Not enough info on popup screen "Improve the Name"

LegacyUser

Geza Magori said: Popup Window does not show the date, and city (place) fields of the original record. When someone edits using the "Improve name" screen highlight function is too hard to point at the very content again. When You are interrupted, or read throgh a full, sometimes hardly readable page, it is very hard to point at that very word. Please, show the data, and place fields of the original data record too,.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Geza

Firstly, "Welcome" to this "FamilySearch" ( "GetStaisfaction" ) 'Feedback' Forum.

Secondly, "Official 'FamilySearch' Representatives", do monitor; and, sometimes, participate in, this Forum.

Thirdly, I am just another User/Patron, just like yourself (and, happen to be a Member of the Church).

Many Users/Patrons who regularly participate in this Forum who have a great deal of knowledge and experience with "FamilySearch", like to assist/help other Users/Patrons like yourself.

Finally, were are you talking about when you say ... "When someone edits using the "Improve name" screen highlight function" and "Popup Window" ... ?

I have no idea what you a referring to.

Is this in "FamilySearch" in:
"Family Tree" ( "Person/Details" page/scree in "Editing" a Name)?;
or,
Attaching "Sources"; and, being able to "Edit" the "Indexed" Name in "Sources", for certain "Sources"?;
or,
Something else altogether?

And, is this to do with, either, (1) the normal (original) "Web" version of "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch"; or, (3) the new "Mobile" Application version of "Family Tree" of "FamilySearch"; or, (4) BOTH?

If possible, can you also include a "Screen Shot".

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: The Improve the Name feature is an update with respect to correcting, changing, and suggesting other changes when one edits an indexed name:

Keep in mind that you are only editing a name. nothing more.

What you have is an image viewer view of the original image. Therefore, your mouse controls are identical to those you use in the image viewer. To increase the size of the image, you can use either the + and - controls -or- if you have a mouse with a wheel control, you can use the wheel to zoom in or out of the image.

Before even pressing the Edit link, which results in the window above, make sure you know where the name is found which you are attempting to edit. Then when using this feature, use the zoom controls to zoom into the image so the name can be highlighted that you are correcting.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Keep in mind that you are editing only one index field -- the name. You should be familiar with the index and original images you are exploring.

LegacyUser

Geza Magori said: Take a look at this:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...
There is no problem editing a name, but highlighting sometimes is hard. You have to interpret the text, translate from a sometimes faulty latin. There are pages without preprinted lines, burnt books, ink stains.

LegacyUser

Geza Magori said: Thank You!

Try:
1. Click on the text "Edit"
2. Modify something
3. Click on highlight. - At this point the date value is forgotten. Maybe this is my weakness. (aged 70 I have problems with short time memory)
I may choose "Highlight" or "Highlight impossible". I feel, highlighting is better option, but when on a page there is a lot of common names, and the difference is the date, should I throw away the changes?
This modification imho needs 2-3 lines copied from the previous screen.

LegacyUser

Juli said: I've been re-reading Géza's question off and on to see if I can figure out what he means, and I think I have something.

When you encounter an index entry that looks wrong, naturally the first thing you do is open the image in another tab and try to find the entry. Sometimes this involves going back and forth between the index and the image, multiple times, looking for the right date and parents and whatnot. After that, you click "edit" -- and have to find the spot on the image all over again, but this time without access to the date and parents (or child) or any other details. And then you have to draw a highlight box around a name that's basically at a diagonal and surrounded by loops and whorls of distracting or obscuring other text. If you get interrupted in the task, you end up having to start all over again.

It's possible that Géza is coming at this from the other direction: maybe he's browsing the images, and noticing ludicrous indexing like _Ludi Magister_ "schoolteacher" entered as the child's mother. (That was the first entry on the image he linked in a comment above; I took it upon myself to correct it as best I could: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619... .) When you click the sheet-of-paper icon next to the offending line to go to that index entry and click "edit", you get a view of just the misindexed name on the left, and the entire image on the right. Without at least a date to look for, you have to rely on (fallible) memory that the thing you need to correct is the one in June with parents such-and-such and so-and-so. If it was truly creatively misindexed, you'll probably end up canceling out of the correction at least once to make sure you've found the right entry on the image.

All of this difficulty could be prevented by simply including the entire index entry -- the same information that's in the "Index Information" tab in the regular film viewer -- in the index correction ("Improve the name") image view.

LegacyUser

Juli said: "Highlight impossible" is for cases where the whole point of the correction is that there's nothing in the entry for the field in question. For example, sometimes illegitimate birth entries give the mother's parents, and those grandparents have been misindexed as the father and/or mother. When correcting the father (to a dash or period, because it will not allow the field to be blank), you have to choose "highlight impossible", because the whole point is that there is no father recorded.

LegacyUser

Geza Magori said: Yes, that was clear.

LegacyUser

Geza Magori said: If the original document contains only the father's last name, (which is wrong, or incorrectly indexed), but does not contain a child's last name, should we highlight the father's last name again? I repeat, there are some documents, that do not contain the child's full name, but the given name.

LegacyUser

Juli said: If the document says the child was legitimate, and records the father's name, then yes, I highlight the father's surname when editing the child's surname.

I don't know what the instructions were for the original indexing project, but given the fact that almost all church registers record only the child's given name, but they're almost all in the index with surnames, I think they automatically filled in the surname based on the father's name. It was probably a post-processing step done by machine.