Moderator Control Panel ]

Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Share your thoughts with your fellow family historians – and the Who Do You Think You Are? Magazine team – here

Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby meekhcs » Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:43 pm

Lots of chat on FMP about this. Personally,I cannot think why the collaboration is necessary.The records are already "out there" and the Family Search site is free......unless it is paving the way for them to become a fee paying site, or if FMP intend using all the extra records it gains as a means to increase their subscription rates.

Whilst the service provided by Family Search is an excellent freebie, the accuracy of their records can often be called into question. Surely by copying them onto their site, FMP will do themselves more harm than good.

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1557
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby Sylcec » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:08 pm

There has already been some collaboration between Familysearch and FMP and also Ancestry (possibly others as well). Certainly the index pointers to the English census on Familysearch use FMP data and it is made clear that to see the original image you will need to pay a fee to FMP or whoever.

Regarding accuracy of records - in my opinion the accuracy of transcribed data on Familysearch - where it has been created as part of the controlled extraction process - is no better but no worse than similar data on FMP, Ancestry etc. One should never rely solely on transcribed data. The LDS have a very extensive network of Family History Centres (some with very limited opening hours) and societies which act as agents, but there is the ability to order up microfilms for viewing at these centres. Using this method I have undertaken research through Britain, 3 European countries & about to embark on a 4th, India etc, West Indies, and others.

Increasingly the LDS is digitising its vast collection of microfilms and many more of these are available on the Familysearch site - but are NOT indexed - you need to browse them image by image. (Incidentally, I am not a member of the LDS, just a fan of their resources).
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby junkers » Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:59 pm

I agree that this collaboration seems to bring few advantages to researchers. I find this strange given that FMP run by the same company that runs Scotland's People (SP) has the transcripts for Scotland but that SP only have the images, so it is not a complete service.

On the question of transcriptions surely just linking to wrong transcriptions does not help at all! and I think that Family Search is far better than some organisations including Ancestry. I agree with Sylcec that indexes are only indexes and anyone doing research seriously would look at the original records.
junkers
 
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby meekhcs » Wed Oct 23, 2013 10:38 am

Please, I am not knocking LDS/Family Search, and yes I realise that collaboration between itself and other sites takes place, but this will be taking it to a whole new level.

LDS Family Search is a great site, and I applaud the fact that so much information is made available for free. I use it a lot, and they have made huge strides in the past few years with the digitisation of records etc., but it still contains a lot of "third party" records.

I am questioning why FMP feels it is necessary to add all the Family Search records to their site,including the "third party" ones which do contain a higher proportion of in accuracies. The site cannot cope with the amount of records it holds at the moment, is often down, or various records cannot be accessed. The world of subscription sites is highly competitive, but in my mind quality will always out weigh quantity. In the past FMP have announced the acquisition of sets of records which have then only partially appeared, or failed to appear at all! I have always been a fan of FMP but I will certainly think twice before renewing my subscription next time.

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1557
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby Sylcec » Wed Oct 23, 2013 11:39 am

I didn't think you were "knocking" FamilySearch, Sally, but I did feel the need to clarify what seems to be a common misunderstanding about their records in general.

I also confess that I had not read the press release about the new 'collaboration', but have not found and read it here https://familysearch.org/node/2412. Frankly, I am somewhat confused about what FMP is aiming for here, except maybe to be a 'one-stop shop' for family history. Nothing is mentioned about fees and charges in the press release, and frankly I would be very surprised indeed if they will be able to charge for viewing records which have been provided by FamilySearch. They are very careful indeed to operate as a charity, with all their records freely available to view. The only time a charge is made is for the costs in shipping/supplying microform records on loan, and very basic photocopying costs at Family History Centres.

Also, I totally concur with your statement that FMP doesn't seem able to cope with the records that it presently has available and some of their indexing is certainly less than optimal. Unlike Ancestry, which many folk like to bag because of their indexing, you cannot see enough information on an FMP index to decide whether it is worthwhile looking at the full record.
Cheers, Sylvia

PS: Maybe we are spoilt for choice - do you remember researching in the days before the internet?! :)
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby meekhcs » Wed Oct 23, 2013 4:30 pm

I am a family history newcomer, taking up the cause when my husband and I "retired" from business in 2006, before that our work hours were far from the norm, leaving no time for hobbies or interests! Thoroughly hooked now, but would never have made the strides I have without the internet. However love nothing better than visiting record offices etc to discover things for myself and generally dig around.

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1557
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby junkers » Wed Oct 23, 2013 7:47 pm

Visiting local archives/record offices is still fun, rather than looking at a computer screen, although you have to be selective, i.e. how far away is it. I can certainly see local authorities being tempted to close/reduce their archives if people don't use them.
junkers
 
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:59 pm

Postby pete25 » Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:45 am

Ancestry.co.uk transcribed most of my Whiteheads under 'Whitchead' (note the C) making it very difficult for me to find who I was looking for. After a very very long time of searching (bare in mind my subscription was running out) it was another Whitehead researcher who pointed out this transcription error hence enabling me to finally find who I was looking for.
I then contacted ancestry.co.uk demanding a refund noting that they had made a very big mistake. I say a big mistake because I've never ever met anyone going under the name of 'Whitchead'. I now must add, I never got a refund...charming!
I have posted this because I feel it important to stress...it's not always the records online that are the most reliable.
Happy searching,
Pete.


Sent from my iPhone using WDYTYA Forum
User avatar
pete25
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:35 pm

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby meekhcs » Fri Oct 25, 2013 12:06 pm

I have just received my latest copy of WDYTYA. Imagine my surprise, having started this thread on FMP/FamilySearch, to read, in News in Brief, of a major collaboration between FamilySearch and Ancestry which will put over 1 billion records on line! I gather the records will be indexed, digitised and put on line with the help of thousand of volunteers. If I was a volunteer for FamilySearch I am not sure I would be happy about Ancestry profiting from work provided by volunteers!

Sally
meekhcs
 
Posts: 1557
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:43 pm
Location: england

Re: Collaboration between FMP and Family Search

Postby Millst » Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:45 pm

FamilySearch.com does have quite a lot of scanned records in its Historical Collection (scroll down from the search box). I have used these to find a Norfolk family that did not appear in any other listings but was in the scanned Bishops Transcripts.

FindMyPast has a collaboration with the National Archives. I have tried using this - I find a soldier's record on the TNA website, giving First Name, Surname, date of birth, place of birth and regiment. When I click on this, there is a box to click on to go into FindMyPast. I then have to search again for the soldier and, more often than not, there is a list of twenty to thirty or more with the same surname and most with no first name or just an initial, no date of birth and no regiment. I'm not sure whether FMP have just been ultra lazy and not indexed the records properly or what. I then have to go through the whole list to find the soldier's record that I originally found on the TNA website. Perhaps the system is not working properly or something.

Although I like Ancestry very much, there are lots of exceedingly stupid errors in transcriptions especially in census listings. Whether these are Ancestry's errors or errors from the past, I don't know. I have 'corrected' lots of errors in names etc., which look really obvious to me.
Millst
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 9:24 pm

Next

Return to Genealogy chat


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests