FTM-TECH-L Archives

Archiver > FTM-TECH > 2011-07 > 1311964583

From: BJ <>
Subject: Re: [FTM-TECH] Changing Ancestry.com data base information
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 11:36:25 -0700
References: <4E31CDA7.90501@anl.gov><4C2E9021003A4FFF9AB4BF85849C610F@claireac3e9bca><4E31DC8F.8080807@cox.net><0E3AF39000B24ED783BB32D77C45EC9E@claireac3e9bca><4E32E30A.90105@cox.net><F86FC0DDE2BD43E0A0B184CC917447FD@claireac3e9bca>
In-Reply-To: <F86FC0DDE2BD43E0A0B184CC917447FD@claireac3e9bca>

I'm sorry but I disagree with your final conclusion.

See comments below.


On 7/29/2011 10:44 AM, Nivard Ovington wrote:
> Hi BJ
> Have you heard the expression "like drawing teeth" well it certainly fits here
> ............................<g>
> If you start with a duff transcript and *add* more duff information
> (ie adding things that do not appear in the original document)
> The result is still a duff transcript that without prior knowledge will not help you find that
> particular person or family
> When you *add* a correction it becomes part of the searchable data in the transcription
> Lets take a scenario
> Fred BAKER and his wife Molly who have a daughter Mary , they are all transcribed as BEEKER
> On finding them someone enters a transcription error correction to BAKER for Fred , knowing Mollys
> maiden name is SMITH they enter her name as SMITH, the daughter Mary is known to later marry a GREEN
> so the surname is entered as GREEN
The suggestion was.
Additional surname "Baker" is added for Fred, Molly and Mary.
Additional surname "Smith" is added for Molly.
Additional surname "Green" is added for Mary.
> (this is as previously suggested)
> You then have in the searchable data :-
> A family of Fred BEEKER with wife Mary BEEKER and daughter Mary BEEKER you *also* have a Fred BAKER
> with wife Molly SMITH and a daughter Mary GREEN
This is not accurate. What you have in the searchable data is
Fred Beeker and Fred Baker
Molly Beeker, Molly Baker and Molly Smith
Mary Beeker, Mary Baker and Mary Green

A search for any of the above names will lead the searcher to the same
record which is still transcribed as Fred Beeker. That record will
still show
Fred Beeker
Molly Beeker
Mary Beeker
> The above family have far less chance of being found than if the transcription correction had been
> corrected to reflect *what it shows in the document* ie all surnamed BAKER
This is where I disagree. It makes it more probable to be found by
researchers who know the family surname is Baker. I will also allow
people who know Molly Smith but don't know her married name Molly
Baker. The same is true for Mary Baker when the searcher only know her
married name Mary Green. All of these people will be pointed to this
one record.
> If the other SMITH / GREEN information and any other sundry detail is added as one of the following
> *as well as the transcription correction* all the better
> Incorrect in Image
> Nick Name
> Maiden Name
> Name Change
> Variation
> I do hope that clears it up as this is getting rather silly :-(
I'm sorry but I don't think this is silly at all. It is providing users
with different perspectives and perhaps them to take the time to add
alternative information.
> If people are *adding* information to the transcribed searchable data that is not in the document
> instead of correcting the bad transcript its hardly surprising that others are having problems
> finding them
I'm sorry but I don't see that at all. It is simply adding alternate
methods for finding the same record which cannot be changed.
> Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK)
>> I have read all of the comments. I think the problem is in the
>> terminology being used and this confuses people. Let's see if we can
>> come to a common set of terms and phrases.
>> Original image - this is the census or in the case of online data base,
>> an image of the original document. I think we all agree that this
>> should not and indeed cannot be changed. The information is there for
>> anyone to view and to interpret.
>> Summary information or the Index information - This is the information
>> displayed to summarize the individuals found within the image. It is a
>> transcription of the data in the original. I don't want to get into a
>> debate about the quality of the transcription. It is necessary so that
>> the computer search engine can find the original image. Again for there
>> own reasons, Ancestry.com does not seem inclined to change this
>> information when a mistake is discovered.
> **********************************
> List information page
> http://lists.rootsweb.com/index/other/Software/FTM-TECH.html
> Online Support for Family Tree Maker
> Version 16 and earlier
> http://pastftm.custhelp.com/
> Version 2008 - 2011
> http://ftm.custhelp.com/
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3796 - Release Date: 07/29/11

This thread: