Bad indexed information
Why can't I edit a simple date. The issue is "1828" since it is muddled up in all the other stuff...
"West Virginia Marriages, 1780-1970," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:FTK3-ZMJ : 11 February 2018), Luthur Anderson Wilson and Early Deskins, 1828; citing Monroe, West Virginia, United States, , county clerks, West Virginia; FHL microfilm 589,918.
Go figure. Trust me, they did not get married in 1828. Neither of them was born. I looked at the image, low and behold, it is clearly written as November 11, 1928.
Best Answers
-
but just because it is "seen and used here" - does not necessarily make FamilySearch the OWNER of the data - even when we are strictly talking about what is in FS.
Note we are talking about the record set that originally came from wvculture.org
if it was simply the family tree record for the marriage of the people in the Family Tree - THAT can be most definitely changed.
BUT a set of historical records or index of historical record that are now housed in FamilySearch because of a negotiated contract and submission by a third party - may not be under the legal control of FamilySearch to change.
BUT there are still options that one would think could be applied (such as annotations and notes that people could add to the item - clarifying such things as errors and mistakes (if that functionality exists - which it may not at the current time)
if the item had been indexed by FamilySearch originally may be there would have been more control to change the index . . . but even there - there are various complicating factors.
I do know that there has been some progress in this area of noting mistakes and errors in indexes - but I defer to FS Employees to clarify the specifics.
I dont claim to know all the details of what can and cannot be changed on this precise item.
Im just pointing out that just because it is a record set in FamilySearch doesn't (always) mean FamilySearch has the right to make the change on the index even if they know its wrong.
0 -
@retgijane, in my observation, people get angry about errors and the inability to fix them because they've missed a crucial detail: there's a difference between data and a finding aid for data.
Despite the index-centric setup on FamilySearch (and many other genealogy sites), the index is not the data. It's just a way to make it easier to find the data. If you've discovered an error in an index, then by definition the index has done its job: it has pointed you at the correct information.
The reason websites like FS and Ancestry are centered around indexes (rather than the actual historical documents that they point to) is that indexes are machine-parseable. They can be neatly slotted into a database, searched, sorted, analyzed, and processed. Historical documents, from a computer's perspective, are just pixel groups with maybe some text attached as metadata. There have been advances made in getting computers to "read" images of writing, but we're nowhere near there yet. Therefore, I expect we're stuck with the current structures for at least a decade, but probably far longer.
Yes, incorrect indexes are harder to use, and it's annoying when one can't even get them fixed to make it easier for the next person. There's nothing to be done about it but to be patient, and remind yourself of the important part: you found the record anyway.
4 -
Great :-)
we will look forward to your continued involvement in the community . . . .
WE are ALL learning new things each day.
everyone has both information to GIVE and information to TAKE. and so do you.
1
Answers
-
In general, indexes for records that do not have an image attached, on the familysearch.org website, cannot be edited. The image for that marriage is on the wvculture.org website, rather than on the familysearch.org website.
1 -
I'm not trying to change the record on wvculture.org, just what is seen and used here.
It is, even more so, now, a moot point b/c passing the buck and towing the party line seem to be the norm here. Not one single question/comment I have posted have returned a simple solution.
Broken Search? Nada. Just another party line answer.
Document errors? even less.
SOLUTIONS????? Anyone? Hello?!?!?! Is anyone home?
No? I'm off to rattle another cage.
0 -
Not really 'answered', but definitely a better explanation of FS' agreements with outside entities. I get that we cannot, nor should we be able to ALTER any historical document, but putting an annotation on FS record of link or whatever, would be helpful.
Additionally, once I have figured out that it IS the document I'm looking for, attaching it to a profile, should almost make it un-necessary since that shows as an 'accepted hint' (for lack of a better term). Right?
I was going to "not a match" with some smart aleck comment about twinkles in eyes...
0 -
. . . a bit confused with the comments about "not a match"
a match means it is the same/right person
"match" does not imply you are saying the information is correct on the historical document or index. (which in some cases it is not)
what you SHOULD ensure is as correct as possible is the date/fact on the profile record of the person (with possibly comments about why this is correct over the mistaken index/transcription)
matching is simply a way of linking the document/index to the person - you would clearly want to know of a given document/index - even if the date on the document was wrong.
1 -
I thought the record was NOT for the same/right person. I'm not sure why I looked at it close enough to discover the error instead of just dismissing it.
It is all good. I actually learned something from this discussion.
0 -
she seems happy now . . .
quoting: "It is all good. I actually learned something from this discussion."
1 -
Thank you, Dennis Yancy.
I did learn something...a little of the bigger picture.
0 -
Mod Note: One comment was deleted for going against our Community code of conduct plus one comment that quoted that post.
0 -
If you would like to go to the trouble of getting that changed, there might be a way. I am attaching a link to the wvculture.org's explanation about their data set which includes:
"To report transcription errors, indexing errors or broken links, send an e-mail identifying the problem to chwvvrr@ wv.gov."
http://archive.wvculture.org/history/archives/vitalrecordsarticle.pdf
and their main page: https://wvculture.org
You might enjoy their research databases, if you family were proud Mountaineers. My roots are in West Virginia.
3 -
If you look at the top of the indexed page you will see "Save" "Edit" and "Share." FamilySearch is working to improve the program to where we can correct errors in the index. An example is the 1880 census for my grandfather listed: (Public account). https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MNS2-M6R?treeref=KWCT-59Q
So far FamilySearch has made this available for about 5% of records. With patience, the goal is to make all indexed records where an image is available, able to be corrected. Indexing, by its very nature, is done by humans and mistakes will be made. So hopefully in the not too distant future we will be able to correct them.
1 -
Oh wow! thanks for answering! I have found a lot of mistakes in names and gender. I can see how difficult it is to index names from a language you are not familiar with. I tried to index, but the only project available was from the Philippines and I could not understand much. I did not continue. Those errors can cause more trouble than help. (well, that is my humble opinion) I could not find my great grand mother because of those type of errors. Anyway we keep going and going and going
Thanks again,
1 -
That only works when the records belong to FamilySearch. This image was not able to be edited.
2
