Scotland Census, 1901

LegacyUser

Paul said: Joe

As has been touched upon, clearing up any confusion about this collection, the 1939 National Register one and any others that produce a "No Results" message after "non-LDS" users have tried a search, is all quite simple. I feel with your help, the problem could be swiftly dealt with. Kindly ask an appropriate colleague (though goodness knows why they should have to be in the legal department) to add one line to the relevant Wiki pages. As you can see, I have tried this approach but, being unauthorised, my "bullet point" remark (on the 1939 N.R. Wiki page) was taken down.

Surely you can see the confusion that "No Results" message is giving? As I have illustrated above, there is no such problem with image collections, just with these restricted-view index-only ones. If the matter is not resolved I'm sure this issue is going to be brought up again and again.

We would be most appreciative of any help you can provide to avoid continued confusion over getting this ostensibly crazy "No Results" to stop appearing when inputting a name obviously common in Scotland produces nothing. "What, no Alexander McDonalds living in Scotland in 1901 - how can that be?"

Just one example, of course, but see https://www.familysearch.org/search/r... for what you get with an 1891 search as opposed to https://www.familysearch.org/search/r.... Naturally, not one result from the 1901 census - well, at least not from my public account: you might possibly see something different.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: FS now seems to be overhauling how the Wiki presents information about restrictions on accessing images and index.

Previously the information was either absent (and could not be added by users) or if present was often inaccurate/out of date.

Now, some of the pages I follow have been edited within today by aforementioned "Dchin" and "SvareJM" to include the following standardized text:

"Whenever possible FamilySearch makes images and indexes available for all users. However, rights to view these data are limited by contract and subject to change. Because of this there may be limitations on where and how images and indexes are available or who can see them. Please be aware some collections consist only of partial information indexed from the records and do not contain any images.

For additional information about image restrictions, please see the Restrictions for Viewing Images in FamilySearch Historical Record Collections page"

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: I've been in contact with National Records Scotland on this matter. They say that the index was not created by or in any way involves them, therefore "we do not believe that we have failed in our equality duty in any way in relation to this". Additionally, they think the fact that this LDS-only index groups individuals by families, while the free to access ScotlandsPeople is based on individuals, is trivial.

LegacyUser

Paul said: AvH

Once again, thanks for your continuing work regarding this general issue.

As a matter of interest, as with the 1939 National Register index collection, I am able to see these records if someone has added them to a Sources section, as illustrated below. In the case of the 1939 NR sources, it was me who added them to various IDs whilst at a Family History Centre, being very surprised that I could view them when I got home - not usually the case with restricted (albeit image) collections.

In this case, another user has attached these (1901 census) sources, so I do not know if he is either a LDS Church member or whether he had to attend a FHC in order to do so. I wonder how many other INDEXED (not image) collections are "restricted" and whether all have the same conditions?

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: As Joe Martel said a month ago, the 1901 Scotland Census Index is only accessible to Latter Day Saints. Being at a FHC or Affiliate Library is irrelevant. But when attached as a source, anyone can view that particular record. The images are not available in any form on FS.

As for whether others indexes are restricted, it seems that Bavarian Catholic church records have been restricted to LDS recently. There's no logical reason for that restriction. See: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/979857/i...

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: It seems some major changes are happening with the Scottish censuses Indexes. It looks like they might even be removed from FS.

Chris Paton has a blogged about this here: https://scottishgenes.blogspot.com/20...

As he also says, a response from FS would be very helpful. I've also asked NRS about this.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Yes, it's a shame FamilySearch cannot advise of records that have been withdrawn / restricted - perhaps incorporated with its "added collections" notifications.

I had noticed yesterday that I only got one result when searching for a person with a common, Scottish surname.** The link provided by AvH and screenshot below illustrates the present problem relating to FamilySearch's Scottish census collections. Can't make any sense of what has happened - individuals from several Scottish counties are still appearing as search results, so reduced coverage does not appear to relate to that factor.

(** See https://www.familysearch.org/search/r... Sixteen John MacDonalds - including surname variants - in the whole of the Scotland 1891 census? I don't think so!)

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: As AvH, Chris Paton, Paul et al, all try to convey: the issue right now is not who has what rights but why the population of Scotland in 1891 is only 6,266. It should either be a much bigger number (which to my chagrin, I don't know) or zero - the latter being the case if access has been withdrawn.

Someone somewhere else said that they'd been in touch with FS Support and after the usual script quoting about "We can only show what controllers agree", Support said, yes, something is wrong, but it should be fixed now. To paraphrase Juli, we are unfamiliar with their meaning for "now".

Anyway - things do go pear shaped, but it would be nice to understand what's going on.

LegacyUser

FamilySearch Moderator said: I can't replicate the screen shot that shows the Scottish collection numbers  (2,000's). Could you provide a URL? Thanks

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: I believe that this is the URL that Paul used.

https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...

It's the list of collections for Scotland.

FYI - in FindMyPast, Scotland has 2.9 million records in the 1851 census not 2,253! It's a rather curious total in FS, I think - neither one thing nor the other. Hope someone can look at it and get back to us.

