youtu.be
Did you know that it is so easy to get help on FamilySearch.org? I just created this video to show how easy it is.
https://youtu.be/l80vaAEUbBYComentarios
-
Thank you. I love it.
0 -
For those maybe indexing our South Africa Dutch Reformed Records here is a little help for you. Remember if you cannot read the language return the batch and select another one. This is what I wrote: Please take the time to read this. It is repetitive but please be patient and read it anyway. I am not sure if everyone in our group read the conversation in the thread below. Some indexers indexed these documents as Memberships. After saying they were Baptisms, Alec Waldeck and Robyn Learmonthy mentioned they were actually Births. they were correct according to the link below. It will be good for everyone to copy this link and save it.
This is confusing - the dates are birth dates but the places are the church where they were baptized. I have had a look at the project - the Entry type covers Baptism/Birth/Christening so the argument about if this is a birth or baptism "event type" date does not matter. There is no field in this project for birthplace so the place on the index can only go into the "baptism parish" field.
Alec Waldeck gave us a link ...http://southafrica.mypeoplepuzzle.net/NGK_Cape_RingBooks...
Below is the type of document you need to look out for. Naam = Name. Datum = (Birth) date. Plek= Place (name)
I need to apologize to this group. I feel I handled some things really badly. I am sorry I hope I can be forgiven. I know it is important to follow Project instructions and Field Help. I teach by this all the time. I am the Lead Trainer for our Group. Nolene Lossau Sproat is a very experienced Genealogist for South Africa and she created our FaceBook group called, "Indexing South African Records on FamilySearch." Since October 28th, 2017 we have indexed 6.5 Million images. We have worked very closely with Elder Howard Cheney and we miss him dreadfully. We could always rely on him to help us get things done or get FamilySearch to add extra explanation where the instructions were contradicting themselves etc. I mentioned earlier the reason why we are adding South Africa onto our records and I would like you all to see where we are coming from and why we are doing it. It is my hope that no one will take South Africa off the Indexing our Team is doing. They will be automated back to Kuwait, Ireland etc. Here is what Nolene explained why we are doing what we are doing.
How to Index Place Names
Background
In the early days on Indexing records for Familysearch, various projects had different instructions regarding how to Index Place Names. These different instructions have, over the years, caused many disputes and irritations to indexers and reviewers alike. The differing instructions and interpretations thereof by Indexers and Reviewers have been the single biggest cause of 2nd and 3rd reviews of documents. This has generated enormous extra work for everyone trying to get the records indexed.
Familysearch now appears to be on a mission to Standardise place names. It seems that this standardisation of Place names is causing problems worldwide and more specifically on the South African records. A recent example is with Kingwilliamstown in the Cape. The Project was originally indexed on a “type what you see” basis and many records only had KWT written on the document. This place was indexed, as per the Project instructions to "type what is written" as KWT. In a recent Standardisation of this place name, the place is now Indexed/standardised as Kuwait! This is just unacceptable and undermines the hard work of the indexers and reviewers.
In order to try and ensure that this type of error does not occur continuously, and until Familysearch come up with a method whereby the place name cannot to standardised to another country, unrelated to the Project, we suggest that indexers and reviewers handle place names as follows:
1) Always try and follow the project instructions
- If the project instruction states, “type all levels of localities, separated by a comma” AND if the document shows the place as Belfast Transvaal and the Project is a South African Project – then Index as “Belfast, Transvaal, South Africa”. The addition of South Africa is not in accordance with Project Instructions but will hopefully ensure that this Belfast is not standardised to Belfast, Ireland! If the document only has Belfast written on it, add the Province and Country as given in the Project Title – You know that you are indexing, for example, Transvaal Marriages – so add the Transvaal, South Africa, as given in the Project Title.
- If you adding an unwritten Province and South Africa to a place name– ALWAYS use the spelling and names as given to the Project Title.
- If no Province is included in the Project Title then just add South Africa as the country.
2) Historical Place Names
- South African Places and Provinces have seen many changes over the years. For example, the Western Cape has, at various times been known (amongst other names) as the Dutch Cape Colony, Cape of Good Hope, Cape Colony, Cape Province etc. These changes to the official Province names can be confusing and it would not be feasible for indexers/reviewers to know each name in its correct time context. If the document has a Province name written – then index it as written on the document. If there is no Province written on the document, then index the Province as per the Project title. The 25 South African Projects already published on Familysearch appear to have the Provinces reasonably standardised to include the following:
o Cape Province
o Eastern Cape
o Western Cape
o Natal
o KwaZulu Natal
o Free State
o Orange Free State
o Transvaal
o South Africa
We need to remember why we are indexing these records. We are not transcribing the records – we are indexing them so that researchers can find the records and decide for themselves what the records say. It is nonsensical to index records in such a way that researchers will never be able to find them. The Country, at the very least, needs to be indicated as South Africa – until Familysearch can ensure that during the Standardisation process the South African connection is not lost.
