do we *really* want unhelpful place names??

LegacyUser

Norma Bethune said: Almost every time I add New Zealand place names, the "standardized" names pop-up suggests ridiculous options. I last entered the place of death as 'suburb' followed by 'city, province, country' ...how [experienced] Kiwi genealogists write such information.
Instead of being able to record that, however, the "standardised" suggestions included '*wrong city*, province, country'; 'suburb, city, *wrong province*, country'; plus *two* identical suggestions for 'province, province, country' ... which is like saying "Utah, Utah, USA"!
Could we please have local input into options available for countries other than the USA ... AND include the old provincial names rather than the latest amalgamated names??

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: It would help the place name people if you post some very specific examples to:

https://community.familysearch.org/s/...

You can explore how the database is currently set up at:
https://www.familysearch.org/research...

If you enter New Zealand in the search box and then click "Places in this Country" you will get a list of all current place names.





If you then click on Add Filter and enter Region and click on the checkbox in front of Direct Children Only, that appears to give the provinces as currently entered.



Working through the Communities place name group, I think you will be find they will be thrilled with your input! They are working to get all names in every historical period for everywhere on earth. As you can imagine, it must be a huge undertaking.

LegacyUser

Brett said: Norma

My "Cousins" from over the 'Tasman' are not alone ...

Australia ("Down Under") also needs the same work on "Standardized" 'Place Names'.

The "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch" is a "Work-In-Progress" ...

And, most like will continue to be (in fact, always be) a "Work-In-Progress" ...

Rather than being discouraged, try submitting, "Corrections"; and, "Up-Dates", to the "Standards Team" that manage the "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch".

There are a number of avenues available to submit "Corrections"; and, "Up-Dates", to the "Standards Team" that manage the "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch":

(1) The "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch" itself
..... Link = Can't find it? Suggest a New Place







(2) This "FamilySearch" ("Get Satisfaction") 'Feedback' Forum

(3) The "Community.FamilySearch" Forum, in the 'Group' of, "FamilSearch Places"

https://community.familysearch.org/s/...

(4) And, of course, not to forget, by direct E-mail to the "Standards Team" that manage the "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch":

placefeedback@familysearch.org

Do not bey shy.

Better still, offer/volunteer your services to work, on; or, with; or, in, the "Standards Team" that manage the "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch"; specifically, for "New Zealand".

And, as an aside, you do realise that the OLD 'Place Names' for various time periods MUST be included, not only the current day 'Place Names' - BOTH, the OLD and current 'Place Names' (with time periods) are needed in the "Research/Places" Database in "FamilySearch".

Brett

.

LegacyUser

Gordon Collett said: And the database is set up to handle changing jurisdictions through history. Here is a farm in Norway whose county has changed five times through the years and they are all available for use:

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: I'm a New Zealander, but don't do much NZ genealogical research.

What I think is notable about New Zealand is that local jurisdictions have changed often and aren't as important as say the United States, where counties have rarely changed and are important for many types of records. We had provinces until 1877, then a system of counties and boroughs. In 1989 850 local entities were merged into 86. We now have regions, and a second tier ruled by district and city councils (but officially known as "territorial authorities). The country (population 5 million) is divided into about 50,000 "meshblocks", and almost every government or statistical area is a merger of many whole meshblocks.

But many genealogical records aren't organised around the provinces, boroughs, regions etc. Wills and Probate are organised around the locations of different Courts. Vital records use a different set of registration districts. Electoral Rolls use parliamentary electorates [constituencies], which changed often.

So while some of the standardized place names like "Addington, Canterbury, Canterbury" mentioned above obviously need correction, I'm not convinced there is much value in doing a massive project on New Zealand standardized place names.