How to handle a person FT shows as as Unknown in the source, but not in the source.

Douglas McPhaden

99HS-TG8 has 5 source citations, 2 of them in 1986. One of the 2 has an "Unfinished Attachment" box. Click on Unfinished Attachments, taking you to the Source Linker. How should I deal with the Unknown person in the source, who is not in the (index) Record?

Thanks

Gordon Collett

Process I would take:

Step 1) Go to the historical record set in question, in this case: https://www.familysearch.org/search/collection/1949341

Step 2) Make a general search on a common last name such as Smith.

Step 3) Scan through the record set and get to know what information it contains and how it is formatted. In this case I see that sometimes parents names are included and sometimes not. It does not appear that spouse names were ever indexed.

Step 4) Click review and attach on several records and see if that Unknown appears other places. I find that it is very common. In fact, it is almost always there. Out of about 50 or so records the most obvious pattern is that it is present if a marital status (single, married, divorced, widowed) was recorded on the record. If no marital status was present, which is the case for less detailed records, then Unknown does not appear. An exception was one record that did have Single but it also specifically recorded that the individual was a child. A second exception was a record that had two Unknowns when viewed in the Source Linker.

Theory: the original indexing had a spot for marital status that when the batch was processed accidentally converted into this Unknown person. Provable? No.

This suggests that if desired and felt to be appropriate, Unknown could be attached to the person's spouse. If the person was single, it should just be dismissed.

Scott H D

Hi Douglas,

Good question! The image for the source is not available, so there's no way I can think of to find the identity of "unknown". You can just leave it as it is, or perhaps try to find this particular record in a different location that includes an image.

Thanks

Scott

AllanH01

This obviously an error in the transcription of the Ohio Death Index. Unfortunately we cannot correct the error and you should dismiss the hint. Please refer to https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/why-cant-i-fix-indexing-or-transcription-errors

As for the Indiana Marriages the link for attaching C Franklin Koch is unrelated to the family and you may just dismiss the Unattached notice

Summer-rae Schwendiman

The following article in the help center gives additional information on how to handle unfinished attachements. https://www.familysearch.org/help/helpcenter/article/how-do-i-handle-unfinished-attachments-in-family-tree

In this case for 99HS-TG8 it would be OK to dismiss the unfinished attachment.

MarvinG

If we cannot identify the "unknown" person, we have the option of dismissing the Unfinished Attachment. We suspect the unknown person may have been the physician, as the Certifier's Role stated that.

Also helpful considerations would be to edit the birth date as obtained from the 1892, Walter Shaffer, "Ohio, County Birth 1841-2003" along with the other sources that are listed. This action will perhaps provide other record hints that will help you.

DebDT

I'm not sure if this is the same problem, but FamilySearch is currently experiencing a technical problem showing unfinished attachments even when they have actually been attached.

Douglas McPhaden

The referral to the article and dismissing an "Unfinished Attachments" are obvious. Maybe my question should have said beyond the obvious.

MarvinG hints at a way the person record source citations may be helpful. I would prefer to see how to work an example.

subrown2

There are several options for handling unknown on a record. Here is an article explaining them:

How do I handle unfinished attachments in Family Tree?

Article Id: 1015

April 20, 2020

In Family Tree, you may see the message, “This source has not been attached to all people found in the record,” on some sources. It means that the source contains information about one or more people and that the source is not attached to them.

Steps (website)

1. On a person’s Sources tab, click Unfinished Attachments.
2. Use the source linker to do one of the following:
   • Attach the record to the other people whose records are already in Family Tree.
   • Add the missing people to Family Tree.
     • Important: Before you add a person who is or may be living to Family Tree from the record, be sure to indicate whether the person is living. This will keeps the person’s personal information private. The person’s record will remain in your private space until you add death information.
   • Nothing. (Some records, like obituaries, mention people that are not closely related to the primary person on the record.)
3. To dismiss the unfinished attachment notification, click Dismiss.
   • Tip: If you dismiss the unfinished attachment notification, the notification is removed for all users. There is no way to go back and review the dismissed notification. However, you can review the attachments for all sources attached to a person in Family Tree. Simply click the source's title, and then click Review Attachments.
4. If you do not want to see the unfinished attachments messages, click Options (which is located at the top of the Sources tab), and then click Unfinished Attachments. This option remains off until you turn it back on again.

Douglas McPhaden

@Mark McLemore

I will try to give you a very brief review of each discussion. No response expected.

All but 1 refer me to the article seen if I click the Learn More link . One actually copied and pasted from the article.

A cardinal rule for Responders is don't make your user (patron) think you're saying "your stupid". If someone writes an answer they should think about the level of skill of the person who asked the question before writing. Responders should err on a high skill level. Users can ask a follow up question if they want.

If a Responder is compelled to reference the article in front of a user's face, don't be so direct that it could taken as condescending. Responders should err on the side of user insult. Another approach is to be less direct. "I take it the Article found by clicking Learn More wasn't helpful."

This is too long for this type of review, but the subject is so important it deserves repetition.

Douglas McPhaden

@Mark McLemore

An idea for you is to ask the user/author of each community submission to identify their skill level in the area to which the question refers. For example "Duplicate Resolution" - Journeyman . So it would not become tedious, Family Tree would preselect the users general skill level on the display. Family Tree should let users select their own skill level. Provide examples to help them do this accurately.

Douglas McPhaden

@Mark McLemore

https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/265789#Comment_265789

Fyi

Douglas McPhaden

@Mark McLemore

The answer I accepted is very good (5 stars), and I haven't tried it yet. Sometimes good answers won't work but they show techniques.

Douglas McPhaden

https://community.familysearch.org/en/discussion/comment/266076#Comment_266076

Step 4) Is this incomplete? "Click review and attach on several records and see if that Unknown appears other places. I find that it is very common." This works, but the next step is not given. I believe it is something like this: Change the Focus Person in the Record (left column) in the Source Linker to Unknown ... However, I cannot see the remainder clear enough to say what it is. Could you provide some guidance?

Regardless, I solved 2 cases of the problem using your technique.

The case of LJ1Z-MPW may be a counter example to your Theory. The Unknown was indexed in the first Name field. This resolves the Unknown in this person. My guess is that the indexer completed the detail data and did not fill in the top level data. This could have been caused by interruption or distraction. In any case program that stores the document record should kick out any with a name field of unknown.

Thank you very much for your on point answer.

Gordon Collett

The intent in step 4 was too look at a large sample of random records to see if the Unknown was there or not since it seems to be visible only in Source Linker, not in the source itself. It was not the intent to ever attach any of them, just to analyze the appearance and look for patterns and trends. So the part I left out would have been "Close the Source Linker."

Douglas McPhaden

Thanks for the quick response.

If I find any repeatable path to attach, starting in the source linker in your technique, a source citation I'll let you know.

Doug

Douglas McPhaden

@Mark McLemore

This discussion is also a good example, even though he did not completely answer my question.