Talk:World Archives Project: Oklahoma, Indian and Pioneer Historical Collection and Index

From Wiki
Revision as of 14:18, 26 November 2013 by Mugglesi (Talk | contribs) (Questions and Answers)

Jump to: navigation, search

Feel free to add to or edit information in this discussion tab as necessary.  Please take time to become familiar with the General Keying Standards and be sure to read all instructions on the main project page.  (Please note that in case of a discrepancy, project level instructions always trump general keying standards.)

Extra Keying Helps

Common Keying Errors Found by Reviewers

Key only the city in the residence city field.

Key ALL of the birth place in birth place field.

Key only family members on the subsequent interview page.

If there is a date use interview page. If there is no date, use subsequent interview page.

Pages that only have a name at the top of the page should be classified as a 'cover page'.

Please do not key names from these cover pages.

Do not key the word 'County' in the birth place field.

Do not key prefixes in the given field.

Do not key suffixes in the surname field.

Questions and Answers

If you have a keying question that is not answered on the project page or in any of the information above, click “EDIT” and ask it here. (If you click on Rich Editor you won't have to worry about formatting your entry.) Then click “WATCH” at the top right on this page and you will be notified via email when an update has been made.

  Q: Do we key in cemetery inscriptions as burial pages or as cover page entries? They usually have multiple names per page listed at a burial ground. The header is: Carselowey, James R. - Cemeteries - Cherokee - McLaughlin. Below are all inscriptions of gravestones - there are multiples per page plus multiple pages - I've had whole sets with just these inscriptions. Advise?

A: Yes key the records as burial records. --Wiedwoman 22:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: "Employee" is a valid relationship in the keying tool for this project. Do we key employees of the person being interviewed when listed?

A: No. We are only keying the names of family members. --Wiedwoman 22:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Q: Even though the instructions only exclude the interviewer, we are not keying other people named in the stories (e.g. neighbors, clergy, teachers, etc.)?

A: Same as answer from above.--Wiedwoman 04:27, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: If a narrative in a Subsequent Interview Page is not explicit in stating who is being interviewed, does it get labeled as a Cover Page? I have a full page of narrative, with names mentioned, but they are mentioned in 3rd person, and I have seen pages where the only name along the top is actually the interviewer's name.

A: I would think when an interviewers name is at the top of the page that we would key the main character of the narrative and their relatives. --Wiedwoman 07:46, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: I have come across two interviewers who are listed as Mrs Husband's first name and last name. Since no prefix Do I put Mrs M C in given name place. If we don't it will look like the husband is being interviewed.

A: Use [blank] as her given name with another record for her husband. --Wiedwoman 18:17, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: Instructions are to not key the interviewer, however... I have a narrative written from the interviewer's perspective AND the interviewer is related to the person the narrative is about. What happens then? Does the interviewer get keyed, since he is actually related, and also has written the interview as if he, himself, has been interviewed?

A: Yes, in this case we would key the interviewer as the original record. --Wiedwoman 02:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: If an interview's Page 2 (or subsequent page) doesn't indicate who it is about, but is directly following (in the same image set) a page with the name of the person it's about, can that information be carried over (unlike normal keying rules) IF there is irrefutable evidence that it IS the very next page in the narrative? (I have one of these, currently) If that is not allowed, must it be labeled a cover page?

A: Data should not be carried over from one image to the next. If there is data that you can determine is related to the individual being interviewed it should be keyed. For example, if the record states that they were "born on September 20" you would mark the name fields [Blank] (Ctrl+B) and enter the birth date information. We are able to associate the records from one page to the next when we process the data. Another example is if the record states, "Their father, Jack Anderson lived in..." You would enter Jack Anderson in the name fields and Father in the Relationship field. Annafechter 21:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: If an interview's Page 2 (or subsequent page) has a narrative that does not indicate who it is about, and does NOT directly follow a page we could glean information from, do we label it as a cover page? (I suspect the next 4-image set following the one I am doing now will have some of these)

A: See the answer above. Annafechter 21:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Q: I have 2 sets with the following "Cherokee Claims" format. My thinking is to label the first pages of them as Interview Pages, Ctrl+B (blank) the dates, and label subsequent pages in that type as Subsequent Interview Pages. OK Pioneer what do I do with this.png

A: You may need to ask Anna. I think I would just key interviewee name. --Wiedwoman 01:23, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
    Additional - Yes, I had intended on only keying the claimant's name (what I'd consider the "interviewee," for lack of a better label) on each one. What is your opinion on the labels for them? First one in a "claim" as Interview Page, following ones as Subsequent Interview pages would be the only logical labels, I'd think. Your thoughts?

Q: Adding onto the previous Cherokee Claims question, I've seen a few claims where the original affidavit is followed by another by a 2nd Cherokee individual stating they have knowledge of the 1st Cherokee individual's claim. I've been keying the 2nd name as a record but with no relation to the first. Is that right? I know we're only supposed to be doing familial relations but proof of any Cherokee individuals seems quite pertinent.


  If you have a suggestion or would like to make an addition to the project page, click “EDIT” and post your suggestion here. (If you click on Rich Editor you won't have to worry about formatting your entry.) Then click “WATCH” at the top right on this page and you will be notified via email when an update has been made.

My opinion: This entire project needs to be redone later to include all names in the records. A lot of subsequent interview pages, I know, are still talking about family members, but I can't key them as such because I can't assume anything from the page I'm on when relationships are not specifically stated. Right now I am keying a history of Sequoyah by his ggg-grandson, but on the 2nd page, it doesn't state this relationship. It only gives the interviewee's name at top and the continuation of Sequoyah's marriages and children. But, since this is not the interviewee's wives and children, and I cannot assume anything, I cannot key a wealth of wonderful information. Also, a lot of interviews are about town histories, gangs, tribe histories, etc, and we cannot key any names because they are not relatives. Please tell me we can redo this project at a later date!! ~lrs~

I agree, there is a huge amount of information being skipped because of the way this is being keyed. If it isn't redone later, I would hazard a guess that some other group, outside of's purvey, will do these records more completely, and Ancestry will miss out on the kudos and potential funds they would have received otherwise. (MAB)

I would love to see this project changed so we type an entire interview. Just gets interesting and you move to another one.