RootsChat.Com
General => Technical Help => Reference Library => Topic started by: Silverhawk on Saturday 22 October 05 00:00 BST (UK)
-
Another query. Do we copy the info exactly as the census states or do we correct info we know for a fact is wrong?
For example, my great-grandmother Mary Watson is on the 1901 census as being from Crook, County Durham. I know for certain though that she was from Arlecdon, Cumberland. What happened was the family moved from Cumberland to County Durham (via Kirkcudbright) when she was young and in 1901, either out of laziness or just not being able to remember, she's given herself the same birthplace as her younger sister (who was visiting at the time).
Anyone else looking for Mary that didn't already know that bit of family history though, would see "Crook" in the census transcript and end up wasting their time looking there for her birth.
That side of the family have always been very vague with personal info. On the 1891 census, her mother has the wrong name (Jane in place of Sarah), but it's right again by 1901. On one of the censuses, half the family just have "not known" for their birthplaces.
Anyway, part of me says that in the interests of accuracy we shouldn't perpetuate these mistakes. However another part of me is wary of setting a precadent as not everyone is thorough with their research and it only takes a few people making erroneous 'corrections' to mess up the database.
Moderator Comment:
Split off from original thread "Done <--> Not done" to form a sepaerate topic
-
Don't know the answer to this one (yet)
Anybody got any views on this ??
Bob
-
I think if you are absolutely certain that the name is incorrect change it, but if there is any doubt leave it as enumerated because it really should be up to the person doing the research to decide what to do with the information presented...I hope that is not too harsh...but hey it gives us a challenge sometimes...if everything was how it was supposed to be we would not have so many fulfilling victories ;)
After saying that I just sent in some transcriptions last night and I have changed one entry to read Alfred rather than Arthur (as enumerated) as I know for certain through other research that it is incorrect, someone else looking at the same entry would come to the conclusion that Arthur is incorrect without too much delay as the father and another son are also Arthur already, but they would not know who was incorrectly enumerated and what the name should read.
What do you all think? I think maybe places of birth and ages should be left as enumerated, sometimes they give a clue to something else (towns they lived in as children for example) or a sneak peek into our ancestors minds, like my great great grandmother who on all census before her marriage states her age correctly, but on EVERY census afterward is consistently 5 years younger! She was 11yrs older than her husband, but really I think it is cute, if someone had changed her age to the correct one I would have never known about her age obsession :)
Jenny
-
Hi
I have been cross checking my transcription against the official version and have found a number of discrepancies between what I think it should be and how it appears on the original transcription. I think it should be consistent with the original. Perhaps someone could give some guidelines on this.
Regards Ericx
-
In general, I would agree with JenClark on this.
One definite exception would be if it concerns your family and therefore you are absolutely certain.
Although, having said that, the thought occurs, that even in the own family some things are far from certain ;D
Bob
-
In Mary's case, I have her birth certificate confirming "Arlecdon Hill" as her birthplace in 1876. And I've compared the data from all available censuses to make sure I'm looking at the same family each time. The 1901 census was actually the easiest as I had documents from that period (my great-grandparents marriage for example).
-
I have a birth cert. from GRO for a uncle stating he was born 27 Dec. 1890 in Ballymena yet the church records state he was born 20 Dec. 1890 in Ballymoney. What I have done in my records is to add a foot note showing the discrepancy. This is what should be done to census errors as well. I don't think we should change things around but let others know our thoughts & let them decide what is or isn't correct. Dealing with 100+ years old information can not be an exact science so leave the original in it's original state but add a foot note.
J.A.M.
-
I agree with J.A.M, if we had an option to add discrepancies in a notes section that would be great....probably more work for you though Berlin-Bob ::)
That would solve the problem though...
Jenny
-
Should we correct them?
Definitely NOT!
I am a volunteer for the FreeBMD website and we are all strictly instructed to Type What You See, and NOT what you think you know. If you cannot read it, you leave a space.
The early Indexes are handwritten and very difficult to read in some cases.
The same should apply for the census.
I transcribed over 10,000 names for Trudy's Leftovers when she had it and in all cases I tried very hard to transcribe exactly what was written on the 1901 census, not what I thought was written or what I knew it should have been. The first page I ever did was appallingly badly written and should have put me off......!
