. Have SOURCES for "1881, Census England & Wales" that were considered DUPLICA

LegacyUser

Brett said: Question?

FamilySearch

Have ALL the "Sources" for the "1881, Census England and Wales" that were considered "Duplicates"; and, then, "Retired", been "Reinstated"?

I have just accessed one of those aforementioned "Sources" that was attached; and, was previously "Blank" (ie. "Retired").

Former look ...



Old



New



Extra

And, NOW it is NOT "Blank"; but, has the "Indexed" information displayed and the URL can be accessed/viewed!

If they have been "Reinstated", when did this occur?
(It must have been relatively recently!)

And, if so, does the same 'hold true' for those of "1851, Census of England and Wales" that were in the 'same boat'.

The reason I ask this question is that, NOW I will have to go back to/through ALL those such "Sources" for my Ancestors; and, AMEND the "Title" (ie. Remove the "Retired" status)!

Please advise ASAP.

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

Could I please get a response from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources" on this matter!?

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

LegacyUser

Paul said: Brett

Haven't checked this out yet but, yes, something similar happened previously with the 1851 set. All those records I had marked as "old version" and "revised / new version" suddenly became the opposite - i.e. the "old" version became the one with the more comprehensive information (display of whole household)!

The 1881 records were also subject to being added with another set of URLs a couple of years or so back. The "usual practice" has generally been for the old URLs to be "overwritten" by the ones used in any update - this has been true of the 1911 and, I believe, 1861,1871, 1891 & 1901 sets. This means no action is required on the part of users, as a computer generated program replaces the old version of the source (in the Sources section) with the new one.

FamilySearch employees seem to place the responsibility for these updated census record sets with Find My Past. However, (as requested in recent posts about problems with the 1861 and 1871 sets), I believe there needs to be a designated FamilySearch employee who has responsibility for liaising with Find My Past. This is needed to save us many hours of effort adding the "new" URLs to individuals in Family Tree, as well as to sort out the "middle-name initial" issue with the 1861 set and the inconsistencies in viewing 1871 images.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

Over 2 Months since I raised this post; and, still no response from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources" on this matter!

Once again, I ask, could I PLEASE get a response from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources" on this matter!?

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

Even more confusion ...

I just found an "1851, Census of England and Wales" that I attached, which was, as in the original post; whereas, NOW, is reinstated and appears with, both, the index and associated image; but, when you select the URL from the "Sources" 'Tab' to display/look at the "Source" you get:
-----
Retired Record
This record was a duplicate and has been retired. Please use the current copy.
-----
But, both, the index and associated image, in the latter as well.





SO ...
WHAT is it ...

Is it ,"Active"; OR, "Retired", it cannot be both ... make up your mind ...

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: FamilySearch

Almost 5 Months since I raised this post; and, over One Month since I raised an addendum to the original post ...

And, yet, NO response (or advice) from any "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative"; especially, one working with "Sources" on this matter.

Please advise what is going on ...

'Thank You' in advance.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

FamilySearch Moderator said: I cannot reproduce. If you provide a URL that might help to see what the problem is. Collection and data in them change, get removed, indexed info changed, forwarded... As to why, it has to do with the contract, custodian, data processes.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Lynne (Moderator)

'Thank You' for joining in this post of mine as an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative".

But ...
That said ...

You DO NOT have to 'reproduce'.

If you do not have any "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; then, you will not understand this post of mine.

The problem/issue is obvious to those with the aforementioned "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records.

This problem/issue has NOTHING to do with "... Collection and data in them change, get removed, indexed info changed, forwarded ...".

We KNOW why the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; and, it has NOTHING to with "... it has to do with the contract, custodian, data processes ...", it that someone or group in "FamilySearch" decided that such (certain) "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records were DUPLICATED; and, therefore, redundant, not required.

The aforementioned decision was very disappointing when it happened; and, I have left such "Sources" attached, with the "Rider" to their "Title" requesting that they NOT be "Detached" (by another User/Patron) and notes to the effect that they had been "Retired". LUCKY I did so; because, NOW those "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System", have been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED, ... 'raised from the dead' ... so to speak.

I would like confirmation from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources", on this matter, as to what is going on!

Have ALL the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

Will such "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" remain REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

I DO NOT want to go thought and amend the "Rider" to the "Title" that of all "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" that I added, ONLY to have to go BACK again, if such "Sources" are going to be "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" AGAIN!

