Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [FHCNET] Re: Arbitrating and Indexing

Expand Messages
  • John Vilburn
    Kathy, that is a valid example. However, the purpose of indexing is to allow people to find the records. Once they have found the record, they should verify
    Message 1 of 3 , May 1, 2012
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Kathy, that is a valid example. However, the purpose of indexing is to
      allow people to find the records. Once they have found the record, they
      should verify the data.

      And as a counter example, I know personally of a couple who got a
      marriage license, but never got married. On their marriage license there
      is exactly what you describe. The marriage date is entered, but crossed
      out. However, they did live together as husband and wife and raise a
      family. When in doubt, perform the sealing. If they were never actually
      a couple, the sealing won't mean anything. But if they were, the sealing
      means everything to them.

      John


      On 4/30/2012 5:39 PM, kgrant100@... wrote:
      >
      >
      > I'd like to give an example of why the policy to index crossed out
      > information is not a good idea. A few years back I came across a
      > marriage license
      > record, I believe it was, where the information had been crossed out. A
      > little more investigation revealed that the marriage apparently hadn't
      > taken
      > place after all. Yet someone indexed it, and a temple sealing was
      > performed
      > for the couple.
      >
      > If the enumerator or record-keeper crossed something out, there was
      > probably a good reason for it. It doesn't make sense to index crossed out
      > information.
      >
      > Kathy
      >
      >
      >
      > In a message dated 4/29/2012 9:37:01 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
      > FHCNET@yahoogroups.com <mailto:FHCNET%40yahoogroups.com> writes:
      >
      > Based on the following, I believe that the otherwise blank document
      > that I
      > referred to below, with one line crossed out should have been indexed.
      >
      > Document ID: 102817
      >
      > Corrected Information:
      >
      > <_https://help.https://help.https://help.<Whttps://helhttps://help.https://_
      > (https://help.fam
      > ilysearch.org/publishing/347/102817_f.SAL_Public.html#top) of page>
      >
      > Some records have corrected, crossed out, or replaced information.
      >
      > · If information is crossed out and replaced, type the replacement data.
      >
      > · If information is crossed out, not replaced, but the original
      > information can be read, type the crossed-out information.
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • RSchell1223@aol.com
      My wife telephoned FamilySearch and asked for direction concerning crossed out information on the 1940 Census. The missionary she spoke to told her to include
      Message 2 of 3 , May 1, 2012
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        My wife telephoned FamilySearch and asked for direction concerning crossed
        out information on the 1940 Census. The missionary she spoke to told her
        to include the information with a line drawn through it.

        Ron Schell
        Turlock, CA

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.