"record removed" red warning --- is the removal permanent or temporary?

LegacyUser

m said: "record removed" red warning on attached sources --- is the removal permanent or temporary?

LegacyUser

Paul said: m

Perhaps you could provide a link, as I don't think I have come across this - well, at least not involving a red exclamation mark warning.

In general terms, of course the organisation who provided the record might have decided it didn't want it displayed on the FamilySearch website any longer. You will probably need to go to the original provider to confirm that, as FamilySearch is unlikely to disclose any contractual details that relate to the issue.

LegacyUser

m said: i don't remember if there was an exclamation mark. i think it was a red box.

LegacyUser

Jordi Kloosterboer said: I have seen this on other records both on this website and other websites. It can mean what Paul said, but it can also mean that there is a new source for the new URL.

LegacyUser

m said: There is no new source for the one I was looking at.

UK census, if I remember correctly.

LegacyUser

m said: And the other UK census of a different year is not removed.

LegacyUser

Amy Archibald said: I'm getting this "record removed" on 1930 US Census records.

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: From 4 months ago:
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

This appeared to be part of the persistent URL update failures. I saw several of them back then in the Ohio County Marriages 1789-2013 collection but I have not seen any recently.

Please provide PIDs and URLs of problems so that they can be examined by others. This may be the same exact problem now being seen in a different place.

LegacyUser

Amy Archibald said: Here is the one I get a 410 Error on.
For this person:
https://www.familysearch.org/tree/per...

I'm wanting to attach the 1930 US Census:


I click on it and get this error:



Which is this page: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: So it appears that the ark type persistent URL of:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

is no longer redirecting to an index file.

That persistent URL should always redirect to William Allen Frost's data in the index file that was derived from the digital image at:
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/619...

This appears to be yet another example of a damaged file system resulting from a broken tool or procedure that was used by FS to update persistent URLs.

I don't know what is going on but these persistent URL problems have been going on for 4-5 months now, and they are resulting in damage to existing data. For example, if that hint had been attached to William's source list years ago and someone came along and looked at it, when they saw the "Record Removed" they will frequently just detach the citation. When FS finally gets around to fixing it, the citation (which was likely used and referenced in editing changes for the person record) will have been long gone.

I have a couple of records now that are like this. The "proofs" documented in the notes and "reason for change" fields all reference a source that is no longer there! Unfortunately, you can not find the source again since there are no hints for it. You are forced to go directly to the digital image file and create a source for it that can be attached in place of the one that was lost.

It is really disheartening when this kind (and quantity) of damage occurs in the production database

LegacyUser

m said: Are the engineers aware of this problem?

LegacyUser

Jeff Wiseman said: Brian Jensen's response to the report 4 months ago says that they are aware:
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysea...

However, the original event created many problems all over the place in the production database so cleaning up the mess completely may need to be done on a record by record basis. That could take a while.