Again, 'Thank You'.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Lynne (Moderator)

'Thank You' for joining in this post of mine as an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative".

But ...
That said ...

You DO NOT have to 'reproduce'.

If you do not have any "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; then, you will not understand this post of mine.

The problem/issue is obvious to those with the aforementioned "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records.

This problem/issue has NOTHING to do with "... Collection and data in them change, get removed, indexed info changed, forwarded ...".

We KNOW why the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; and, it has NOTHING to with "... it has to do with the contract, custodian, data processes ...", it that someone or group in "FamilySearch" decided that such (certain) "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records were DUPLICATED; and, therefore, redundant, not required.

The aforementioned decision was very disappointing when it happened; and, I have left such "Sources" attached, with the "Rider" to their "Title" requesting that they NOT be "Detached" (by another User/Patron) and notes to the effect that they had been "Retired". LUCKY I did so; because, NOW those "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System", have been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED, ... 'raised from the dead' ... so to speak.

I would like confirmation from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources", on this matter, as to what is going on!

Have ALL the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

Will such "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" remain REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

I DO NOT want to go thought and amend the "Rider" to the "Title" that of all "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" that I added, ONLY to have to go BACK again, if such "Sources" are going to be "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" AGAIN!

Again, 'Thank You'.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

FamilySearch Moderator said: There should be no expectation that an employee will respond. However, the more info, (like URLs) you can provide the easier it is to investigate. Posts are typically triaged by those with general knowledge and confirmation that it is an issue and then sent to teams that might be involved. 

LegacyUser

Brett said: Moderator

'Thank You' for joining in this post of mine.

But ...
That said ...

You DO NOT have to 'reproduce'.

If you do not have any "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; then, you will not understand this post of mine.

The problem/issue is obvious to those with the aforementioned "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records.

This problem/issue has NOTHING to do with "... Collection and data in them change, get removed, indexed info changed, forwarded ...".

We KNOW why the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; and, it has NOTHING to with "... it has to do with the contract, custodian, data processes ...", it that someone or group in "FamilySearch" decided that such (certain) "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records were DUPLICATED; and, therefore, redundant, not required.

The aforementioned decision was very disappointing when it happened; and, I have left such "Sources" attached, with the "Rider" to their "Title" requesting that they NOT be "Detached" (by another User/Patron) and notes to the effect that they had been "Retired". LUCKY I did so; because, NOW those "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System", have been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED, ... 'raised from the dead' ... so to speak.

I would like confirmation from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources", on this matter, as to what is going on!

Have ALL the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

Will such "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" remain REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

I DO NOT want to go thought and amend the "Rider" to the "Title" that of all "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" that I added, ONLY to have to go BACK again, if such "Sources" are going to be "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" AGAIN!

Again, 'Thank You'.

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Moderator

'Thank You' for joining in this post of mine.

But ...
That said ...

You DO NOT have to 'reproduce'.

If you do not have any "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; then, you will not understand this post of mine.

The problem/issue is obvious to those with the aforementioned "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records.

This problem/issue has NOTHING to do with "... Collection and data in them change, get removed, indexed info changed, forwarded ...".

We KNOW why the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System"; and, it has NOTHING to with "... it has to do with the contract, custodian, data processes ...", it that someone or group in "FamilySearch" decided that such (certain) "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records were DUPLICATED; and, therefore, redundant, not required.

The aforementioned decision was very disappointing when it happened; and, I have left such "Sources" attached, with the "Rider" to their "Title" requesting that they NOT be "Detached" (by another User/Patron) and notes to the effect that they had been "Retired". LUCKY I did so; because, NOW those "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records, that that WERE attached as "Sources", to individuals/persons; and, that were LATER "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System", have been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED, ... 'raised from the dead' ... so to speak.

I would like confirmation from an "Official 'FamilySearch' Representative" working with "Sources", on this matter, as to what is going on!

Have ALL the "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" been REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

Will such "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" remain REINSTATED/RESURRECTED?

I DO NOT want to go thought and amend the "Rider" to the "Title" that of all "1851 and 1881, Census' of England and Wales" records that were "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" that I added, ONLY to have to go BACK again, if such "Sources" are going to be "Retired" (ie. "Removed"/"Deleted"/'Made Redundant"/whatever someone wants to call it) by the "System" AGAIN!

Again, 'Thank You'.

Brett

.