Welcome to the BillionGraves Community! An amazing community of users from every corner of the globe here to help you in your BillionGraves endeavors! Join the movement and connect with others to create the world's largest GPS cemetery database!
Welcome to BillionGraves Q&A, where you can ask questions, receive support, and look at answers from other members of the BillionGraves community.

3,100 questions

4,030 answers


2,662 users

Please tell me you WILL NOT make the new Transcription Page mandantory? It is pathetic.

1 like 1 dislike
PLEASE, tell me you will not make the new transcription page mandantory!!!!!  It is pathetic
asked 4 days ago in Other by Shirley BG Explorer (1,260 points)
Why not, I think it's way better.

Large image and also the implementation of some basic image manipulation, now I don't have to copy/past in to Gimp. To fill in dates is much quicker now, since I can use number for the month field.

But of course it's maybe because I have not used the old transcript page so much to get used to it (as the new one).

But need some improvements.

1. Zoom should be faster.

2. Moving around the picture, does not work perfect. Strange with the click and release then move..

3. Go to Next Image: CTRL + > doesn't work for me.

4. In the "Settings" I like it to remember my changes for the "Simple Mode".

5. They should improve the sanity check when pressing save, it's for instance easy to save someone who is 500 years old.

6. When pressing Ctrl-<I> (add new record), the new record fields do not align up well every time (so I must scroll, and I prefer not to use the mouse so much).
(Editing my comment after playing with the new look some more)  

I definitely like the side by side view.  

I definitely do not like how the image gets rated now.  Before you could do one click to say it's good (which the vast majority are).  Now you have to do two clicks regardless of whether it's good or not good.

I just noticed that you can save a transcription without rating an image.  There is no block like previously done.  Maybe they are (perhaps rightfully) assuming the image is good if you're saving it.

I like that the date issue with (11, 12, 21, 22, etc.) appears to be fixed.

I like when a new person is added that the family name gets automatically entered.  Just have to remember to change it when needed!

I like that the first letter is automatically capitalized.  That is a nice change.

I do not like that the first letter in "others not buried here" is not automatically capitalized.

I like that you can change what is in the simple form vs advanced.  Why can't that be saved to be the default?  Did I miss where that can happen?

I agree with ds that the marriage date should be after the death date.

I would like to see the "add person" button be moved up so you don't have to scroll down to access it.

DS:  I think the names on the left are what BG is thinking might be potentials for duplicates that would need to be merged.  It's kind of annoying when that pops up.

The suggestion was made about the age thing to have some type of check years ago, but nothing has happened with it.

Overall, a positive change!

1 Answer

1 like 0 dislike

Please respond and tell us what you do and don't like about it. They are asking for our feedback so please make practical suggestions.

I used it twice, and last night for about an hour to really test the things I did not like the first go and I have already sent them a BG support response with specific ideas/changes.

1. Need to move the marriage date field below the death date.

2. I like the maiden name in that position, but could see where others might not.

3. The "persons not buried here" works much better. I had a dual stone of two children from different parents who died on the same day (/?reason) and were buried together. I was able to enter the children names and then the parents, for each child, and after a few mistakes on my part, when I refresh, it clearly stated the relationship of the others on the stone for each child. No longer merged and mangled relationships.

4. Have not yet figured out why those other names are popping up in upper left? Anyone know why?

5. Not sure if I like the short version or the advanced version as a default.

6. The military parser does a better job I think, and I like the religious symbol separate. I do wish they would put in fraternal/dcommunity organization symbols. There are a lot of those on stones in the US and it would be nice to have those in the searchable database. For example, all members of Eastern Star in a cemetery?

7. I also like that they have the international alphabet characters in a menu. I have often skipped stones with Spanish or Portuguese characters because it was not easy to get those diacriticals in my computer.

Anyway, I mostly like it so far. Does still need some tweaking.

answered 4 days ago by dswright BG Master (31,520 points)

"4. Have not yet figured out why those other names are popping up in upper left? Anyone know why?"

That's suggestion for merger, it seems like it follow what you type and then update the suggestion. I didn't understand it in the beginning, but then I started to notice it was name that I was writing in my transcript. Then it was possible to click the picture (not the zipper). Then I can see it's the same grave. So then instead I can press the zipper (or if it's merging lanes maybe). And then it will will merge the picture (as identical headstone). Very convenient, because it also fill in what the other person has transcribed (which might be more than I can do with the image I'm transcribing.

" 5. Not sure if I like the short version or the advanced version as a default."

I prefer the short version after I have change present element to my likes in "Settings". But maybe a suggestion would be that the user can shuffle them as well to arbitrary position as well. Anything that speed up transcribe should always be welcomed.