This is a test. This is only a test.
We occasionally see this warning on television directing us to a specific station to receive information in case of an emergency. Although this is not an emergency we are conducting a test. Ancestry’s ultimate goal is to get more content onto the site to help you, others and future generations have greater success in finding that missing link.
This test is to determine if a slight change to our indexing process in the World Archives Project keying tool will get us closer to our goal and still maintain an acceptable quality standard. We have taken a few rolls of previously keyed content and placed them into a new review format to test a Single Key with Review option. We would like to invite those of you who are arbitrators to help us test out this process.
The two collections we have chosen are located in the “Arbitration Projects” tab under the project names:
TESTING – Jacksonville, Florida Area City Directions
TESTING – Pennsylvania, U.S. Naturalization Originals
For more complete instructions click here.
Once you have completed reviewing a few image sets we would love to hear your thoughts about the new process. Please send feedback to worldarchivesfeedback@ancestry.com.
Thank you!
The testing Jacksonville project has been “in processing” for some time now. only keyer “testtgn” with 250,000 records keyed.
Only arbitrators Anna F and Christa C of WAP.
Also, it does not as of the time of this note) appear in the arbitration tab for me.
The instructions of the Jacksonville project state it’s one of two using the A – review system.
But it’s not: it’s one of 5. The other 3 were released some time ago to a small group of test keyers. (One is now In Processing already)
My comments about this so far: jacksonville is going to be SUPER frustrating to arbitrate because missing records will not be so easy to find in the match records phase. You will catch them only on the Review phase.
Because of bug (you can call it intended behavior, if you want, it’s still bad.) Any time you have to go back to the match records (or Review) portion. you must RE-arbitrate all records up to the point you had to insert a record.
So what I say to A-review for more than a handful or records per image: forget about it. Or fix the tool so records can be added, deleted and moved without having to trash previous work.
If it sounds like I’m peeved at WAP right now, that would be a correct impression. For dumping the State data we keyed in the Illinois Nat index and replacing it with a default. And the wrong default.