Problem with genealogy bank source

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: On this page https://www.familysearch.org/tree/per...
is a source for a genealogy bank computerized extract. But it causes the browser to nearly crash, and when I eventually get tired of waiting, I tell it to stop. (It appears as the first obituary, but it may be the only one if I attach the rest).

Then I see a very long list of names, for which there's not a real good association to what I'm looking for, nor any text to look at relating to an obituary.

So, something is messed up on that genealogy bank source.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: You can see the actual obituary image from the newspaper so you can work directly from that for figuring things out.

It appears that the "record indexed by a computer" has merged multiple obituaries together or something. Luddie Weaver Jr.'s obituary in the paper only references 12 names including his brother Terrance. And yet the source linker is finding 103 names in that supposed obituary "group" (sort of like the household "groups" in a census). This is why the source linker is choking on the huge list it is being handed.

If you go to the actual index record and go to the bottom of that record, the is an "Errors?" button that you can select to report problems on the computer created index. Since the IDIOTIC use of modal windows by FS overrides my normal browser's ability to open the index record in a new separate window, I can not obtain and post the URL for the index here. So I just reported the issue for you:



I would suggest this approach. Since that obituary (that references Terrance Weaver) is actually for Luddie Preston Weaver Jr. (i.e., he is the principal for that obituary) I would do the source attaching from Luddie's PID:
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/per...

Hook the obituary up from there. That way the relationships that the source linker gives you won't be scrambled as much and will be easier to follow. There will also be a whole bunch of names that the source linker will incorrectly tell you are related. So use the image of the original document to determine which names REALLY should be attached (and possibly added). Don't add any other that are not explicitly mentioned in the newspaper article.

I wouldn't attempt this from a cell phone as you will need multiple windows open at the same to to easily compare the original image with the source linker as you scroll through the different sections and names. A desktop with a large screen will be a lot easier to use for this

LegacyUser

Juli said: Point of clarification: you can see the newspaper image if you're LDS. Otherwise it's all just a big black hole.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Thanks for pointing that out Juli. However, it would seem that something is wrong there as well. The image at:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

is marked with this:



So a restriction may be screwed up. Note though, that with the source linker struggling to load this monstrosity, you might be getting time-out issues. Anyway, here's the actual obituary that is "for use by FamilySearch members only":

LegacyUser

Justin Masters said: Thank you Jeff! I went ahead and worked with it (had to stop it, rather than keep waiting), and it was very painful to move people to match, as it seemed to be (I dunno) parsing everyone and moving them up to fill in the spot that was there on the unmatched side.

I appreciate your filling out an error report on it. I was unable to get the error reporting area to respond to me.

Justin

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Yea, it was incredibly slow for me as well. But it was trying to handle 10 times the number of names than it should have been. I kind of suspect that system capacity had something to do with it :-)