Home› Ask a Question› Search

Permissions Check on Two Record Sets

GFre
GFre ✭✭✭✭
May 13 in Search

The permissions for these record sets seem a little odd, e.g. volume 1 is available to view online but not the others. Just wanted to check that this is correct.

If you have a moment, @SerraNola, or if there's another moderator able to, could you please take a look? Thank you!!

https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/koha:1025189 (Also, I think the end date of the second book should be labeled 1850.)

https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/koha:1244

1

Best Answers

  • SerraNola
    SerraNola ✭✭✭✭✭
    May 16 Answer ✓

    Áine, I can save you the trouble of error checking this one at the FSC, but thanks for offering to help!

    @GFre You are correct in your assumption of a typo for the date 1950. It actually should be 1844. It was hard to read on the cover of the book but dates on the actual documents don't lie. This has been corrected in metadata but not in the catalog. @m how, can you add this one to your list?

    I think that permissions should become Access Anyone (same as the other Civil Order Books) in the next auto-update for 8052865, but let us know if you don't see it change in a few weeks.

    I am confused with the second link in your post for Iowa Probate Records. Was there something you wanted us to look at in that collection?

    https://www.familysearch.org/en/search/catalog/koha:1244

    Also—for future reference, questions about records will get more attention in the Search Category.

    2
  • SerraNola
    SerraNola ✭✭✭✭✭
    May 18 Answer ✓

    @GFre Regarding the Iowa probate journals---it seems that indexes are access Anyone, but the actual probate records are restricted to FSC/AL. #7592179 has both an index and records, but the film has not been divided. #7591346 has been divided and Item 3 containing probate records is restricted, while Items 1 and 2 containing inheritance tax records are fully accessible.

    For the Administration records, it is likely a similar situation where some record types are stipulated for viewing at a FSC/AL while others are not.

    2
  • SerraNola
    SerraNola ✭✭✭✭✭
    June 15 Answer ✓

    @GFre Forgive me, but I'm having trouble remembering how this collection's permissions were set at the time of your original post. I know we corrected metadata for 8052865.

    When I look at the collection now, all are accessible at a FSC/AL with the exception of the first film, as you mentioned. That film, 4203312 is also the only one with "Indiana County Court" as the custodian—all the others are "Indiana Circuit Court". That is likely the reason it is falling outside of the FSC/AL restriction. This may be an error, as logically (which you pointed out), they should have the same restriction.

    Sorry I missed this on the first go-round.

    1

Answers

  • Áine.ní.Donnghaile
    Áine.ní.Donnghaile ✭✭✭✭✭
    May 13

    @GFre
    Have you looked using Images instead of the catalog? For example, the first DGS 4203312 (Civil order books, v. 1-2, 1828-1839) lists 3 items in Images.
    https://www.familysearch.org/en/records/images/search-results?imageGroupNumbers=4203312&pageSize=100

    image.png


    Or, have I misunderstood your question?

    0
  • GFre
    GFre ✭✭✭✭
    May 13

    @Áine.ní.Donnghaile, Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't mean volume 2 on the first example so much as the next item on the list isn't available to be viewed online, while the first is.

    It looked odd that Civil order books, v. 1-2, 1828-1839 was available, even indexed, but Civil order books, v. 3-4, 1839-1(8)50 and onward were only available to view in the FS Center or affiliate library. I don't believe those are available under images.

    1
  • Áine.ní.Donnghaile
    Áine.ní.Donnghaile ✭✭✭✭✭
    May 13

    I spent yesterday at my FSC, and SerraNola and I went over several apparent permissions issues while I was there.

    I can put this one on my list for my next visit. Sometimes, when I view at the FSC or AL, it's easier to understand why something may be restricted because I can see more information.

    1
  • GFre
    GFre ✭✭✭✭
    May 13

    Thank you, @Áine.ní.Donnghaile!

    1
  • GFre
    GFre ✭✭✭✭
    May 16

    Thank you so much, @SerraNola! I'll let you know if I don't see the change in a few weeks on the Indiana records. Also, thank you for advising me to post questions like this in the search category from now on. I will definitely do that.

    In the second link, I mainly wanted to check if it was correct that Probate journal, v. 1, 1851-1860 is available online outside the center and library and has full-text search, but the other journals are restricted and don't have the search, like the next journal, Probate journal, v. 2, 1860-1866.

    Or, that Administrators' and Guardians' bonds, oaths, & letters, v. 1, 1864-1878 is available but not the next book, Administrators' and Guardians' bonds, oaths and letters, v. 2, 1878-1888.

    The Iowa set looked a little odd to be skipping like that, but that might just be the way it is.

    Again, thank you both for your help!

    0
  • GFre
    GFre ✭✭✭✭
    June 15

    Hi @SerraNola.

    You said to let you know if the permissions for the Indiana set didn't change after a few weeks. Unfortunately, they're still restricted.

    0
Clear
No Groups Found

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 47.1K Ask a Question
  • 7.5K Family Tree
  • 6.1K Search
  • 5.4K General Questions
  • 7K Get Involved
  • 1.2K Memories
  • 338 Other Languages
  • 80 Community News
  • Groups