If you change the entry in the transcription, it is not then a true copy of that page and its entries.
You may know your great granny was known as 'Peggy-Sue' or whatever, but if that is not what the enumerator wrote [say - Margaret Susan, or even, Margaret S], then you must not change it to what you know.
If the transcriber has genuinely mis-read the entry and you can prove this, then, yes, it should be changed to what the handwritten entry says.
If you apply the TWYS then you should not go far wrong.
Best wishes
Claremcg
-
In Mary's case, I have her birth certificate confirming "Arlecdon Hill" as her birthplace in 1876. And I've compared the data from all available censuses to make sure I'm looking at the same family each time. The 1901 census was actually the easiest as I had documents from that period (my great-grandparents marriage for example).
But this is information that you have found over 100 years later, that you BELIEVE is her. You may be 99.999 percent sure that it's her, but what if it wasn't .......
The information on the census return is what she herself gave to the enumerator, he wrote it down and this is what you see on the page and you read. A transcription should be an exact copy only typed of what was on the page. Its not for you to change it years later. A change of any sort makes a nonsense of a census entry. If you make a change you create something that wasn't there at the time that page was written, it means you are making up history to suit yourself.
This is the reason that sites such as FreeBMD and others have the "Type what you see" rule.
Mary
-
Claremcg, 10,000 names! - you deserve a medal, or free chiropractic for the rest of your life. Irene
-
[quote ]
Claremcg, 10,000 names! - you deserve a medal, or free chiropractic for the rest of your life. Irene
Hi Irene
Thanks for that kind thought..... will ask my chiropracter and see what she thinks! <vbg>
And, actually, that was at the time of the changeover; there's a whole load more waiting to be sent up when I catch up with things.
Claremcg
-
Type What You See, and NOT what you think you know. If you cannot read it, you leave a space.
Having re-read this thread, I now agree with Clare, but I'll also accept one or more ? for a space.
One point, however:
If the Enumerator wrote Do. or do or " for ditto, then please fill in with the full details.
The reason for this is simple - when you see the names on an image, then you know what the ditto refers to. But if you are searching by name, and you don't have the previous entry in your search results, then you have no idea what the ditto refers to :(
So to help others, this is one place where you fill in what the Enumerator meant, and not what he wrote !!
Bob
-
Hi Bob
Yes, you are quite right, and yes, I did do that when transcribing all those pages for Trudy, so you won't find any 'do's' or 'ditto's' in mine....
You get so used to doing it that you don't automatically think that others don't know what you know! So sorry, I should have said about how to deal with them.
Best wishes
Claremcg
Type What You See, and NOT what you think you know. If you cannot read it, you leave a space.
Having re-read this thread, I now agree with Clare, but I'll also accept one or more ? for a space.
One point, however:
If the Enumerator wrote Do. or do or " for ditto, then please fill in with the full details.
The reason for this is simple - when you see the names on an image, then you know what the ditto refers to. But if you are searching by name, and you don't have the previous entry in your search results, then you have no idea what the ditto refers to :(
So to help others, this is one place where you fill in what the Enumerator meant, and not what he wrote !!
Bob
-
What if, all the details for a rellie are correct but the place of birth is on the next line down ? ???
Mackiwi
-
What if, all the details for a rellie are correct but the place of birth is on the next line down ? ???
Mackiwi
Hi
Yes, very annoying, but you still cannot alter it. I found one of my husband's possible rellies, listed as head of household and aged 14. Not impossible, you might say, but he was living with his mistress, it says he was married and he's a brewer's carter. He has a son aged 5 and a daughter aged 2. Now that is very precocious!
The enumerator SHOULD have written age '41' but I TWYS just the same, even though I knew it to be incorrect.
If you alter what you see and YOU know your family information to be correct how, then, will the rest of us know that what we see is the original information of that page?
We could all do it, as we type out the page, putting in that bit of info that we know but which is not what the enumerator put. WE might be getting that bit of info wrong as well! :( Could be very misleading. So if you TWYS then its no-one's error but the original enumerator's.
