tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post4070472000244345650..comments2023-04-20T12:46:11.858-06:00Comments on The Ancestry Insider: The World Has Had Enough of Silly PresentismsThe Ancestry Insiderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-73522970898586267932011-01-22T20:49:59.216-07:002011-01-22T20:49:59.216-07:00Dear AI;
The vendor in this case is FamilySearch. ...Dear AI;<br />The vendor in this case is FamilySearch. I had a lengthy correspondence with them about their silly indexing of La Crosse. They failed to understand the problem. As far as they were concerned, if two indexers agreed that the place name was Saleiope, then Saleiope it was. The fact that one could search for a surname of Smith or a first name of John in the 1875 Wisconsin state census in La Crosse and get NO results (because they were indexed in Saleiope, Lalewpe, etc.) didn't seem to bother FamilySearch in the least. Now that's a silly presentism! --Not So SureAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-52434073555588248142011-01-14T17:52:08.899-07:002011-01-14T17:52:08.899-07:00I'm fascinated to learn that there is a word -...I'm fascinated to learn that there is a word - "presentism" - to describe "historical analysis in which present-day ideas and perspectives are [used for] interpretations of the past". <br /><br />Some years ago I coined my own term - "chronologism" - to embrace both this phenomenon and the accompanying mindset, which invariably views the past as unsophisticated, backward and inferior compared to the present.Carohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04977450933277241692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-7007767078311950982011-01-14T15:25:52.162-07:002011-01-14T15:25:52.162-07:00I see Ancestry indexing mistakes very often One o...I see Ancestry indexing mistakes very often One of my favorites was found recently in the obituary collection in which Jesus Christ was named as the deceased. In reality, it was for one of the "other persons mentioned" who "went home to be with her Lord, Jesus Christ."Jack Coffeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03649768599179736262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-49274672939671340062011-01-13T13:43:38.550-07:002011-01-13T13:43:38.550-07:00AI, your presentation is very well put.
Now if An...AI, your presentation is very well put.<br /><br />Now if Ancestry.com could only be convinced to drop the made-up intra-household relationships that are not actually given, in extractions and encoding for US Federal Census enumerations 1880+. Invented parent for grandchild of head-of-household and invented spousal relationships are among the errors of this type. The provisions for user-suggestions do not include these items.Geoloverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12050268303916428230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-80892249485984650362011-01-13T11:53:41.283-07:002011-01-13T11:53:41.283-07:00In regards to the Iowa and Indiana 1850 census rec...In regards to the Iowa and Indiana 1850 census records State abreviations were the first intial and the last so both Iowa and Indiana had the same intials. And I believe that Iowa may not have been a State at that time, only a territory. It is important to keep in mind the history of States and how the also affect our owm research. I found this out the hard way when looking for my Indiana ancestry with the Ia place of birth.\in 1850.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-12701077267849320162011-01-13T06:39:27.715-07:002011-01-13T06:39:27.715-07:00Dear Not So Sure,
I should have been more clear. ...Dear Not So Sure,<br /><br />I should have been more clear. The vendor can display both a keyed value and an interpretation of the keyed value.<br /><br />As shown in the example, the interpreted value is shown in editorial brackets.<br /><br />Laleropes [La Crosse]<br />Saleiope [La Crosse]<br />Lalewpe [La Crosse]<br /><br />Had the vendor done what you did, return to the source and re-keys with more context, then the better keyed value replaces the keyed value:<br /><br />La Crosse<br />La Crosse<br />La Crosse<br /><br />Note these were vendor corrections. User corrections are a different animal.<br /><br />-- The InsiderThe Ancestry Insiderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02490682912125335188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-58847510927867389872011-01-12T13:51:59.149-07:002011-01-12T13:51:59.149-07:00I have discovered ancestors born in Indiana indexe...I have discovered ancestors born in Indiana indexed as being born in INDIA. Just a not for those who are searching for people in Indiana...check India as well.tablyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-56709852740610600992011-01-12T09:18:48.885-07:002011-01-12T09:18:48.885-07:00Anonymous is somewhat correct. The Indexers are su...Anonymous is somewhat correct. The Indexers are supposed to index what they see and not interpret. On the other hand if it is a variation that is unknown or not clear they can index as blank for the searcher to interpret on their own.FranEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00727917499152200255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-7358427355477180042011-01-12T07:28:50.555-07:002011-01-12T07:28:50.555-07:00# Indexers key exactly what is seen; any interpret...# Indexers key exactly what is seen; any interpretation is secondary.<br /># Vendors display exactly what is keyed; any interpretation is secondary.<br /><br />I'm not so sure this is always a best practice for indexing. FamilySearch indexers have indexed La Crosse, Wisconsin at least 13 different ways in the 1875 census of Wisconsin, including Laleropes, Saleiope, Lalewpe, and more ridiculous ways. So how is one who is doing a place-related search supposed to find all those ridiculous spellings? When it is known what the spelling is supposed to be (e.g., from the film title, the manuscript cataloging, etc.), why not correct the nonsensical eyeballing of the indexers?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5512311610334754148.post-55904766075041195082011-01-12T03:19:44.362-07:002011-01-12T03:19:44.362-07:00On a somewhat related topic, in the 1960s/70s LDS ...On a somewhat related topic, in the 1960s/70s LDS Four-Generation Project, vowels were to be left out of county and state name submissions. Maine was thus MN. When the IGI was released to FHCs on fiche, the Zip Code had made Minnesota MN. I found several Maine ancestors now mistakenly listed in Minnesota by computer people entering info from these old family group sheets. I wonder if this has ever been corrected.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com