Historical records Search problem.
LegacyUser
✭✭✭✭
MaureenE said: I was looking at the catalog record
https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...
Parish register transcripts, 1875-1878
Church of England in Iran. Anglican Chaplaincy (Julfa)
The catalog shows that this record 574493 Item 2, has been digitised and there is an icon showing it has been indexed, or at least that is what I thought this icon meant. I click on the magnifying glass icon, and get this dataset for film 574493
https://www.familysearch.org/search/r...
I go to the Redefine your Search at the side of the webpage and enter Iran as country (under Locations) Nothing happens. There is no statement that there are no records. Should I be using a different country name? If so, what?
How do I filter out the records which the Catalog has stated have been indexed?
I also get the same problem with catalog record
Parish register transcripts, 1835-1878
Church of England in Turkey. Anglican Chaplaincy (Constantinople) (Main Author)
https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... which is part of the same microfilm 574493, item 3. There is also another microfilm listed as indexed 1647594, Item 10 but again no results trying to filter using Turkey as the country.
I suspect that these records have not been indexed at all, so is it a problem with the Search, or am I searching incorrectly, or is the Catalog information incorrect?
https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...
Parish register transcripts, 1875-1878
Church of England in Iran. Anglican Chaplaincy (Julfa)
The catalog shows that this record 574493 Item 2, has been digitised and there is an icon showing it has been indexed, or at least that is what I thought this icon meant. I click on the magnifying glass icon, and get this dataset for film 574493
https://www.familysearch.org/search/r...
I go to the Redefine your Search at the side of the webpage and enter Iran as country (under Locations) Nothing happens. There is no statement that there are no records. Should I be using a different country name? If so, what?
How do I filter out the records which the Catalog has stated have been indexed?
I also get the same problem with catalog record
Parish register transcripts, 1835-1878
Church of England in Turkey. Anglican Chaplaincy (Constantinople) (Main Author)
https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... which is part of the same microfilm 574493, item 3. There is also another microfilm listed as indexed 1647594, Item 10 but again no results trying to filter using Turkey as the country.
I suspect that these records have not been indexed at all, so is it a problem with the Search, or am I searching incorrectly, or is the Catalog information incorrect?
Tagged:
0
Comments
-
Juli said: It's the "item 2" that's throwing you off: the icon is the same regardless of which item on a film it applies to.
Film 574493 has seven items on it: Anglican Chaplaincy records from the Netherlands, Iran, Turkey, and Portugal (https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...). It's likely that the records from Iran and Turkey either have not been indexed, or the index has been restricted.0 -
MaureenE said: Thank you for your comment Juli.
I can see that it is no doubt correct , however where I live (Australia) the implication is that if an index symbol is seen next to a specific record , as set out in my original post, that part of the record will have been indexed.
Perhaps this is an indication that FamilySearch needs to take account of what their symbols mean in different parts of the world.
Where is the documentation which spells out what the magnifying glass symbol actually means?
How am I supposed to know that the Familysearch symbol does not mean what it says?
Also , if as you suggest the index may have been restricted, why does FamilySearch persist in displaying an index symbol of records which are not available to me? FamilySearch knows from my sign in whether I am a Church member or not.
I think it is unethical of FamilySearch to suggest there are indexed records to me, if in fact there are not, for whatever reason.0 -
A van Helsdingen said: This sounds like what was happening with the Scottish Censuses. non-Latter Day Saints were being told the index was available, but when they/we made searches, there was always zero results. The Wiki Page for the article did not disclose this either, in line with FamilySearch's recent actions of removing all content on the wiki that relate to restrictions to viewing images and indexes.0
-
David Newton said: Ditto English 1939 register as well.0
-
Adrian Bruce said: That magnifying glass is so flakey that I seldom bother with it - just try it and see. Of course, if I get no answers, does that mean that the person in question wasn't in the data or that the index doesn't exist / isn't complete yet. Given the inability of the FS Indexing projects to answer the question, "How complete is the index?" (and in some cases an inability to understand why it's an important question...) I'm not expecting much.
Actually, it does occur to me that the magnifying glass icon may be a function of the data record collection? And that the relationship between the data record collection and the image collection may be, ahem, somewhat complex. So if the magnifying glass applies to the data record collection, is it even possible to know which items of the image collection have been indexed?0 -
Juli said: Going into more detail, because apparently it's highly confusing to many.
The magnifying glass indicates one thing, and one thing only: that out of the collection of images indicated by that film number, *something* is associated with an index entry.
The icon doesn't tell you whether there are index entries associated with every image, or just a chunk (be it a separate item or not), or even just a handful here and there. This is and has been always the case, and it doesn't make any difference where you are or what sort of account you have. It's just a simple toggle: if there is a link between the film number and an index, then there's a magnifying glass.0 -
Paul said: Just to reiterate what has already been pointed out, FamilySearch does not give any indication if there is restricted access to indexed collections (or parts thereof). The restrictions are only shown (albeit very confusingly, depending on ones location) regarding access to digitised films.0
This discussion has been closed.