Nonsense dates problems when searching from https://www.familysearch.org/search/
LegacyUser
✭✭✭✭
Paul said: I wonder if the programmers can find away around this - although, admittedly, there appears to be more than one problem involved with this issue.
The first screenshot shows the general problem, where burial dates are displayed in a "0011" type format. I examined two of these more closely and found there was a fairly good reason not to display the date correctly in the first (see 2nd screenshot), although not so in the second example. Unfortunately, that seems to relate to some poor indexing, as the year (1790) is clearly shown at the top of the page - although the child's age is shown as 4 years, at burial, so the birth date here (September 1790) is also wrong.
My general enquiry is not about the issue of correcting indexing errors, but on how missing / unclear dates should be recorded / appear on the Results page. I don't think the method illustrated is a good idea at all.
BTW - yes, I can see where the "0011" etc. come(s) from - the day in the month - but this is then treated as the year 2011 in the search routine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See https://www.familysearch.org/search/r... - search on death year range 2007-2019.
(See https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...)
(See https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...)
The first screenshot shows the general problem, where burial dates are displayed in a "0011" type format. I examined two of these more closely and found there was a fairly good reason not to display the date correctly in the first (see 2nd screenshot), although not so in the second example. Unfortunately, that seems to relate to some poor indexing, as the year (1790) is clearly shown at the top of the page - although the child's age is shown as 4 years, at burial, so the birth date here (September 1790) is also wrong.
My general enquiry is not about the issue of correcting indexing errors, but on how missing / unclear dates should be recorded / appear on the Results page. I don't think the method illustrated is a good idea at all.
BTW - yes, I can see where the "0011" etc. come(s) from - the day in the month - but this is then treated as the year 2011 in the search routine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See https://www.familysearch.org/search/r... - search on death year range 2007-2019.
(See https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...)
(See https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...)
Tagged:
0
Comments
-
Jordi Kloosterboer said: I would have thought the indexer would look at previous pages to get the correct date. And a burial date outside the ranges of the collections should bring up a red flag to someone...0
-
Adrian Bruce said: "I would have thought the indexer would look at previous pages to get the correct date"
Well, yes. So did I, and I went to the image (of Paul's 2nd screenshot) to demonstrate this and discovered it was a lot harder.
Basically, the register in question has been badly burnt round the edges. Possibly the binding has been lost or removed, because it looks like there was simply a stack of leaves, and it was photographed top, top, top, top until the stack was finished when it was turned over and the process repeated. Hence, one gets a series of left, left, left, pages until it changes to right, right, right pages (or maybe vice versa). Since the pages are actually provided with printed page numbers, it is possible to find the reverse side of the leaf - possible, that is, for the researcher looking at one or two leaves, but pretty much impossible for the indexer, I suspect.
It would have made more sense to photo the pages in the conventional order... No idea why they didn't because it sure has fouled things up....0 -
Paul said: I probably put my emphasis on the wrong aspect of the problem here. The problem I was seeking a response to is whether it is possible to avoid sources that have not been indexed with a year only appearing when specifying a date range involving the 21st century. That is, if a record is indexed as just "15 June" or "11 September" should this be producing a coding that effectively gives a date of 2015 or 2011?
I can't see a way of excluding the records I've illustrated from, say, a search year range of 2007-2019, but then I've no knowledge of any alternative way of coding such records, so these unwanted items possibly CAN be excluded.
Any ideas from any of you (ex-) software programmers?0
This discussion has been closed.