Talk:FamilySearch Indexing Updates

From FamilySearch Wiki

(Difference between revisions)
(Sortable: table made sortable once again)
Line 13: Line 13:
 
:Hi April, I have reapplied the table formatting so that the table can be sorted on any of the columns. I hope that in future the table contents are amended so that the formatting remains. Although it appears that maybe the whole page is replaced from a working copy of the data held in another place. I say this as I noticed that the category was also lost in the most recent updates. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 16:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 
:Hi April, I have reapplied the table formatting so that the table can be sorted on any of the columns. I hope that in future the table contents are amended so that the formatting remains. Although it appears that maybe the whole page is replaced from a working copy of the data held in another place. I say this as I noticed that the category was also lost in the most recent updates. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 16:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
  
Sortability comes and goes: some weeks it's there, some (like now) it's not. Can we please either make the list permanently sortable, or always sort it by project name? (Sorting it by percentage is like offering a cemetery directory sorted by plot number: utterly useless except in some very unlikely scenarios.) -- [[User:JPmiaou|JPmiaou]] 18:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)  
+
Sortability comes and goes: some weeks it's there, some (like now) it's not. Can we please either make the list permanently sortable, or always sort it by project name? (Sorting it by percentage is like offering a cemetery directory sorted by plot number: utterly useless except in some very unlikely scenarios.) -- [[User:JPmiaou|JPmiaou]] 18:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 +
 
 +
:Hi, I have today changed the formatting (once again) so that the table is sortable. I can not guarantee that the formatting will not get overwritten next time the information is updated, but I'm hopeful that everyone can agree that it is better when it is sortable. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 12:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
  
 
== Missing Projects  ==
 
== Missing Projects  ==

Revision as of 12:47, 26 April 2012

This question or concern has been resolved.

Help us improve the indexing and arbitration of his project.

Click the Edit This Page button to help index this project. Messages will be removed after careful review by support.


Contents

Sortable

Page was way better last week when it was sortable. Now i have to go back to coping and pasting into my own spreadsheet again just so I can sort it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aprilrobertson (talk | contribs) 19:35, February 13, 2012 (UTC)

Hi April, I have reapplied the table formatting so that the table can be sorted on any of the columns. I hope that in future the table contents are amended so that the formatting remains. Although it appears that maybe the whole page is replaced from a working copy of the data held in another place. I say this as I noticed that the category was also lost in the most recent updates. --Steve (talk| contribs) 16:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Sortability comes and goes: some weeks it's there, some (like now) it's not. Can we please either make the list permanently sortable, or always sort it by project name? (Sorting it by percentage is like offering a cemetery directory sorted by plot number: utterly useless except in some very unlikely scenarios.) -- JPmiaou 18:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I have today changed the formatting (once again) so that the table is sortable. I can not guarantee that the formatting will not get overwritten next time the information is updated, but I'm hopeful that everyone can agree that it is better when it is sortable. --Steve (talk| contribs) 12:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Missing Projects

Projects are missing. For example, New Jersey, County Marriages. Granted that less than 300,000 records have been indexed, but if you are going to exclude new projects from the % and also exclude them from the new project list, please explain why. Example: "Projects with less than ___ records will not be listed here." — Preceding unsigned comment added by McCormickMW (talk | contribs) 00:40, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Project Order

I'd find the data more useful and accessible if the projects were in alpha order by project name rather than by percent complete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oxxguy (talk | contribs) 15:06, August 23, 2011 (UTC)

  • One of the old pages had a table that could be sorted by column. That would be helpful here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garymaher (talk | contribs) 03:37, September 3, 2011 (UTC)

Percentages

I'm not clear on the meaning of the percentages. Is it the percent of indexed batches that have been arbitrated? Is it the percent of all batches in the project that have been arbitrated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garymaher (talk | contribs) 03:37, September 3, 2011 (UTC)

There needs to be wiki project update pages for each and every project. People have lots of questions and some of the current update pages are somewhere between nonsense and totally useless with no information and almost totally useless.

For instance, the 1930 Puerto Rico Census.. NOTHING.. People have questions on names and other things.. between Project Instructions, the empty Project Updates page, Field Helps, and Basic Guidelines.. there is no answer..

Also, the Civil War Headstones project,  Indiana marriages, Illinois, Chicago- Catholic Church Records... also have no helpful wiki page.

In case you are not familiar... with a wiki update page.. people can ask a question on the discussion tab... and FSI and update/answer the question on the main wiki page for that project.  Here is an example of a Project Update wiki page: https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/FamilySearch_Indexing:_US,_New_England%E2%80%93Naturalization_Index_1791-1906,_Project_Updates

A Update wiki page needs to be created for each project AND the discussion page needs to be created so that people can click on the discussion tab to ask their questions.

Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezink (talk | contribs) 15:50, September 13, 2011 (UTC)

Indexing Projects Update Page

Why do you NOT read what you are saying?

You reference https://www.familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/FamilySearch_Indexing_Updates


to answer my question of what % of the US Colorado 1885 State Census is INDEXED.The link you sent me tells me what % of the US Colorado State Census is ARBITRATED!  I take it from this scenario that no one knows what % of the Colorado 1885 State Census is INDEXED.

Thanks for nothing.  Or maybe you don't even know the difference between Indexed and Arbitrated?

Patricia A Johnson, Fort Collins, Colorado 22:52, January 1, 2012 (UTC)

FamilySearch Indexing Update

My rate was low beacuse tehre is no mention about the Italy Torino projects. Where are they?