Why aren't the birth dates of the people in Swedish Exam Books available to save when adding?
I feel like it's been about a year since this began happening, and I thought it was temporary due to reindexing or something else, but it is very annoying, as the data is there, if I go to the "Sources" tab, and view source, it's clear as day, but for some reason, when adding people via the Swedish Exam books, there are no birth dates.
This also can cause many errors of people attaching records just based on the name of the person, with no birth date or location to back it up (especially when you don't know what town they're even in. Ex: Nedre Ullerud just saves as Varmland, Sweden). I've done it, and I'm usually pretty careful. I have arkiv digital open, to type in the dates as I add people...but WHY? You have the books/data/information, but I have to use a separate program (as I am not going to the sources tab for every person I add).
By viewing the other post you made today I can clearly see the problem, as illustrated below.
The birth details and marriage date have been indexed, but (as you say) the birth details cannot be carried across in the source linking process. Another user / employee might be able to explain this, otherwise I can still only speculate as to why. The problem should not relate to lack of permission from the record custodian (otherwise the birth would probably not be visible at all), so perhaps there has been an error in programming that stops the birth details being carried over to the source linking page (and thereby the ability to attach to the person page directly, during the process).
Now you see the birth details....
... but now you don't.
Hopefully, someone will be able to provide you with a more satisfactory response than I can.1
@Paul W - I do apologize. I know better, from my job, but I was just frustrated and typing without sourcing anything. I appreciate you taking a look at my other post regarding the Parish/Place names for the Sweden Exam Books and figuring it out. I was starting to think maybe the problems were related, but as you show above, the same thing is happening with Segerstad (which appears to be correctly named as far as the place).
Here is an example from a problematic place name (as I stated in my other post, my family is mostly in this problem area of place names).
Nedre Ullerud, Varmland, Sweden. Here is a hint for Anna Svensdotter (KCL4-9F4) https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/KCL4-9F4https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/KCL4-9F4:
Birth date is clearly shown in the hint preview, and, as I stated previously, after the record is attached, under the source tab.
However, when I go to attach ("Review and Attach") the record, this is all I get (I'm also lacking her death date, as shown above):
Had I just been clicking through hints, and going to this view, I would have no way to verify if this information is correct, as there is zero useful information here (including location, but have another post regarding that). I've seen incorrectly attached records due to this, and find it very hard to sort out regular errors (which happen with indexing on any site, paid, etc.), including children, husbands, etc, because I have no idea how old any of the people are in the record.
This also makes it difficult to decide if I should attach the record at all/create a new person, as maybe the person is born more recently (still living), and I generally don't attach those, unless they are close family.
I can only think of Varmland having issues, but it is not all of Varmland, as I just attached some Karlstad, Varmland records today, and they had birth dates available.
I give you guys a lot of credit, though, as the way you built the searches/hints/etc. is leagues ahead of any other site (Ex: If I have Anna Johansdotter, you will also provide hints for Anna Johannesdotter, if relevant). This makes it so much easier to make connections in Swedish records! AND you won't add the father's surname to the search (unlike a paid site I use), which completely makes my search useless.
Please let me know if you need anything else, and I very much appreciate your very quick response, @Paul W0
I am just a registered FamilySearch user, like yourself. Hopefully, a moderator or someone with more specialised knowledge of this area (both type of record and region) will be able to offer further advice.
@Gordon Collett - can you possibly offer any advice here?0
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Paul, but I haven't worked much in this collection. I worked on attaching all the household examination records I could find to my Swedish ancestors and my wife's Swedish ancestors in Family Tree long before the index was available.
I agree this is very strange, looking at the example provided, and do have one theory for the birth information not showing up properly that probably also accounts for the place names sometimes being goofy. Looking at the document information you can read: ""Sweden, Household Examination Books... database and images, MyHeritage(https://www.myheritage.com : n.d.); ..."
This is not a FamilySearch index. It is an imported copy of My Heritage's index. Either My Heritage put on some restrictions or the conversion software did not work properly and the birth information is not flagged right for Source Linker or there is some basic incompatibility between My Heritage programming and FamilySearch programming that just cannot be overcome.
Just another example of something that @Julia Szent-Györgyi put quite nicely. I can't quote it correctly, but it went something like this: "Indexes are not sources, they are only pointers to sources."
