United States Census, 1930 (FamilySearch Historical Records)/Known IssuesEdit This Page
From FamilySearch Wiki
| This page was created by FamilySearch Historical Records personnel. It details problems identified within this collection and answers to those problems.
If you wish to comment, please visit the talk page to post your comments.
NOTE: If the census record is for Puerto Rico (both a Spanish and English speaking country), the possibility exists that the race designator "B" could have been for Blanco (white) and not Black.
Question #1: Why am I not able to view the image when I login, but am directed to Ancestry.com where I have to pay for the image?
Answer #1: The 1930 U.S. Census is a partnership venture between FamilySearch.org and Ancestry.com. FamilySearch created the indexes which are free to all users. The images may be viewed in several ways.
- Images are available for viewing with an LDS login (available to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), the supporting organization behind FamilySearch.
- Images are free to the public at any FamilySearch Center. Please call the FamilySearch Center to verify that it is certified to view these images.
- Image can be viewed at Ancestry.com for a fee.
A very brief video titled Access to Records may help you understand why we partnership with other organizations.
Question #2: When searching for a child, on the details page it shows the wrong parents. How can I find the correct parents and family?
Answer #2: There are instances where the incorrect family number was entered by the enumerator. On the image check the previous family names to see if the child belongs to that family. This sometimes happens when the parents are on one page of the census and the child is on the next page.
There are other instances where the enumerator added additional children on a completely different page where there is no family relationship, possibly because of additional family members encountered later, or additional room was needed. The indexer had no way of connecting these families. In most cases, the record details page is linked to the correct image and there is a note in the sidebar indicating where the correct family is located. These cases will all have to be reported and corrected on an individual basis.
Question #3: When searching for the town of Empire in Harper County, Kansas, I see Emprie listed instead. Can this misspelling be corrected?
Answer #3: On the record details page, the error in spelling was corrected. The listing for Emprie in Harper County, Kansas in the browse section will be corrected to Empire in the future.
Question #4: In Louisiana there is a page (136) that appears in two different places, city of New Orleans and Orleans County. Which is the correct location?
Answer #4: New Orleans (Districts 1-254), 0054 is the correct location for this image, as it is part of the city of New Orleans.
Question #5: I am trying to find the images for Bridgeton City in Cumberland County, New Jersey. Are they available?
Answer #5: The images for Bridgeton City have been incorrectly located in the Commercial browse point. Districts 01-13 in the Commercial browse point are Bridgeton City images. District14 are the Commercial images.
Question #6: Where can I see the images for Onondaga County in New York?
Answer #6: The Ououdaga and Anondaga browse points were misspelled in the indexing process. These waypoints should both be labeled Onondaga County.
Question #7: I am looking for images for Mantua in Ohio, Portage County. Are they available? Are there other missing images from Ohio?
Answer #7: The images from Portage County E.D. 67-13 through E. D. 67-35 which includes Mantua are not available. The images from Pickaway County are missing as well and are not available for viewing online or from microfilm at FamilySearch. This set of records is available at Ancestry.com. Please see viewing instructions in Question and Answer #3.
Question #8: My ancestors in Byers, Clay County, Texas have been combined with what looks like many other families. Can you explain this?
Answer #8: In the browse point Texas > Clay > Byers > 0002, the enumerator failed to record household numbers beyond household 59. Because of this, families from Sheet 3A Line 40 through Sheet 3B Line 50 have all been indexed as one family. The names are indexed and linked correctly to the image. Your best option to determine correct family groupings is to look at the image itself.
If you encounter additional problems with this collection, feel free to report them at email@example.com. Please include the following information:
- If searching a specific collection: please include the name of the collection; include all search criteria used, including name, event, dates and places.
- If browsing this collection: please include the full path you followed to where the problem occurred. The browse path is located above the Image viewer window.
For example: United States Census, 1930 > Alabama > Coosa > Concord > 0013 > Image 4 of 7.
- If you are reporting a technical issue: please include your operating system and browser version, such as Windows XP and Internet Explorer.
Your assistance will help ensure that future revisions will be considered.
Return to the United States Census, 1930 (FamilySearch Historical Records) Learn More page.
Return to the United States Census, 1930 collection at FamilySearch.org.
- This page was last modified on 5 June 2014, at 21:08.
- This page has been accessed 2,045 times.
Share Your Opinion!
Give feedback on our new look! Tell us what you like, and what you would do differently.Give Feedback