BUG: Import from OpenArch.nl changed province!

LegacyUser

fbax said: Have a look at this source:

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

It states "Event Place: Rietveld, Zuid-Holland, Nederland"

Now click on link (on right side) to OpenArch.nl

https://www.openarch.nl/hua:918AA35E-...

Birth on September 12, 1880 in Rietveld, province Utrecht (Netherlands)

Somehow the province was changed from Utrecht to Zuid-Holland during import?

Here is wikipedia page; confirming Rietveld is in Utrecht.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietvel...

Hopefully someone can investigate to see if other sources were affected by this BUG in import process; then fix it.

Frank

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: There are multiple places for Rietveld on FamilySearch Places which is probably one of the reasons FamilySearch has a problem with matching it to the right one: the other that the database is not complete.

The one the record is talking about the Rietveld municipality that existed from 1 April 1817 through 31 January 1964. That municipality was in the province of South Holland the whole time according to DANS Data Guide 2: Repetorium van Nederlandse gemeenten vanaf 1812 (second edition 2011). However, the records are stated to be within the province of Utrecht at the time (so not sure why the difference). The town of Rietveld within that municipality is now within the municipality of Woerden, which is in the province of Utrecht.

The picture should have a timeline where the town of Rietveld should be displayed as Rietveld, Zegveld, Utrecht, Netherlands from 1812 or before until 1817, Rietveld, Rietveld, South Holland, Netherlands from 1817 to 1964, and Rietveld, Woerden, Utrecht, the Netherlands from 1964 to today.

And then the corresponding municipalities of Zegveld, Utrecht, Netherlands from 1812 or before to 1888, Rietveld, South Holland, Netherlands from 1817 to 1964, and Woerden, Utrecht, Netherlands from 1812 or before to today.

The event place would be Rietveld, South Holland, Netherlands from 1817 to 1964, a municipality.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Zegveld was located in two provinces from 19 Sep 1814 through 31 Mar1817 (Rietveld area was part of South Holland).

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: https://atlas1868.nl/zh/rietveld.html Evidence of Rietveld in Zuid-Holland (South Holland).

LegacyUser

fbax said: Jordi: Thanks for the input. If we follow the links from FamilySearch to OpenArch.nl and then to SCAN; we see (image #3) that Rietveld was in Utrecht at the time of this event.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: I think OpenArchives thinks it is in Utrecht because the records are in Utrecht because the place is within the province of Utrecht now (but not before). And I think the records were recorded in the city/town of Utrecht.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: I do not know why the records went to Utrecht, Utrecht, but that does not mean Rietveld was inside the province of Utrecht. Here is other evidence showing Rietveld was in Zuid-Holland instead of Utrecht. The stamp (stamped in 1879) shows it in this picture of a Huwelijksbijlagen located at https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Because Rietveld area was part of south holland from 19 Sep 1814 through 31 mar 1817, the town would actually be displayed as Rietveld, Zegveld, South Holland, Netherlands. and the municipality would have two display names as Zegveld, South Holland, Netherlands and Zegveld, Utrecht, Netherlands. Ignoring French departments, before 19 Sep 1814, I would display Rietveld as Rietveld, Zegveld, Utrecht, Netherlands. According to this. Rietveld would have been in South Holland from 19 Sep 1814 through 31 Jan 1964, and Utrecht otherwise. However, before 1812, I am not entirely sure.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: I have seen this sort of error before. Some records from Zwolle, Overijssel (the capital city of the province, today around 120,000 people) are listed as Zwolle, Gelderland. This other Zwolle is a small village 100km away.

Because of how this collection is imported from OpenArchives (who in turns uses open data unofficially imported from the archives) these sorts of errors have to be expected. If there is doubt, use OpenArch, and if there is still doubt, then go to the website of the archive or use WieWasWie (both are "Official" sources).

LegacyUser

fbax said: Today I made *many* updates based on data imported from OpenArch.nl
Many of these updates involved Scherpenzeel
Only after making these updates did I realize that Scherpenzeel for these events is actually in Gelderland not Friesland. Here is one example.
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...
I have no idea how many persons now have corrupted data!!
I suppose someone will eventually notice the errors and fix the data.
I have no plans to try and find these errors myself.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: Yep that is correct, the Scherpenzeel in Friesland is probably the town of Scherpenzeel in the municipality of Weststellingwerf.