Genealogy Chat

Using the 'free search' tip on this board, for whiich many thanks, I have been looking at several of my ancestors. One thing that has become apparent is the poor quality of the transcriptions, eg Scrivens appears as Serivens. Have others suffered this problem? Do 1911/FMP really expect customers to pay premium rates for sloppy records?

The Daily Telegraph printed letters from people complaining about transcription errors on several days in the last couple of weeks.
J*

If you pay for the transcript or to see the original page, you get the chance to change the errors for them !!!!

I don't know if it applies to 1911 census, but I think a lot of transcription work is farmed out to India, 'cos it's cheap. So some poor indian in bombay has to spend all day trying to transcribe names and places that he's never heard of,. Thats not an excuse, It's just the greediness of fmp. I Can just see there CEO saying "Get it done cheap, who cares if its wrong the mugs who'll pay a fortune for it will put it right for us" Allegedly!.

I remember when the 1901 census was first released......DITTO became a surname !!

Bear in mind, when moaning about the site, that the census forms were filled in by the householders, whose writing may not have been very good............

Has the thread relating to the 'free search' tip disappeared?

I can't see it on here today and I'm sure it was on the first page of the tips board last night as I copied and pasted it onto a word document.

Jeannie

I managed to find my grandad down as "William Simond Siggs" on the index - I know his middle name was Everard so I think that's a mistranscription somewhere.

Mind you, Siggs has always been a bad name to look for - I'm still hunting for his uncle Daniel using my bank of "alternative spellings" and I found his mother Maria Ann down as "Narion". And Maria's sister Betsy Barnett is still puzzling me - she was "Bessie Barnell" on Ancestry in 1901 and I don't think she married.

It may end up being a case of just hunting away - a shame we can't search by birthplace, though. (The address trick is good - I've found that very useful.)

Hi Folks

Glad you all enjoyed the thread yesterday, but I'd remove the instructions from this one if I were you.

I have had an email from Genes and apparently FMP didn't take too kindly to the tip.

To save yourself from getting a slap on the wrist I'd remove it - honest!!

Well I for one haven't minded paying out for credits. I've found both my Grandparents together on 1911 and after searching for 20 years ....I am sooo happy..........now to continue looking for their BMDs...

the free thing still works

So am I happy... yes it might be a little bit expensive but having within 5mins of getting my credits found info that proved I have an Italian great grandfather. No wonder I'd hit a brick wall. And some other info led me to another genes member who has so much family info...well, it would keep me busy for a few years. I never realised trees could get so big!

The problem I have now, is it worth paying the extra for a copy of the actual census form? Is the Geogre spelling correct as in the transcript or should that be George. I'll probably end up buying a couple to find out but anyone know what the quality is like?

Why are you getting all het up about mis-transcriptions?

Yes, it's hard ...... but it is nothing new!!!!


It has happened on ALL the other censuses .... and we the searchers have to correct those as we find the errors.



One instruction given to transcribers is that they must write down exactly what they see ........... they cannot make changes.


If you have ever really looked at the census images, you can see where anyone could have problems reading copper plate script. Combine that with your almost illiterate ancestors, and there are bound to be problems.


We're all darn lucky that we're getting to see the 1911 now instead of having to wait another almost 3 years, until January 2012.


Have you ever thought that the rush to satisfy public demand could have contributed to the hurried transcriptions?



sylvia

The given name Virtue seems to have caused a problem. I have two in different family trees, one is Virtne the other Virtie

Graham I have certainly found it worthwhile getting the actual images of the census returns (earlier ones) - you do get more personal information particularly with reference to occupations. To give you an illustration - I had the actual dates of some distant relatives in a tree. He was described as a silk merchant. Working backwards looking up his wife he was described as a divinity student and was staying with his future wife 's family whose father was a Unitarian minister. They were all living in Lancashire at the time, and I was able to pick up the names and occupations of their various children over quite a period. I had earlier found someone of his name in a later census living in the Isle of Wight - which seemed improbable but when I got the imaged census return I saw he was now a Unitarian minister himself (with the wife and some of the children corresponding). And later still after his death I found one of his daughters had gone back to Lancashire and was a teacher, having never had a job before. All this suddenly made the family very human as opposed to names on a chart. All this information from the images was free - given that I've just upgraded to GR gold.

How did FMP find out??????????????

Someone must have told them!!!

Ann

Or they have someone checking the boards of geneology sites, to guage public opinion, maybe not though, but some big companies in other fields have people basically employed to keep and eye on the information out there about the 'product'.

Thanks Det and Elizabeth for the info. I'll be getting a couple shortly.

As for the number of occupants in a room... I must have had such luxury -only 8 in 3 rooms.

n

It's not just transcription errors, it all depends what the head of the household wrote down,
Spent ages looking for a Jane Sewell nee Wallis only to find when I looked at a Wallis Image that her father had put her down as Mrs Herbert Sewell.

Oh such fun!