Thanks

LegacyUser

joe martel said: I know this isn't the initial concern in this thread but losing records has been brought up. The teams are unable to see those small numbers. I think the blogger had a filter. When I go look at those collections I see the big numbers. 

But if I limit and search on a surname then the results are correspondingly small:

So I'm guessing the small numbers shown in that blog are because of filters applied in the search query and the collections are not getting smaller. Am I missing something?

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: I'm getting the small numbers without any sort of filter, and I haven't searched FS's historical record collections for at least a day.

And another blogger today reports that the 1841-81 censuses were deleted:

https://www.geneamusings.com/ 3rd blog post as I write. Randy Seaver usually gives a URL for each post but hasn't done so (yet) for the weekly update on FS collections.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: hmmm. I still see the collections in both member and public accounts.
But now I see the small numbers in the public accounts, with no filter.

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: Sounds weird to me. I'm glad that you can see the issue Joe. Just to confirm, the URL that I used to show the tiny numbers is in my Comment on the FS Moderator's reply immediately below. I had no filtering in place. In fact, I wasn't even doing a search, I was just looking at the numbers of records in each collection for Scotland. At that point no mention has been made of individual's details.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Yes, https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... confirmed - still showing with the smaller numbers this morning (GMT). Public account.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: Just an update. There are multiple systems and teams that are involved in tracking down these kinds of rights issues. Thanks for bringing it to FS attention.

LegacyUser

W David Samuelsen said: What is wrong with using Recordseek feature to around that problem?

LegacyUser

W David Samuelsen said: "Edit wars" You have no idea how bad it can be. Even in FamilySearch Wiki, there are many pages locked. Wikipedia is worse - politics involved and Wikipedia do the darnest to end such wars. The Chinese will do their way and then see others undo what the Chinese did and put in derogatory comments, and vice versa.

LegacyUser

A van Helsdingen said: Update from Chris Paton. https://scottishgenes.blogspot.com/20...

Says there is a glitch, and that someone at FS has said the collections will be restored.

LegacyUser

Paul said: I'm surprised the issue of the (un)availability of Scotland census index collections appears not to have been raised on this forum in the last 3 months.

I have just returned to researching my Scottish ancestry, after a break, and the collections appear to have disappeared altogether. The link I provided previously (https://www.familysearch.org/search/c...) now shows as below. Compare this with the screenshots above.

Has anyone any idea what is happening here? Specifically, any comments / updates from Joe would be appreciated.

LegacyUser

Paul said: Please note, it's the indexes to which I am referring, not the images. These could still be viewed at a FHC or Affiliate - if they were open!

LegacyUser

gasmodels said: Paul,
in my member account when I do a search for Scotland collections, I see the following:


I can search the Census records but the images are restricted to viewing at the Family History Centers. It appears an adjustment has been made relative to access to these indexed records

LegacyUser

Paul said: Thanks for that, gasmodels. This does seem to confirm that (all) the indexes are now only available to LDS Church members.

LegacyUser

Colin Cameron said: Odd that even the LDS owned 1881 index is restricted on here but freely available elsewhere (scotlandspeople.gov.uk)

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: "owned" may be the wrong term - it'll probably be licensed from ScotlandsPeople so no surprise it's on the scotlandspeople.gov.uk I'd guess?

LegacyUser

Colin Cameron said: Scotlandspeople.gov.uk have two versions of the 1881 census index. Their own version, with links to images of the original documents, that you pay for, and a free version which links to an LDS transcript.

LegacyUser

David Newton said: Now do the census collection articles on the wiki have information about the restrictions now in place? Well let's see: the 1851 article still talks about searching the index and makes no reference to the new restrictions. So that's an out-of-date article for that. I suspect the others are similar.

So what about updating the wiki articles with the correct information? Now wasn't that something which we found out only the "legal team" can do? So the last change to the 1851 article was on 25th March: where is this "legal team"? Why haven't they updated the information to be correct in over a month? Why are they both allowing incorrect information to persist and preventing others from correcting the system?

Is it "lack of resources"? Is it that perennial fall back for lack of proper information? So if it's "lack of resources" why are external users prevented from adding the infotmation by having it reverted? You can't legitimately try to have your cake and eat it and yet that's precisely what seems to be occurring here.

LegacyUser

joe martel said: FYI, just a guess, given the current state of the world with COVID, I'm guessing many companies and especially legal has had to devote a lot of time to make sure they are up to speed with current rules, regulations, across multiple municipalities and having to comply and protect their employees.

LegacyUser

MaureenE said: If you can't access them on FamilySearch, the Scotland Censuses up to, and including 1901, are available on both Findmypast and Ancestry, in addition to ScotlandsPeople

The 1911 Census is only available on ScotlandsPeople

LegacyUser

Adrian Bruce said: True, but these issues date back before COVID - if the legal team had insufficient time to document the full situation, they still had sufficient time to revert changes made to the Wiki by ordinary users attempting to explain the situation. That's hurtful.

But thanks for trying Joe!