FamilySearch Indexing: US, Illinois, Cook County—Deaths, 1959–1994, Additional Helps

From FamilySearch Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


FamilySearch Indexing: US, Illinois, Cook County—Deaths, 1959–1994, OverviewFamilySearch Indexing: US, Illinois, Cook County—Deaths, 1959–1994, Project UpdatesFamilySearch Indexing: US, Illinois, Cook County—Deaths, 1959–1994, Additional HelpsFamilySearch Indexing: US, Illinois, Cook County—Deaths, 1959–1994, FAQFSI Tabs Additional Helps.jpg
  Click here to learn how to use the wiki.

Additional helps disclaimer.jpg

Link to additional help for for US Illinois Cook County Deaths 1959–1994 Part B
(Blog comments are us help others)

Q: If the Occupation box reads "None," "Infant" or "Child" -- what should be indexed in the Occupation field?

  • This arbitrator presumes that we index what is there, in the absence of any directions saying otherwise - but official clarification would be nice; many indexers seem unsure
  • Clarification in this area is definitely needed. This arbitrator feels the fields should be blanked since "None", "Infant" or "Child" are not occupations.
  • But the Field Help only says, "Type the occupation that was written on the record." And then, "If the occupation was not recorded or was written as a variation of the word 'unknown,' press Tab to skip this field." It doesn't tell us to decide if what's written there is an actual job and only index it if so. The issue becomes: where do you draw the line in defining an occupation? I've seen indexers blank "Housewife" and "Student" too using this logic.
  • This arbitrator considers an occupation as relating to something one does -- "housewife" and "student" relate to activities, while "infant" and "child" do not -- and arbs accordingly.
  • Agreed.... As an indexer I feel an occupation is quite different than terms such as infant and child. I also find it disturbing that arbitrators have no definitive guideline for this as I will then get my keying marked wrong a certain percentage of the time depending on individual presumptions.
  • ANSWER: If a non-occupation was written in the occupation field, such as a title, then the occupation should be marked as blank.

Q: If the Informant box includes both a relative's name AND a clerk's name, which should be indexed?

The new PDF shows that only the relative should be indexed when two names are recorded in informant box (but doesn't clarify whether if only a clerk or hospital representative signs it, that name should or should not be indexed).

  • When I got chatted online with support, twice, I was told not to index everyone BUT hospital staff.

Q: If the box Funeral Home contains a signature (presumably a funeral director) rather than the name of the funeral home, should the name be indexed?

  • This arbitrator thinks we should index the individual's name, if the name of the funeral home is not given.
  • Agreed, definitely could use clarification on this too... .

"This Arb believes names should not be indexed. Only Funeral homes...

Online support stated this field should only be indexed if there is a funeral home listed. It should not be indexed if there is a signature of a funeral director.

Online support is NOT a final answer. See the Q and A about Informant's Name above where PDF says to index relative's name and online support says only index hospital staff. Nothing is cast in stone until it's on the official page. In addition to that, many times the name of an individual IS the name of a funeral home. How does one make that judgment call?

  • ANSWER: Signatures of names should not be indexed as funeral homes.