Thoughts on Correcting Errors in the Records
Comments
-
rover said: I find it just unbelieveable that we cannot indicate in some small way obvious errors in transcript......
I was searching Astle and found the marriage of Joseph Astle. His wife's name was given as MANLE, this should be Maule..... also the place of marriage is incorrect.
I have a copy of the marriage certificate.0 -
Marschalkó Mark said: Hi!
I find a big mistake in the records of 'Slovakia, Church and Synagogue Books, 1592-1910'
For example Tamas Marschalko 'https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1...'
the real name of the person is: Tamas Schultz!!!!
The record analiser changed the 'parents' with the 'godparents'.
In hungarian: 'szülők' equal with in english: parents!
In hungarian: 'keresztszülők' equal with in english: godparents!
And on the same sheet i find a real Marschalko, who's father is Imre Marschalko, but she is on her godparents lastname!
Please correct the mistakes!
thanks.
Mark Marschalko0 -
Thomas Dwight, Jr Rethard said: I, too, am seriously dismayed at the errors in the indexing. My family name (Rethard) is frequently misspelled, misrecorded, misinterpreted, etc., not just in the 1940 index, but in most other sources, so it can be a major source of frustration. What's worse, it is not at all unusual for "Richard" written with bad handwriting to be interpreted as "Rethard", leading me on many wild goose chases over the years. Such errors are a fact of life in genealogy.
That being said, the fact that the ability to correct such errors in the index is not only absent, but apparently unplanned, is a major oversight. As a software designer of 40+years experience, I find it both unimaginable and inexcusable that this is the case!
For those who are as frustrated as I, the best approach is to go to ANCESTRY.COM to do your searches. Their index is (supposedly) the one supplied by familysearch, and DOES allow corrections. The corrections even show up in the index!
Just as an illustration of the difficulties with the familysearch index:
My grandfather lived his entire adult life in the same house, which makes him relatively easy to find. I found him in the images of the census sheets before the index was complete. When Ancestry published the index, a search for "Rethard" did not show him at all. Searching for his neighbors allowed me to find him by checking "other people on page." He was listed at "Ruthars." After I entered the correction for him (and the rest of the family), he showed up properly in the index. "Ruthars" does not show up in the index on familysearch, nor does "Rethard," at least for my grandfather. Other members of my family are also missing from the index, including my greatgrandmother, who lived across the street from my grandfather. Ancestry, however, shows her, and the son who was living with her.
As a member of the church, a genealogist, and a greatly experienced software designer, I urge the familysearch staff to sit back, take a deep breath and fix this problem before it gets worse. All you need to do is talk with your counterparts at Ancestry...0 -
Thomas Dwight, Jr Rethard said: Actually, I frequently correct transcription errors on ancestry, as I have for a number of years. It's actually an extremely clean system that allows correction of most facts, as well as entering explanations of why. You might want to look again. The great thing is that corrections show in the index, meaning that it's easy for someone else to find a person after one of us makes a correction.0
-
Duane L Rosenthal said: Those who are directly involved with the programing and making software for the projects need to network with those who also program to resolve these issues. So far there is much ado about the 'program', 'programming', 'errors', and any other derivation, but not to a resolution. The engineers/ programmers need to work with and as united teams rather than divisions and use the systems which the family history consultants currently use to network for solutions. The idea is simply to flag other programers inside thier groups, and then fruther out to other teams, and then to the world of others outside the church's domain. It might surprize you all how many others in the world are just as interested in making a solution that will work IF you would allow for other programmers to show and share the way. If you would open the door and invite others to help assist like WIKI has done, then the resolutions can be made possible, doable, and readilbly available.0
-
silsie329 said: So far all you have said is there is no way to correct a mistake in the records. You will be trying to solve this problem. 3 individuals check these records over. Bull Honkey otherwise they would not have made a mistake on my birth year. It shows that when I got married I was in my 80's and married a man 21 yrs. old. I got married in CA. June 7, 1969. I am wondering about the accuracy of all of your records.0
-
Robert Harrison said: Just found an ancester????? has been combined 97 times, am now waiting for a round 100 then I can go out and celebtate. I have also found that someone has gone back to 0312 on my line, with some of the temple work done; whoopee or should that be "Stone the flippin' crows?". (Ye olde English expession.)0
-
Mark Cummins said: First, thank you for Family Search; I have extended two lines back hundreds of years since I started two weeks ago.
