Talk:Social Security Death Index

Accuracy and context
This article needs to take into account information available from the Administration's website about different forms of the Index and the fact that the Adminstration does not endorse any derivative sources. See, for instance, http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/ssa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=149. Further, not everyone who has died who has a SSN will appear; this is evident if you try to map published obituaries to an instance of the Index (as I've done personally). This is explained in part at http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com/ssdi/missing.html. Finally, access to application records via Form SS-5 should be included. If I have time later, I will make these additions to the article, but I invite someone with more experience, maybe a professional genealogist or a person who has worked with the Master File at the Administration, to do a better job than I could. Regards, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 07:10, 30 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Rewrote second paragraph. Corrected "There are several websites that offer it online, many of which are affiliated with the Mormon Church." Many sites offer the SSDI online, but I know of only one affiliated with the LDS church: FamilySearch. Expanded on the reason the SSDI is invaluable by listing information provided. Expanded on the "hand written application form" by naming the form and indicating what it contains. Added "Further Reading" section with link to RootsWeb's SSDI tutorial and SSA article on genealogical research. NextExit 07:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

External links removal
I'm taking several of the external links out of the article, which is explained individually below:
 * Rootsweb: SSDI search ~ this is one of dozens of sites that offer SSDI searching; no need to focus on one or another particular genealogy portal
 * Social Security Death Index - Online Searching ~ same reasoning as for "Rootsweb: SSDI search" link
 * Rootsweb: SSDI Tutorial ~ this does provide some portal-independent information, but this information should be available from a government site ... I'll look into replacing it with a non-commercial link.
 * --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 17:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It makes no sense, though, to leave the main Wikipedia page bare of a useful link. Just because more than one site offers a useful search is no reason to bar all of them. Pick one, and add it to the page. --Ed Pegg Jr

I agree with Ed and have restored the links to Rootsweb; I believe the article is incomplete without links to a few reputable sites which give access to the SSDI. --jcarroll (talk) 01:53, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I, too must side with Ed and JCarroll on the "missing links" issue. I disagree with arbitrarily selective omission of potentially valuable outbound links. Not all DMF/SSDI search engines provide the same search results or require the same depth or type of data. More significantly, many are free while others charge subscription or per-search fees. To view stark evidence of this, visit http://stevemorse.org/ssdi/ssdi.html?engine=.

Finally, just because a government agency "should" provide certain types of information but chooses NOT to do so is not sufficient grounds to delete private resources from the page. Indeed, precisely opposite is true IMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrissieLuckey (talk • contribs) 06:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Death Master File
I propose that this article be merged with the article Death Master File. The Social Security Death Index is simply the commercial name for the Social Security Administration's Death Master File. They contain the same data, so virtually all encyclopedia information about one is true about the other. After the merge, there would be a redirect from whichever article title would no longer be used. — Walloon 03:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support merge. There is no good reason for their to be two different articles.  Since there has been no opposition in the 6.5 years since the merge was proposed, anyone is free to conduct the merge.  Andrew327 18:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I do not support the merge. The Death Master File is a comprehensive list of deaths. The Social Security Death Index contains far fewer deaths and is purposed for public consumption. The two have diverged quite a lot since the announcement in November 2011 from the Social Security Administration. While I cannot find the original link to the SSA's announcement, I found a blogger who explained the differences here http://stephendanko.com/blog/15164 --Ignarp (talk) 19:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

OPPOSE MERGE. After conducting just cursory research via external resources, it's apparent that two many distinctions between DMF and SSDI exist to combine the articles. As previously mentioned, not all purportedly deceased individuals' data is contained in SSDI. Even more significantly is the 2011 change that effectively renders SSDIs useless, since randomization eliminated the previous geographical association with the first 3 digits of SSNs. Consequently, DMF and SSDIs are two very different types of sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrissieLuckey (talk • contribs) 06:35, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Social Security Death Index. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080222151141/http://www.wsmv.com/news/15357541/detail.html to http://www.wsmv.com/news/15357541/detail.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120110115351/http://www.abc2news.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/website-stops-displaying-social-security-numbers-for-recently-dead to http://www.abc2news.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/website-stops-displaying-social-security-numbers-for-recently-dead

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)