Talk:FamilySearch Indexing: US Veterans Pension Cards, 1907-1933, 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.

Thanks to all of you who are indexing this project. As noted on the project updates page, there have been and will be changes as we try to make the instructions more clear. As we respond to your questions they will be removed to simplify the page. Every item is being reviewed and will be addressed by those who supervise the projects. All comments are given equal consideration. When we respond on this page we usually use bold type. Please help us draw attention to our responses by using simply formatted messages that will draw a distinction between the comments and the responses.

I am finding names of widows on the ledger side of cards, that per project instructions are supposed to be marked no extractable data.

What should I do with these names? Please follow the project instructions.

Examples: U.S. Verterans Pension Cards 1907-1933 [Part A] 004691896. The last 2 or three ledger cards have names of widows. The certificate numer on the ledger card can be matched to the certificate number on the image of the other side of the card, so confusion need not be a problem.

There has been a change in the slide show on pages 12 and 13. These instructions seem to directly contradict the project instructions:

'''DO NOT INDEX: Names of people who received reimbursements or accrued payments, unless the relationship to the veteran or principal person was clearly indicated. Do not assume that a reimbursement recipient was the widow or a guardian unless that relationship was written on the card.'''

Also I believe that it is not clear that a conservator is a type of guardian.

I absolutely understand that these projects are complicated and each project is different from the others, but I have to say that when you make a change like the pages 12 and 13 without mentioning it on the project page, you do a disservice to all the indexers and arbitrators who are working on these records. I care about my accuracy. I want to do it the way you want it done. But please, please help me by making your changes easy to understand, find, and implement. Most respectfully, Carol Yocom.

another person's comments

TODAY Jan 25th, 4:01 PM DSTime -- Page 12 of the 17 page presentation on US Veterans Pension Card says to index the name of the person receiving the payment. That is what I have done when indexing and/or arbitrating these records.I imagine that a lot of these names could be the married daughters of the veteran so their surname does not match.

What an excellent resource this will be to include the name of married daughters !

Today I was indexing another batch and I noticed that the field help for recipient's surname states

" Do not index the names of people who received reimbursements or accrued payments, unless the relationship to the veteran or principal person was clearly indicated. Do not assume that a reimbursement recipient was the widow or a guardian unless that relationship was written on the card. Click here for an example

I think this field help should be rewritten to agree with the example on page 12 because the recipient of the payment [not the fee] is likely a family member even though the relationship is not written down. This is only an index to information it is not the documentation of family relationships.

Best Regards

Widow Card with minor recipients
When adding additional records for minor recipients, should the additional records come after the Widow record or after the second record? It seems logical to me that the children should come right after the Widow.