Second, these thoughts were written a year ago, could you please update them, if, as I hope, there has been some progress?0 -
Bruce Vaughn Lloyd said: If you can't figure out how to let users correct census record indexing errors, fire your programmers and hire the ancestry.com programmers. Their database allows for users to make corrections (spelling variation) without destroying the original spelling of a name. In the 1940 Census in Salt Lake City UT, Louis and Ada Gillett Love are not listed. They are incorrectly listed as Lane vice Love. When I index, I look for relatives on the same or previous pages or hard to read characters compared to other similar characters on the same page. Also, if indexers are unsure of the spelling, they should open up ancestry.com and search for the same people (or use wildcards) in previous census years. In this case, the supplementary information at the bottom of the census record CLEARLY shows the spelling as LOVE. The CORRECT name is LOUIS OSTLER LOVE and ADA LOVE and their two children have the last name of LOVE.0
-
Lane Jim Fillingim said: One change I have thought about for a long time that would be nice, would be able to change the text color on a person name in the family tree. This would allow the ablity at a quick glance to see ones direct line. For example when one is looking at a list of children and trying to decide which one is your grandparent. If a choice of colors could be picked from, then one could have different colors for different family lines.
Lane Fillingim0 -
Jan Sniderman said: If you have an Ancestry account, you CAN add the correct information to the data base, at least for the 1940 Census. That way both the incorrect, and the corrected data, point to the same record. It is an easy work around with Ancestry.
Hope the same will be true with Family Search's system and soon!0 -
Lorraine Marie Ficklin said: I would encourage corrections to published records. I know there was a big push to get the 1940 census out but I had to go to ancestry.com to find my grandfather.
The overwriting on the census led to the errors, I'm sure, but I would like to correct the last name so anyone looking for it can find it! Please, please move this up on the wish list!0 -
John W Mock said: Why don't you just add a message board where people can start listing errors that will need to be corrected. It would have fields for the salient information on the error to allow it to be located at a future time, and a note on why the correction should be made, like a citation of a correct resource or how the name is a nickname for someone, etc. Then, future volunteers can look at an "error board" message, locate the error and make a correction note. Having ANY place to report errors so they will not be ignored will be a great asset. If it was searchable, then it would also mean that a person can be located with their correct name spelling and linked to the index entry that contains the error.
I too have worked with computers and programs and databases for a long time. If the problem is defined properly and the real problem identified, then a fix is simple and elegant.
Help the people that are interested enough to find errors and provide a repository for these error notifications so in the future they can be fixed and for now, correct information can be searched even if in another area.
Keep up the good work!0 -
John W Mock said: If you had a "smart" search feature, it would...0
-
Mary Kinsey said: One more frustrated user. It is now almost the end of 2012. Any movement on making corrections or is it forever "vaporware?" As with many users, I can document the correct information. Also, Ancestry.com has an excellent mechanism to show suggested corrections. Hire them--but don't buy them out and destroy their process. Thank you.0
-
Gene McAvoy said: I'm VERY DISAPPOINTED in the lack of any way to correct faulty index files.
This is the result of a very poor design.
Frankly, I'm just to **** to say anything else!0 -
Flavia Ramos Stypurski said: Ola, ja tinha algum tempo o registro de casamento do meu trisavô
JAN JAROSINSKI
recentemente encontrei um erro de quem indexou este registro, o sobrenome jarosinski que tb pode ser transcrito como IAROSINSKI,Foi transcrito como TEROSINSKI
João Terosinski
Brazil, Civil Registration, 1870-2012
birth: 1873
other: 30 Nov 1907 03a Circunscrição, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
parents: Miguel Terosinski, Margarida Terosinski
spouse: Josepha Noruscha
Por favor,gostariad e acertar este erro de transcrição,veja por favor o link do registro e note que não existe T nenhum no começo do nome...
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1...
REGISTRO NUMERO 333,CONTINUA NA PÁGINA SEGUINTE.
A letra t do escrivão nada tem com o sobrenome.
E VEJA NA ASSINATURA CLARA DO MEU TRISAVÔ.
JOAO JAROSINSKI...
Como faço para concertar isso?
Desde ja obrigada0 -
Vern said: Household Gender Age Birthplace
self Alfred Negley M 50 West Virginia, United States
wife Mary Negley F 38 West Virginia, United States
wife William Negley F 38 West Virginia, United States
https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1...
See anything wrong here? It looks to me like the indexer didn't complete the line for the "son" William Negley "M" "21" WV.
