Project Update

Our last update was in September and in the past 3 months we have made great progress.

Projects that have been available for over a year.

The following projects are 100% keyed.

With the increase in projects waiting for the review image sets to be completed we have been concentrating on adding more reviewers – watch for emails coming your way.

In the last 4 months we’ve completed 12 projects and there are now 8 more projects live, and 202,000+ more records searchable on Ancestry!  Each record keyed and reviewed makes a difference.  Thank you for all that you contribute!!

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Other Posts

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Reader Comments

I would love to review if considered.

I also would like to review if you would consider me…

Sandie, Trishzam,
I have replied via email.

If others are interested in becoming reviewers please send an email to

Type your comment here.
Je suis incapable de retourner les documents que j’ai terminés (17 séries de 5) est-ce que quelqu’un pourrait m’aider.
Je parle seulement en françasi

I must be a glutton for punishment… of the two of the projects I have worked on since starting with WAP have been extremely large. These are the Canadian volunteer payroll (I forget the exact name), which was reasonably easy to key, but was quite large, and consequently did not show ‘visible’ improvement. The French Electoral cards are another extremely large collection. The size of the project can affect the enthusiasm with which people choose them to key. Let’s keep the numbers easy. Two imaginary projects to key. one has 1,000 records, the second has 1,000,000. a person keys 100 sets. in the first project, that will reduce the size by 10%. in the second set, by a mere 1%. it can be quite discouraging to work on a single project, only to see the # of sets dwindling slowly and the %-age completed barely changes.
While I know that some projects are much larger than others, and that the record count will vary hugely based on the type of record (the Australian/New Zealand directories come to mind. one set would contain 400 to 600 records, while the French Electoral cards have a grand total of 5 records per set.)
I noticed that the Kansas State census records were split into 4 parts. This was another very large project. Is there a way the larger projects (set count, # of records per set, etc.) could be “equalized” as much as possible, we might have more success in clearing out the big ones… a piece at a time!