Hard-to-locate FS images

Emily, I totally agree with you that the new record-delivery structure at FamilySearch can be confusing—both to use and to cite. For a decade or so, FS has done a great job of creating “suggested citations” that worked well. Some of the current “suggested citations” are creating significant problems.  You’ve given us a good example. Let's see if we can sort things out for you and others.

So that everyone can follow our discussion, here is the image for the URL cited in your Paragraph 3, together with all the FS headers and sidebars:

You say: "I decided that 'Probate/Estate Case Files' would be considered a title."  This title issue lies at the core of the problems you are having in using the records and citing them.

PROBLEM 1:

The “title” you've decided upon does appear at the upper left of the screen, below the URL.  (Actually, it’s just the first part of the identifier that FamilySearch places in that position. The full descriptor is “Probate/Estate case files: Posey. Probate Estate Case Files 1849.”)

This upper-left position is the location in which FamilySearch supplies one of the following:

• some sort of identifier or description of the record set that’s being imaged (as in your example, imaged above).

OR ….

• The title of a named collection with a path to follow through various menu selections (as in the unrelated example posted below).

 

 

Speaking of the images you actually used, you say:

“I cannot find them in the catalog, online under images or via full text searching.”

That is because the words that appear in that location (the words you decided upon as a "title") are a descriptor. They do not represent any NAMED COLLECTION.  To test this, go to FamilySearch.org > Search > Records. There you will find a query box to locate anything that is in a named collection.

 

 

In the spot that is flagged in red, if we type in the FamilySearch descriptor “Probate/Estate Case Files,” we get no hit.  If we type in "Indiana," then look through the list of named collections for Indiana, we get no hit. That tells us that there is no named collection for Indiana probate records at this point.

PROBLEM 2:

Actually, the problem is bigger than this. Going back to my screen-shot above, if we look to the right of the document, we see a side bar with information about the record. In the bottom right corner, we see a suggested citation:

"Posey, Indiana, United States records," images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-CQY9-5F56?view=explore : Oct 21, 2024), image 1 of 121; .

That suggested citation also implies that Family Search has a named collection called “Posey, Indiana, United States records.”  That is misleading. As with the other words you copied from the upper left, when we go to FamilySearch.org > Search > Records and use the query box for collections to type “Posey, Indiana, United States records,” we get a “No Results” response.

 

One of two things seems to be happening here:

• Someone new to writing citations at FamilySearch has tried to create an Evidence Style citation without understanding the problems they’ve caused. 

Or ...

• Family Search has created a new named database (aka collection) titled "Posey, Indiana, United States records," but that collection title has not yet been entered into the catalog that is currently online.

I will, this afternoon, initiate a discussion with a FamilySearch contact who may be able to help us clarify the situation.

PROBLEM 3:

The citation you have drafted is this:

Posey County, Indiana, "Probate/Estate Case Files," Volume B000015132Z, Box 4, Daniel Barton, inventory, 25 February 1846; imaged, FamilySearch (Https://www.familysearch.org : accessed 11 October 2024) image group 114416145 > images 1-2 of 91; [repository of originals not cited; originals are at Indiana State Archive, Indianapolis, Indiana.]

I have used coloration to distinguish each of your three layers.  For those layers, you have followed a clear pattern:

• Layer 1 intends to cite the original record or record set.
• Layer 2 cites the website.
• Layer 3 (the “citing …” layer) points out that the original repository is not cited but  you know where the originals are.

The issues center upon Layer 1:

Layer 1

• This draft citation identifies Posey County, Indiana as the author/creator of the record; but there is nothing on the image itself to say so. When I back up to the start of the images, I see nothing that says so. That identification comes from the website's sidebar in which they are telling us that the record was created by Posey County.
• Assuming the website's information is correct, then the “title” that you give was not created by the entity you cite as the author/creator: Posey County, Indiana. The words of your "title" are words put together by FamilySearch to broadly describe the group of records in which your image appears. 

For layered citations to online images, there is one rule we can never break without making a citation unworkable. Details that identify the website (and words used by the website to identify their offerings) should NEVER appear in the layer in which we identify the original record.  (See EE4 §3.16 for “The Rule That Has No Exception.”)