This type of mistake should be corrected.0 -
Cindy Voelz said: I agree with the majority of the people here. There should be a way to correct errors. I've done indexing and I know sometimes it's hard to read some of the handwriting. My dad's race is wrong on your record page. On the 1940 census it clearly indicates "W" for him. His neighbors before and after are "Neg". The indexers list his race as Negro. This is carelessness on the part of both indexers for this record. It's very frustrating that there is no way to correct this and other errors I've found. I can correct on ancestry.com. There should be a way to do this on familysearch.org. There is no acceptable reason for this inability. I and others sincerely hope this ability is added soon to your records. Records should be as correct as possible.0
-
Phyllis Wolf said: I would think a simply button next to each surname going to a link that would allow the user to correct the spelling of a name would be enough. No major reprogramming, just adding a link that would let the user key in the correction and put in their relationship to the family. My grandfathers name is spelled incorrectly and it fustrates me that I cannot correct it. It is the data operators error as it is spelled correctly on the census record. If I had a link next to his name it could put a note in that would explain to future searches the error. In the search mode, the program could be changed to check these notes as well as the entries so that all records would be called up, even the ones misspelled.0
-
C S Manske said: It is clear that there is a need for some process to submit corrections to indexes (e.g. 1940 census). Family Search should have the ability to develop this process. It is very frustrating not to be able to make transcription corrections, especially when it involves the name of your ancestor! Despite the best efforts of indexers and arbitrators, mistakes are made. I 'm sure you've heard many times over that Ancestry.com offers this capability. Why can't Family Search?0
-
Leanne Starkey said: To all the people who have made these resources available .. THANK YOU!
For those people who are frustrated you could also contribute yourselves by getting involved in the indexing project.
To Robert :
The Hague City archives has a site function and structure that allows users to note corrections and additions in a "comment" sort of way - these comments are then also searchable, as far as I can see. Example here :
http://195.242.171.17/hga/virtuelestu...
Once again, Thank you and best wishes
Leanne, in The Hague, The Netherlands0 -
Taillefer said: Some arbitrators are adding corrections for correction's sake. I does get frustrating to not be able to send a comment to a particular arbitrator' who's obvious corrections to a correctly indexed line in a batch disregard most of the particularities of a precise project (such as not entering the sexe of a line even when the name is a female name). Why not permit a short comment when the indexor asks for feedback when revising his batch?0
-
Janet Hall said: The powers that be are not going to answer these questions.... Who chooses the arbitrators? What are their qualifications? Recently I was frustrated to find, after long searching, the death certificate for an ancestor. The front of the document was online, but the obverse side had not been scanned. Of course I wrote to the county to ask for the information and hope it will come soon. {The person died far from where I had been previously searching.} This is such a blip in this wonderful project.
What good is indexing, if someone further up the line, these mysterious arbitrators, have the final say and cannot be reached or challenged? All we are asking is a little "opinion" line where we can clarify or question data posted. I keep a list and so far I have found 116 items where there are obvious errors, not even judgment calls on spelling in old handwriting. Sometimes the information is unfindable as we use the excellent search capabilities, because of these errors. The hoped-for comment/corrections option would be included in searches and help us.
Look at the admin message at the top of this thread. Dated two years ago. I am afraid there is never going to be an option for users to add comments.
I don't think we could ever comment the many errors in the IGI, which was on line for years. It never occurred to me to do it, as these were not original records. One can't be bothered to try and correct the many fanciful offerings on line.
But when an official document is on the screen, and the indexer has misinterpreted or otherwise changed the data in front of us, there must be the option to comment, for the benefit of others.. Please. This is a huge flaw in an amazing, beneficial-to-all project.0 -
Joe Worrell said: I have called umpteen times on this matter, and I have been doing Michigan State Deaths and talked as I said, They came back with a reply. ( why worry as they won't worry about your name (Joe Worrell) when it is finally done, but I WILL... and it bothers me as a former Teacher, student, and a human to know that my ancestor(s) line has so many variations. For example if you google and bring up Cities in Michigan, as I do every morning. I have found several variations to the same name ex. Blumfield, and then Bloomfield, (and these are not duplicates as some counties has a Bloomfield . Reguardless, they need to check and make sure that it is correct, and if it says county accept the word county, leaving it that way, not omitting township, city, unicorporated, etc. as that is the document as it is... typing in or omitting it as they think should be there. LEAVE IT THE WAY IT SHOULD BE.
Another is the name a child is given, and we are told to type it and leave it the way the documents is written... Yet so many arbitrators take off the word (BABY) in front of Boy or Girl. say for example, my name of my child was *** Baby Girl Worrell***, they come back and show Girl Worrell... WHICH IS INCORRECT. and then I had done one which said (Angel Baby Girl Thompson) they need to leave all of the words as it is written, not taking out BABY GIRL... As that is what they named the child. Only parents, or the child, as an adult have the right to go and get their name changed through the courts, etc., then that record(s) will reflect the changes. not someone else in arbitration to make the decision. Just like when my wife married me, she had to change to the name of WORRELL, omitting her former married name, but still has her naiden name HERBERT.. So her name is now Maria Herbert Worrell, as it was changed when marriage took place. Removing her former married name.. (Smith)... she even had to get a new Social security card with updated changes of her name....
