AnneV-Learn
commented
4 weeks ago @geoffj-FUG Maybe I’m not fully understanding but for RG10_1617A isn’t the solution to update the Admin County for the Piece to CAM? It should the appear in the County Stats for CAM rather than NFK.
RG10_1618A has the 'shared VLD file' link populated in the Piece - I do not think it should be populated so I can remove it but again the Admin County for the Piece should be updated to CAM I believe.
Please let me know if you agree with my solutions.
DeniseColbert
Reported by Sue Johnson. My reply to Sue: I have had a look at RG10_1617A and RG10_1618A.
Firstly, RG10_1617 does not exist so Rhoda doesn’t need to do anything. Only RG10_1617A exists. I have it listed as a NFK piece which it is geographically, but it is managed by CAM as it was in a CAM Registration District. I will log this as a bug as it should appear on the CAM county statistics, but it is shown in NFK. The piece is online. When I look in the NFK county statistics for 1871 I see the following: Piece Number (Chapman Code) Piece Name Status Online VLD Files Incorporated CSV Files Unincorporated CSV Files RG10_1617A Walpole St Peter ["RG10_1617a.csv (Suej1949)"] [] I notice that RG10_1618A is not in the CAM county statistics but is not in the NFK county statistics either. There is no RG10_1618, only RG10_1618A. So it must all exist in NFK, but is a CAM piece to manage. There is a vld piece recorded as online for this piece. I will log this one as well.
RG10_1619/19A and RG10_1620/20A are correctly in your county statistics. They are split between the 2 counties and so need to be split and converted to csv files. They are currently vld files.
The issue is that these 2 pieces do not have any records in the responsible coordinator's county (CAM). Because all the records are in NFK they appear to be showing up in NFK county statistics.
Geoff