Talk:FamilySearch Indexing: New Zealand–Passenger Lists, 1871-1915, 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.

Non-intuitive
Being told that we can't use Mr., Miss, Mrs., or Master to identify gender is so non-intuitive that we are tempted to say whoever made that up must have been violating the Word of Wisdom drunk and is not to be believed. At the very least there should be a clear explanation as to why.

Abbreviations in Occupation field
Many of the occupations for ship's crew members use commonly used and understood abbreviations, such as "Chf Engr" for "Chief Engineer", "AB" for "Able Seaman", etc. Is there a specific policy for this project on whether or not to expand these abbreviations when indexing? The Field Help simply says:

"Type the occupation that was written on the record. If the occupation was not recorded or contains a variation of the word 'unknown,' press Ctrl+B to mark this field as blank."

No guidance is given on how we should handle abbreviations. I prefer to expand abbreviations when I'm sure of what they mean, and where no specific instructions are given saying *not* to expand them, but the arbitration so far has been mixed, with some accepting the expanded occupations, and others reverting them to the abbreviated form. So I thought I'd better check what the official line is, and get that on the Project Updates page, so everyone can be clear on how we're meant to index abbreviated occupations in this project. Thanks! - Dms246 14:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Occupation : "Labourers and Domestics"
I'm seeing several batches where "Labourers and Domestics" is written vertically across the Occupation column, applying to all passengers generally, with no specific occupation recorded for each individual passenger. I'm unhappy with the way some indexers and arbitrators are assuming that, in these lists, all male passengers are Labourers, and all female passengers are Domestics. There were female labourers back then (such as farm labourers) and male domestic servants (such as butlers, coachmen, etc), so it doesn't feel right to assume male=labourer and female=domestic. Is it acceptable to index all of these passengers with the occupation "Labourer or Domestic"? - Dms246 15:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)