Fortunately this household examination records is new enough that all the records have images attached right there in the hint and no one has any excuse for not checking the actual source. All one has to do is click on the image in the hint or click on Image at the top left corner of the Source Linker page. I just hope they do and don't just blindly attach hints.
It's a bit concerning to see that the birth information on Anna, placed there in 2012 does not match the birth record in the hint. Is the Family Tree Anna a different Anna than is in the hint? Or does the examination record have her birth date wrong? I have seen a priest make an error copying dates enough times in these records to know that it happens. To be sure of the birth date you do have to trace back to an actual birth record. Or is the 2012 entry wrong?2
@Paul W - apologies again. As you can see, I am new to the forum, and have no idea how it works. I appreciate your input! I usually just cross-check the data with Arkiv digital to ensure I've got the correct record, but as I said, time consuming, and frustrating, when the data is visible in other avenues.0
Wow @Gordon Collett , that is very interesting! how did you determine that it's a copy of My Heritage's index? I have no idea on the back-end pieces of this site. I am wondering if it is a restriction on their index...as that would make a little bit of sense (still insanely frustrating, though!).
I agree there is no excuse, but I know in the beginning, not being as diligent, I was just happy to see "hints" for my family, and would attach. Also, when households get combined, and the lines get mis-aligned, it really becomes difficult to discern who actually belongs to which family. I just ran into that yesterday. Only one line was flagged as wife (missed his actual wife), so I added that person as the "wife," only to realize there was a second family included in the index, and that "wife" had no relation, and then had to disconnect/undo quite a few things (Also included the children of the incorrect wife). Source in question: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QG5B-B4TK - August Ferdinand Lidberg was married to Maja Kasja Petersdotter, but since she was not flagged as wife, it just brought up Britta, and all of her children with Lars Magnus. Which is very clear in the link provided, but very unclear from the hint/attach (prior to me attaching August Ferdinand et al.):
Regarding Anna Svensdotter, thankfully, the profile birth date is correct, as shown by the baptism record attached. I generally don't explain the variance on family search, as I am working on updating three sites, so I focus on my Ancestry tree for citations. After 69 years, the births can get very mangled. I run into way more often than I would have thought when I first began my research. I "follow" the person on Arkiv digital, and then cite the locations, etc. in my Ancestry tree. If it's overly confusing, I'll usually leave a note on FamilySearch.0
I could tell this was a My Heritage database for two reasons. First, I ran across this database on My Heritage before it ever showed up on FamilySearch and when I first saw it on FamilySearch it looked suspiciously the same. Secondly, when you look under Document Information you see there is an Affiliate film number and when you look under Citing this Record you see that it cites not FamilySearch, but rather My Heritage:
You can see the same type of thing all the time at Ancestry and My Heritage, for example, if you look at the Swedish birth indexes at those two sites, you will see an example.
Ancestry is very clear about this trading:
My Heritage is less up front about it in that I can't see they actually admit this is from FamilySearch:
But that is FamilySearch indexing information and the database description is a direct copy from FamilySearch:
Depending on where you are mainly working, it can be handy to check this, because it is much easier to attach a FamilySearch source to Family Tree than it is to attach an Ancestry source to Family Tree, and vise versa when working on an Ancestry tree. People generally have favorite search engines, but one you know a record exists in an index, it is usually pretty easy to find it in the other company's copy of the index and attach that version onto a tree hosted on that company's site.
Sometimes there are discussion here about whether one should attach all FamilySearch sources and all Ancestry sources to an individual. I think that has some merit if they really are different indexes but not if they are just identical copies of the same indexes.0
One last note. May I respectfully ask you to reconsider that you "focus on [your] Ancestry tree for citations" and take the time to put all you citations in Family Tree as well? A well documented person on Family Tree with full information is much less likely to be incorrectly merged or otherwise corrupted.
Also, depending on how many people are working in your family, all your hard work is much more likely to be seen and useful to others if you put it in Family Tree.
For example, if you were working on my g-g-grandfather Daniel Collett, you would be one of well over a hundred people (I quit counting) on Ancestry with him in their tree where only a couple besides yours actually have any sources. All your hard work on him on Ancestry would be lost in the clutter of those other 99+ unsourced trees.3
Since this is an issue with the source linker, we are moving the discussion to the Tree category where they can address the limitations in source linker.0