FamilySearch Indexing: Passenger Lists, FAQ
Click Wiki Presentation to learn about making submissions. Use this page to ask all questions about this project. Please include a share batch number, if possible, for clarification. Hold the batch as long as possible before submitting it. Comments will be removed after review.
US,Massachusetts - Boston Passenger Lists 1829-1891
Indexer problems/Arbitration problems
1. Indexers and arbitrators are using Ship descriptions in the ships name, ie: Bark Twin Seas…. do not insert the type of ship the correct way should be ‘Twin Seas’
2. Country to which they severally belong, Many folks leave city ,province state etc in this area, many folks subtitute the city/province/state with a Country name… If it isn’t written there ,don’t write it in
3.Country to which they severally belong, Many folks will replace a Colony name or what appears to be a province name with a Country name : ie Nova Scotia which was a British Colony and not a part of Canada it also included parts of Maine at the time, look up the histories if you’re not sure, on that note Cape Breton is not a Country, it has been part of Nova Scotia since 1763. New Brunswick was part of Nova Scotia till 1784..
4. Page Numbers - On most images a single number appears usually upper right on the image, it also appears written where the ship name should be , it isn’t the ship name, and on some records a smaller number appears as well. The larger number is usually the cargo record number, the cargo could include 20 pages (smaller number). Which number is appropriate? Who knows? Till that is clear I use both. But One indexer may use one the other indexer uses the other, someone has to be wrong.
We are asking on 3, 4 (5 is in the Additional Helps) - 1 is covered in the field helps and 2 in the Basic Indexing Guidelines (which we invite all indexers and arbitrators to read)