Why does the name in the search result not match the data in the target record?
Some search results show a quite specific person name, but when the record is selected to view, the name in the record is not an exact match. I thought at first this was a random fluke but it has become more frequent in results.
This search result
is associated with this record
How does the search engine come up with Walter G Brooks ?
The record in question is : https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:3B7F-9T2
Best Answer
-
In recent weeks/months, some of the indexes have lost the middle name or initial. The middle name or intial is present in the record image and was originally indexed. It's just the display that is not showing the middle name.
The record is https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:3B7F-9T2 Your post has a link that has been corrupted by the community software.2
Answers
-
Thanks for the correction Áine.
The consequence of the problem is to increase uncertainty when deciding whether or not to attach the record. From your given example, it would be reasonable to attach the record to Walter G, if you had arrived at the record by searching for Walter G.
I suspect that if you were viewing the record as a list where the focus was another person on the record, then Walter G. would appear as Walter, so it would more likely that a novice might attach a different person to the record.
2 -
I agree that the change to the display is unfortunate. There have been a few discussions about the issue. One can only hope that FS will roll back this change.
3 -
In cases like these we would really appreciate some acknowledgment (from a moderator) that the issue has been passed to the appropriate team to deal.
There are at least two further issues that are currently impeding our work within FamilySearch and Family Tree and it would be reassuring to have confirmation the engineers are working to resolve these problems.
3 -
@Maile L Good morning and hope you had a good weekend. Could you please review this thread and send it up the line, if it is not already on some engineer's list to review and fix? Losing the middle name/initial, especially on common names, is more than unfortunate. It makes searching more difficult and makes it more likely that novice users will either miss finding their target or connect to the wrong record.
Here's an example, from my extended family. Mary Ellen Gilmore L6VV-3WQ was born in Oldham, Lancashire, England, in 1860. In the 1861 census, she and her parents are living with her grandfather, aunts, uncles, and cousins in what must have been a very crowded residence. Since the family is Irish and Catholic, there are MANY women/girls named Mary. Mary Ellen stood out from the crowd before her middle name was lost from the index display. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:M7V5-Q9W
In Search results, her middle name is still present:
Thanks.
2 -
…. and another thing
It seems that the result of a search produces a curtailed list of persons for G.R.O. Marriage records. As a consequence many spouses are missing.
The search result
connects to this record
which shows only the first entry in the list of all other persons in the record.
However, after you attach the person to the record… if you then view their sources, the correct information is displayed as follows:
So why does the record presented after following a search result chop off the other possible spouses ?
Clearly there is something very wrong with the presentation as a consequence of the recent updates.
2 -
@Re Searching, I believe that @Paul W posted something similar regarding the GRO marriage index a few days ago.
0 -
-
I will send this to be researched. Thanks guys.
2 -
@Maile L Thank you!
0
