Records that don't make sense...and what to do with them

Everyone comes across records on the genealogy sites that don't tell us much and we are puzzled as to where the record came. Such was the case of a posting in one of the genealogy related groups I follow on Facebook.

"Can someone explain to me how and where I can access the actual record for this marriage? I found this index on ancestry, but I guess I am not smart enough to figure out where the actual source document is or how to reference it. It does mention the film number, but that's all I've got (Film Number: 000010066)."

Screen capture from Ancestry.com for the index entry of Lillian E Overlock and Chas A Overlook from the Maine, Marriage Index, 1670-1921 collection.

First of all, never sell yourself short when it comes to your genealogy and family history research knowledge. We have all been in the same boat way too many times. Just by asking the question shows that you are smarter that many others that will just take that index entry at face value. Even I didn't know where that film number came from. Fortunately the hive mind on Facebook did but I'll get to that shortly along with a common problem that I came across with some of the records we use.

What also caught my attention with this query is that the original poster provided all the details needed to help us to answer the question and he was only asking one question. This is something that I mentioned in my post "Questions and Answers: Dos and don'ts". Even better, his question include a screen capture that included the Ancestry logo and the collection name at the top with all the necessary details.

My first reaction when I come across an index entry like this is to click on the link for the other party listed to see if there is any additional information. However, in this case, nothing new was provided:

Screen capture from Ancestry.com for the index entry of Chas A Overlook and Lillian E Overlock from the Maine, Marriage Index, 1670-1921 collection.

Next I will check the "Learn more..." link under Description for the collection. Again, no additional information was provided by Ancestry as to the source other than it was from "Various Maine County marriage collections." Great...it came from a bunch of stuff and you aren't going to tell us from where.

I also noticed that there was no marriage date recorded in the index. That seemed strange to me for an index consisting of marriages.

Fortunately there are many that are familiar with this collection within this Facebook community and they stated that the "Film Number" is from FamilySearch. The hive mind can be so awesome!

So what can you find out about that film number? After logging on to FamilySearch with your free account start a search of the catalog by Film/Fiche Number:

Screen capture from FamilySearch for a search of Film/Fiche Number 10066.

The search reported back that the film/fiche number is for the "Vital records, 1892-1907" authored by "Maine. Division of Vital Statistics; Maine. Division of Vital Statistics." Following that link brought me to this collection that has 184 microfilm reels.

Screen capture of the description for the collection, Vital records, 1892-1907, containing film 10066.

A search for 10066 on the page brought me to the following:

Screen capture from FamilySearch for a search of 10066 on the Vital records, 1892-1907 collection page.

Only one problem, we are looking for a surname that started with an "O" and the digitized microfilm reel has surnames Woodward to Wyzanski. Something is definitely not right. Time to go back a few steps to see if we can straighten out this point of confusion.

We are going to go back to Ancestry and the Maine, Marriage Index, 1670-1921 collection and try searching again but using a bit of the knowledge we have gained. As you can see below I've just entered in the surname of "Overlock" and the exact film number "000010066". It is important to include those leading zeros since that is what the original record for Lillian E Overlock used.

Screen capture from Ancestry for a search of the Maine, Marriage Index, 1670-1921 collection for a Last Name of "Overlock" and exact film number of "000010066".

Only one results appears with that criteria and the spouse listed has a surname of Wotton. A name that fits within the range provided for film 10066 on FamilySearch.

Screen capture from Ancestry for a search results of the Maine, Marriage Index, 1670-1921 collection for a Last Name of "Overlock" and exact film number of "000010066".

Now we can go back to FamilySearch and look for a 1905 marriage in Maine for Grace M Overlock and George B Wotton.

Screen capture from FamilySearch for a 1905 marriage in Maine, United States for Grace Overlock and George Wotton.

That first record looks like a promising candidate and there is even an image available as indicated by the camera icon on the right side. After selecting that entry I clicked on the image that was presented.

"Maine Vital Records, 1670-1921," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939K-RBGW-P?cc=1803978&wc=71R8-F7C%3A1029440301%2C1029483501 : 20 May 2014), Vital records 1892-1907 > Woodward-Wyzanski > image 1681 of 3463; multiple sources, Maine.

I always try to remember to check the next image to see if there are any additional details. In this case the names of the bride's parents didn't make sense to me:

"Maine Vital Records, 1670-1921," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939K-RBR3-C?cc=1803978&wc=71R8-F7C%3A1029440301%2C1029483501 : 20 May 2014), Vital records 1892-1907 > Woodward-Wyzanski > image 1682 of 3463; multiple sources, Maine.

So, what about going to the previous image? I know from experience that sometimes the back of these cards/forms get microfilmed first.

"Maine Vital Records, 1670-1921," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939K-RBLL-H?cc=1803978&wc=71R8-F7C%3A1029440301%2C1029483501 : 20 May 2014), Vital records 1892-1907 > Woodward-Wyzanski > image 1680 of 3463; multiple sources, Maine.

Look at that, there is a Chas . A. Overlock and Lillian E. Overlock listed as the bride's parents! I think we found the image of the document that the original poster was asking about.

How do I know that this image isn't associated with the image before this one? Well I checked that image and it is for a birth registration. So it seems that this image is the back of the form for the marriage of Grace M. Overlock and George B. Wotton.

Why is there a separate entry for Chas A Overlook [as transcribed by Ancestry] and Lillian E Overlock? I'm guessing that the transcribers didn't realize that the cards had a front and back to them and just recorded what they saw, creating a marriage entry for Chas A Overlook and Lillian E Overlock plus a separate entry for Grace M Overlock and George B. Wotton.

So the short answer, which was provided by the others in the Facebook group where the question was originally proposed, is that the film number is from the FamilySearch collections. However, the longer answer found a marriage registration for a daughter and a possible explanation as to why the original index entry was created.