that particular missionary must be new. Normally it is not rude response. Provision is not in place yet to deal with corrections. David S. On 1/16/2012 8:05 PM, Karen Tippets wrote: > I recently emailed Family Search about an individual in my family that was > indexed from a census as Raymond Booker. His name, as I see it, is really > very much clearer as to the man's actual name: Benjamin. His wife shows up > clearly as Sarah, though part of the end of the name is kind of messy, as > is the case with many of the records. > > I emailed Family Search and got an almost rude reply about how corrections > to the indexing can NOT be made. (They didn't even spell my name right > when they copied it from my email, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised > that some people don't think much of a name being misread on a transcribed > record.) Am I the only one that is running into this on Family Search's > indexed records? Even with a request to at least put up an alternative as > Ancestry is finally starting to do, the person who replied wasn't willing > to discuss the issue. I figured we had a higher degree of accuracy with it > going through three different sets of indexers, counting the > arbitrator--but I'm beginning to question it. > > Karen >