If we choose to emphasize the original record in Layer One, then the details we put there must come from what we, ourselves, see on those images and can verify for ourselves from the images we examine.  When the provider (in a sidebar, a frame, a header, etc.) gives us a description of the record or tells us that the record is supposed to be XYZ, we have no way of knowing that information is correct. Yes, providers do err. Their employees are human and make the same kind of errors we make.

All of this is why that last layer exists in citations to online images. If our provider gives us a description of the record set, or tells us where a record set is found, then we put that information in our last layer.   That’s where we say the provider is “citing …..”

PROBLEM 4:

The exact URL that you give leads to screen with information that differs from your cited image numbers:

• As shown in my first screenshot, the URL leads to a screen that states: “Image 1 of 121.” To the right, the sidebar says that it is image group 114280729.
• Your citation says “image group 114416145 > images 1-2 of 91.”

In an effort to reconcile this, I have

• used FamilySearch.org > search > catalog and entered the IGN number 114416145. The result screen says “No results found.”
• used FamilySearch.org > search > catalog and entered the IGN number 114280729 that appears in the URL you gave as “FHL’s suggested citation” that led me to the image. Again, I get “No results found.”

Apparently, the issue is obsolescence in the FamilySearch catalog—i.e., FS's decision to not continue updating the old catalog while the new catalog is under construction. 

In the process of trying to reconcile this, another issue became apparent:

• The long URL that you gave from FS's suggested citation led to a record for William Young, said to be in vol. B000013920J, Box 12. 
• Your draft citation using FamilySearch’s landing page > IGN > image number, cites a totally different record for Daniel Barton, attributed to vol. B000015132Z, Box 4.  

Because I cannot locate the Daniel Barton record using the  path you gave, “FamilySearch.org > IGN 114416145 > images 1-2 of 91,” my Evidence Style citation at the end of this response will use the William Young record.

PROBLEM 5:

In the case at hand, we cannot construct a citation to the original record, for use in Layer 1. We are told that they are Posey County records. However, from what is imaged, we don’t know know the name of the Posey County agency that created the records. We don’t know how that agency identifies that record set. We don’t know how those records are arranged or how any record is found within that record set (files, folders, boxes, etc.). We don’t even know—not from the images or from the FamilySearch description—where the original is housed. 

Therefore, an Evidence Style citation would not attempt to lead the citation with the identification of the record. 

SUMMARY:

An Evidence Style citation for this Family Search offering would lead with FamilySearch in Layer 1. My altered details are in red.

Layer 1:

FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-CQY9-5F56 : accessed 11 October 2024) > image group 114280729: Posey, Probate Estate Case Files 1849 > image 1 of 121, receipt to William Young from Indiana Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 11 October 1852;

Layer 2:

citing “Volume B000013920J, Box 12,” with no identification of the repository [this researcher has found the originals of this set of records at Indiana State Archive, Indianapolis, Indiana.]
 

    Assembled:

FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QHV-CQY9-5F56 : accessed 11 October 2024) > image group 114280729: Posey, Probate Estate Case Files 1849 > image 1 of 121, receipt to William Young from Indiana Mutual Fire Insurance Company, 11 October 1852; citing “Volume B000013920J, Box 12,” with no identification of the repository [this researcher has found the originals of this set of records at Indiana State Archive, Indianapolis, Indiana.]

UPDATE ON FAMILYSEARCH CATALOG:

After Emily's question, above, I contacted an appropriate authority at FamilySearch and provided a link to this Q&A. The quotable portion of the response is this:

Starting 8 June 2021 FamilySearch ceased to add digital assets into the catalog. Starting September 2022 FamilySearch ceased to add physical assets into the catalog.

The cited image group, 114416145, was captured on 19 February 2024 and published on the 21st. Consequently, it is not found in the catalog. However, it can be found under Search > Images. ... Use the Advanced Search options and select the Record Type “Probate Estate Case Files.” Set the place to Posey and the date as desired, such as 1846 in the cited example. Somewhat serendipitously, the metadata includes the name of the decedent. Including ["Barton, Daniel"] in the keyword field will return that particular image group.

Work is proceeding on the catalog. An incremental release will occur this quarter. It will unfreeze the updating of physical assets. Digital assets will not be unfrozen until sometime in 2025. You are invited to critique the changes that are being made to the catalog for this quarter’s release. Check it out at https://beta.familysearch.org/search/catalog.

The cited image group is also included in a full-text collection, “United States, Indiana, Legal, 1853 to 1874-08-31.”

EE