Search results missing

dontiknowyou

Here is another case of missing search results.

https://www.familysearch.org/search/record/results?q.surname=Bowerman&q.residencePlace=Ripley%20Township%2C%20Montgomery%2C%20Indiana%2C%20United%20States&q.residencePlace.exact=on&q.residenceDate.from=1870&q.residenceDate.to=1870&count=100&offset=0&m.defaultFacets=on&m.queryRequireDefault=on&m.facetNestCollectionInCategory=on

The search returns 9 records but should return 11.

There are 2 households: Thomas B Bowerman with 7 individuals and William J Bowerman household with 4 individuals. The William J household has 2 children present and shown on index pages but not returned in the search results.

For the complete family I see both the old-style and new-style index pages with all their names complete.

For the family with children missing, the children's surnames are "ditto" on the census image and absent from the new-style index page. I don't see the old style page for this family, and I don't know why I don't see it.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

Nettie A and Elizabeth C are on the "Image Index" tab without a surname, probably because their names are actually written on the following page. They have been grouped with their parents as if they were on the previous page, but the page break apparently means that the surname was not copied over. I believe that they're not showing up in your search because of this indexing difference.

dontiknowyou

I have worked many households split across census pages, without this problem. Spot fix is to edit the index to add the surnames, which I have now done.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

What to do with households and dittoed names across a page break is one of those indexing grey areas that largely depend on individual indexers' decisions. Even if there are specific instructions addressing the matter, not everyone is likely to find them, or having read them at some point, to remember them correctly at need. Thus, you can expect such cases to be indexed differently on different pages (even adjacent ones, because of the way FamilySearch divides indexing into randomly-assigned batches).

dontiknowyou

Understood. The index editing tool is good for these situations.