0 -
For those maybe indexing our South Africa Dutch Reformed Records here is a little help for you. Remember if you cannot read the language return the batch and select another one. This is what I wrote: Please take the time to read this. It is repetitive but please be patient and read it anyway. I am not sure if everyone in our group read the conversation in the thread below. Some indexers indexed these documents as Memberships. After saying they were Baptisms, Alec Waldeck and Robyn Learmonthy mentioned they were actually Births. they were correct according to the link below. It will be good for everyone to copy this link and save it.
This is confusing - the dates are birth dates but the places are the church where they were baptized. I have had a look at the project - the Entry type covers Baptism/Birth/Christening so the argument about if this is a birth or baptism "event type" date does not matter. There is no field in this project for birthplace so the place on the index can only go into the "baptism parish" field.
Alec Waldeck gave us a link ...http://southafrica.mypeoplepuzzle.net/NGK_Cape_RingBooks...
Below is the type of document you need to look out for. Naam = Name. Datum = (Birth) date. Plek= Place (name)
I need to apologize to this group. I feel I handled some things really badly. I am sorry I hope I can be forgiven. I know it is important to follow Project instructions and Field Help. I teach by this all the time. I am the Lead Trainer for our Group. Nolene Lossau Sproat is a very experienced Genealogist for South Africa and she created our FaceBook group called, "Indexing South African Records on FamilySearch." Since October 28th, 2017 we have indexed 6.5 Million images. We have worked very closely with Elder Howard Cheney and we miss him dreadfully. We could always rely on him to help us get things done or get FamilySearch to add extra explanation where the instructions were contradicting themselves etc. I mentioned earlier the reason why we are adding South Africa onto our records and I would like you all to see where we are coming from and why we are doing it. It is my hope that no one will take South Africa off the Indexing our Team is doing. They will be automated back to Kuwait, Ireland etc. Here is what Nolene explained why we are doing what we are doing.
How to Index Place Names
Background
In the early days on Indexing records for Familysearch, various projects had different instructions regarding how to Index Place Names. These different instructions have, over the years, caused many disputes and irritations to indexers and reviewers alike. The differing instructions and interpretations thereof by Indexers and Reviewers have been the single biggest cause of 2nd and 3rd reviews of documents. This has generated enormous extra work for everyone trying to get the records indexed.
Familysearch now appears to be on a mission to Standardise place names. It seems that this standardisation of Place names is causing problems worldwide and more specifically on the South African records. A recent example is with Kingwilliamstown in the Cape. The Project was originally indexed on a “type what you see” basis and many records only had KWT written on the document. This place was indexed, as per the Project instructions to "type what is written" as KWT. In a recent Standardisation of this place name, the place is now Indexed/standardised as Kuwait! This is just unacceptable and undermines the hard work of the indexers and reviewers.
In order to try and ensure that this type of error does not occur continuously, and until Familysearch come up with a method whereby the place name cannot to standardised to another country, unrelated to the Project, we suggest that indexers and reviewers handle place names as follows:
1) Always try and follow the project instructions
- If the project instruction states, “type all levels of localities, separated by a comma” AND if the document shows the place as Belfast Transvaal and the Project is a South African Project – then Index as “Belfast, Transvaal, South Africa”. The addition of South Africa is not in accordance with Project Instructions but will hopefully ensure that this Belfast is not standardised to Belfast, Ireland! If the document only has Belfast written on it, add the Province and Country as given in the Project Title – You know that you are indexing, for example, Transvaal Marriages – so add the Transvaal, South Africa, as given in the Project Title.
- If you adding an unwritten Province and South Africa to a place name– ALWAYS use the spelling and names as given to the Project Title.
- If no Province is included in the Project Title then just add South Africa as the country.
2) Historical Place Names
- South African Places and Provinces have seen many changes over the years. For example, the Western Cape has, at various times been known (amongst other names) as the Dutch Cape Colony, Cape of Good Hope, Cape Colony, Cape Province etc. These changes to the official Province names can be confusing and it would not be feasible for indexers/reviewers to know each name in its correct time context. If the document has a Province name written – then index it as written on the document. If there is no Province written on the document, then index the Province as per the Project title. The 25 South African Projects already published on Familysearch appear to have the Provinces reasonably standardised to include the following:
o Cape Province
o Eastern Cape
o Western Cape
o Natal
o KwaZulu Natal
o Free State
o Orange Free State
o Transvaal
o South Africa
We need to remember why we are indexing these records. We are not transcribing the records – we are indexing them so that researchers can find the records and decide for themselves what the records say. It is nonsensical to index records in such a way that researchers will never be able to find them. The Country, at the very least, needs to be indicated as South Africa – until Familysearch can ensure that during the Standardisation process the South African connection is not lost.
@Indexing Chat @Africa Genealogy Research
0 -
Really liked your youtube instructions! I learned a lot and appreciated all you put into this!
0 -
Thanks, I am glad it helped.
0 -
You are very welcome
0 -
Hi there, did you mean to put his in the comment? You probably need to share this in the Indexing Group or South Africa? It should show up in those 2 groups now. Good luck with this!! You gave so much great details that will help others working on these!!
0
