Every once in awhile I get a curious (and one time, frantic) email stating that they, or their aunt, or their parent, etc., is NOT dead, yet my database says they are.
Yes, I know the person is not deceased :)
When dealing with such a huge database, especially with so many having the same last surname, there is a definite need to put in their last known locality. The only field in this database to put in this information is in the 'Location of death" field.
If there is a complete date, or an "abt" (about) date, then yes, it shows that that individual is deceased. If it says "AFT" (after), then it just means that they were alive on that date and the location of death, if also listed, indicates their last known locale.
A hypothetical example would be for, let's say, a person named George Smith. In his death field it lists his date of death as "aft May 2004" and his place of death as "of Lucas Co., OH". If you look at the notes section of that individual, you'll most likely see typed text that says something like "2004 - mentioned as a surviving son, George Smith, of Lucas Co., Ohio, in mother's May 2004 obit". This gives the observer MUCH more info on George Smith and he's now able to be differenciated from a George Smith of Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, etc. This info merely indicates that yes, George Smith IS alive, and he was last known to be in Lucas Co., Ohio in May of 2004.
I hope this explanation helps! Thanks for stopping by, and if you have any corrections or additional data, please email me with the information at email@example.com