Transcription of original census has impossible children's ages

LegacyUser

Wade Wilkerson said: The transcription of the US Census, 1910 Missouri St Louis (Independent City) St Louis Ward 13 ED 207 on line 75, the daughter (Martha Lloyd) has age listed as 18. The parents (Eugene and Edna Lloyd) are 28 and 20. On close inspection of the original census document Martha's age is 1 5/12 that is 1 yr 5 mo. Compare with line 86 (Tabitha Stattler). On that line the same census taker entered age there more clearly as 1 4/12, that is, 1 yr 4 mo. I don't know who to contact to make this correction.

"United States Census, 1910," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3... : 24 June 2017), Missouri > St Louis (Independent City) > St Louis Ward 13 > ED 207 > image 2 of 18; citing NARA microfilm publication T624 (Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.).

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: Welcome to the community support forum for FamilySearch. FamilySearch personnel read every discussion thread and may or may not respond as their time permits. We all share an active interest in using the resources of this site and as users, we have various levels of knowledge and experience and do our best to help each other with concerns, issues, and/or questions.

The means to correct indexing errors is slowly coming online. For quite a while, we've had the ability to correct some transcription errors for names. Now, the ability to correct place transcription errors has been recently introduced.

Eventually, we will be able to correct all transcription errors.

We have been advised in the past that when we come across transcription errors, that we attach the record to the person(s) involved and correct the attached source, adding notes as appropriate.

LegacyUser

Tom Huber said: It should be noted that FamilySearch has limited resources and as such, only the most gross (covering numerous records) errors, especially when the same error appears across a number of records (such as a place), will be dealt with by a FamilySearch person.

LegacyUser

Wade Wilkerson said: Thank you for your kind, quick, and informative reply.
As you advised, I attached a note to her record.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Wade, if you actually select "Edit" on the source citation, (e.g., on the citation attached to Martha's source list) you can add the note right there in the source citation (e.g., Martha's age of 1and 5/12 years old was incorrectly indexed as 18 years old).

Then when anyone following that source citation which is likely tagged to Martha's birth vital, they will immediately see the note that the source is incorrect in this area BEFORE they get to the index data or images.

Putting a collaboration "Note" in her person record (I assume that this is what you did) is OK, but since the error in in the index file, adding a note to the citation which is pointing to that index data makes it a bit more visible.