How to fix indexing errors when no option to edit the indexing?
I've found thousands of indexes that incorrectly list the certificate date as birth/death date, instead of the real birth/death date mentioned in the certificate. This causes that, when adding profiles based on the indexed data, the data wil generally be off by 1-3 days, sometimes more.
In the case of Belgian certificates, they usually start mentioning the date the certificate is being made on the top line, and the real birth or death date a few lines into the text (often as "yesterday" or "day before yesterday").
Is there any way to fix those indexes, or should we just attach them and then correct manually on the profile?
Best Answer
-
To address your question more directly - no, there is no way to "fix those indexes". So, yes, you do have to "...just attach them and then correct manually on the profile". Assuming you have the facts to hand, of course.
0
Answers
-
If I am understanding correctly, are you saying that the birth date is indexed as the recorded certificate date and that the actual birth date is mentioned as "yesterday" or "Day before yesterday" and that there isn't an actual birth date listed as month-day-year?
If so, as indexers we are only supposed to type what we see and if there is no actual DOB listed, we are normally asked to mark the DOB <blank> or Type in certificate date ( this is rare, depends on the project). We are instructed not to assume DOB based off what is said in the text, such as "born yesterday" or "born day before yesterday".
Can you share a link to one of the birth certificates you are looking at? If I am incorrect, I or someone else may be able to help you if they are able to see what you're seeing. :)
0 -
Yes, as @Ksalers explains this is usually down to what I find the rather bizarre way FamilySearch project instructions work. I recently discovered that if a record states an event happens on "the last day of February", even if historically we know this was not a leap year, so the day could be nothing other the 28th February, indexers are instructed not to record the day as the 28th.
Even more crazy to me is the idea that if a certificate is dated, say 18th March and the event is stated as happening on "the previous day", the instructions are usually to index the record as 18 March, as this is the only date shown in the record. Quite contrary to logic, it must not be assumed that the event (in this example) took place on the 17th of March.
If there is an accompanying image, okay, the researcher will be able to check the facts for themselves. However, if the image / original document is not easily available, one will be deceived into believing the event took place on the day of the certificate. What indexing project managers fail to understand is that indexers know how the recording of dates "works", but the individuals finding the indexed records at a later date have no idea about these practices, and hence gain a mistaken impression.
You cannot blame the hard-working indexers for effectively providing false information, but if a date cannot be assumed (if not directly shown) I think it would be better to leave the event date blank, rather than create such inaccurate records.
I would ask if any other website operates its indexing projects in such a manner: from my checks I am yet to discover one. Which is why I have, for some time, been urging FamilySearch to revise its practices / project instructions.
0 -
Here's an example: birth certificate for Maurice De Landsheer. On the first line it gives the date of the certificate as 29 March 1897, but on the 6th line it says "dewelke ons heeft verklaard dat eergisteren om twee uur s'morgens..." (whom has stated/declared to us that the day before yesterday at 2 am). So, the birthdate is 27 March 1897, not 29.
0 -
We can't assume that "yesterday" is less precise than saying the exact date, since the reference date is already on top of the certificate. It was a matter of choice of the clerk who wrote the certificate how to specify the exact date, some wrote it in words, but most didn't. It's still as valid for our records.
1 -
I am just an ordinary FamilySearch user and can see your argument here. The problem is with convincing the FamilySearch Indexing managers that their methods of indexing dates go against reason, logic and fact. Two days before the 29 March is always going to be the 27 March, but their argument is that is "interpretation" and, as the actual date (27 March) is not written on the document, the only date that can be indexed is 29 March. Exasperating, isn't it? The facts are completely clear, but an incorrect date for the event must be recorded, because of "project instructions".
0