In fact, I have never keep records of the changes as you mentioned, but, I am from now on, so I know I did it correctly. Yes I make mistakes, as we are all human, but to continue doing this is not be taught correct personal or gospel principles.
I feel that there should be a name, or email, or number to discuss and see how they came up with that name or date(s)...0 -
Thomas Dwight, Jr Rethard said: Janet-
I agree with you completely, and I have raised this issue a number of times, always receiving a reply that amounts to "too bad, so sad, but it can't be done easily right now."
My response to all is that, if ancestry.com can do it, then FamilySearch, with all of its resources, can certainly do it.
What I don't understand is that these are not just names and numbers we are dealing with here; they are people. Mostly deceased, to be sure, but people nonetheless. Every name is part of someone's family and someone's friend. Those names need to be given to utmost care possible, and need to be as accurate as possible. An inability to be able to even add a (supported) correction is, in my view, caused my an ignorance of the implications of not being able to find an ancestor.
Just to resharpen my sword in this argument:
My family name is Rethard. It is over 1000 years old in that same form, but it is quite rare (less than 25 on the planet that I can find. All Rethards in this country descend from a single ancestor who came here between 1791 and 1810. I have personally spoken with most of the living Rethards in this country.
Which brings me to the point: In 1940, there were several Rethards residing in or near Centralia, IL: Jacob Washington Rethard and his family, Arthur Rethard and his family, and Malena (Forth) Rethard and her son. When the 1940 census images were released, I found Jacob's family (entered as John Ruthard, not Jacob Rethard) because I had the address and Malena's family strictly by chance. I did not locate Arthur's family due to the lack of an address.
Once ancestry brought the records up, I looked again, but found NO Rethards listed in Centralia. Going back to the original images, I relocated Jacob's family again by address. The name was entered as "Ruthars." Malena's family appears correctly.
I still can't find Jacob in the FamilySearch version of the census; still no sign of Arthur.......and Malena's family has disappeared!
Clearly, there's a serious problem here. Without a way to tie the original images back to the interpreted records (as with ancestry.com), and without a way to correct the records when good reason is found (I think a family member's say so is good enough), there is a very serious problem.
The solution to this - an other FS issues - is really quite simple. The people responsible need only two skills: (1) an real understanding of how to design computerized systems; and (2) an deep understanding - and commitment to the work this data represents.0 -
Patricia Casey said: I agree.... It seems that FS has screwed up my Familly Tree also. Not just in one family name, but in THREE! Starting with my Mother's family, then my Father's family... and now I find that it has messed up names in my Grand-Mother's family. One error could probably be forgiven... but there are way too many errors in this program. ; When it reaches to Family Tree Maker, and Ancestry.com, it is covering a lot of historic information and errors that follow our ancestry from now on! For some of us, a lot of work has gone into these records! And for our decendants who in the future want to do GENEOLOGY research on our family history, ??????
This is un-excusable, and the attitude of what replies are to these complaints is atrocious! I think this whole program should be shut down!!!! Family Search used to be one of my favorite Geneology sites, and very helpful.... Until they started this "INDEXING" program that we have no way of correcting!!!!!0 -
Leonard McCown said: I can understand the frustration Patricia Casey is speaking of. Makes you not want to contribute to the file if they are going to corrupt it!0
-
Barbara Engel said: I agree with all of the responses and even more perplexing is why there are so many entries with outrageous dating, i.e., mothers born AFTER their children,sometimes up to 200 years! And it goes on and on. You have to study all FS info and ancestry 'leaves' to make sure you're not transferring such information and sometimes the info gets added anyway mysteriously as it shows up as added when I didn't even add that file. Something somewhere in the programs adds info automatically with many errors included so I have to check periodically to see what changes have occurred after I have added records! I'm so glad that so much is being added daily digitally but it's of no use if it's not correct! I also agree it should not be such an impossible task to program the ability to make corrections. Why would that take more than a programmer who is skillful in databases? If someone could explain this to me I would appreciate it.0
-
rotkapchen said: "Why would that take more than a programmer who is skillful in databases?" In large environments dealing with large databases there are many different technology specialists. Even aside from programmers and database specialists there are data architects who look for issues in the data and work backwards to solve those problems.
So far I have not been able to identify such roles being employed on the 'back side'. Thus the results we've seen.0
This discussion has been closed.