Talk:FamilySearch Indexing: US, Texas—Deaths, 1890–1976, Project Updates

Help us improve the indexing and arbitration of this project. Click the Edit This Page button to make suggestions. Messages will be removed after careful review by support and any updates will be posted to the Project Updates page. Many commonly asked questions, such as indexing crossed out information, have already been answered in the Basic indexing instructions.

&lt;fck:hr&gt;

1/18

Since we are now indexing the name of the County, if no City or Town was entered, do we also enter the word "county" to differentiate it from a City or Town? No _____________________________________________________ Marital Status...  Sometimes the word  Child or Infant appears in the Marital Status field. How to index that? Index Child or Infant entries  as  Single   or  tab over and leave field empty? Here is example:  https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-1951-25170-29063-90?cc=1983324&amp;wc=13682430

______________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________

Is the 1/16 update addressing the county issue of birthplace when only a county is recorded on the death certificate? If the county is not to be entered into the city/town field, could you please state that? I have not been entering the county and there has been a lot of discussion about this. &lt;fck:hr&gt;&lt;/fck:hr&gt;&lt;/fck:hr&gt;

Slide#7 in project instructions explains that a woman's listed middle name MAY be her maiden name and the correct way to ascertain and to index this if this is the case. However, I have been doing this and the arbitrators are NOT following this instruction and changing the individual's name back to read as if it were just the middle name. Could you please make this an individual update on the first page so it is more prominent and likely to be followed by the arbitrators. I have been corrected for this on EVERY batch I have submitted this way and I have already done more than 50 of them. Thank you.

I agree. The directions are clear on this and the arbitrators are not reading them nor following them.