Transcription errors, well... IF they are genuinely wrong, there must be some way of contacting the 1901 Leftovers site and asking for it to be corrected. On FreeBMD they allow a search of that particular page which the entry is on (the pair of spectacles you see beside the entry) and if you see something the volunteer missed, then you can put in a corrected entry notice, the website then contact the volunteer who then changes it and it is corrected on the website. I think I've done about 4 corrections in 18 months.
But they do ask for proof of where you saw the original entry.
Hope this helps a bit.
Best wishes
Claremcg
-
Hi Claremcg
Thank you for that, it was the 1891 census and perhaps I will leave it and just add a note in my tree for future generations to decide what they think. I had checked everyone of that name and it was the only one that had the right birth place.
Mackiwi :)
-
One ancestor that I found had been indexed wrong, I only found it was the correct one by a bit of lateral thinking and checking the other members I knew for sure would be with him, then I paid for the image which was correct. Transcription errors are bound to happen. Maybe the original errors could be left in but highlighted in some way and a note added by the person submitting the information. My reasoning is there will be generations coming after us and it may help them to know. Does that make sense? :-\
-
Hi stewartgenes,
Yes that does make sense, I will make a note for future generations.
I have rechecked the image I paid for , name, age occupation all correct. Just the place of birth on the wrong line. To double check I may see if I can trace the place of birth for the next person on the list. Perhaps that will sort it out !!!!!!! ???
Mackiwi
-
I found some of my husband's family on the 1901 census but, it appeared, that the brother of H's g.grandad had a different surname (Pappe). It should have been Pyke. Then the children (h's grandparents) were called Pappe and Poppe!
Being utterly bemused by this, I downloaded the actual scan of the census... lo and behold, they're all clearly Pyke but the transcriber hasn't read the writing correctly. Should I notify the website in case anyone else is looking for the family online? ???
-
Hi Delphinium
This is a major problem with the way in which the 1901 census project was carried out.
The original transcription was done by guests of Her Majesty, most of whom probably had no real interest in what they were doing. This led to large numbers of people called "Ditto" appearing in the transcription! It also meant that if the original handwriting was unclear, the transcriptions were often not accurate.
The transcriptions were then sent to India to be prepared for the internet, where place names and family names were totally unfamiliar.
Hopefully, because they are being done by family historians with an interest in the accuracy of the transcriptions, the FreeCen project should produce better results!
As other people have said, it is vital that we transcribe EXACTLY what was written on the original - there were enough chances for errors to creep in during the original information gathering and recording process without us making alterations 100 years later. We must remember that a large proportion of the people giving the information could not read and write, so the enumerator had to write down what he heard. If the person giving the information had an unfamiliar accent, or a speech defect of some kind, this could lead to all kinds of errors. For example, how many people outside of Kent would know where "Astonlye" is? Or "Uffam"? Or "Walltum"? (answers on a postcard, please! ;D)
Of course, when we are writing up our own family history, we can "correct the mistakes" by reference to other records, such as birth certificates, baptisms, etc. However, it is still worth noting, maybe as a footnote, what the original record shows.
Regards, Bill
-
If you are using the "other" source for the 1901 census, then there is a facility for notifying any errors and suggesting the correct spelling. Unfortunately by the time they get to your entry, double check it against the image etc. it may well be months before the amendment gets through, but eventually it will, so it's worth notifying them, especially as it does show that a change has been suggested and gives you a clue that others may well have been researching the same person.
Mary
-
Hi
I see we are still wondering, after about a year, if we should change that which we know to be correct from that which we see on the census form.
TYPE WHAT YOU SEE!
Don't type what you 'know'.
If you start tinkering with the transcriptions how is anyone to trust what you have typed?
If you see my name alongside a transcription well, you can trust me to have typed what I saw on the page, but can the rest of us trust you if you have 'added' or 'changed it' to what you know?
I'm sorry if this sounds a bit strong, but you shouldn't still be wondering if you can change what's on the page.
Don't do it. Don't go there.
Put it in your own family tree notes that this was what you saw on the page but know to be incorrect. DON'T put it on the transcription.
Imagine, if you were allowed to do this on FreeBMD! :D
Looking for your relatives is hard enough without these added distractions.
Sincerely
Malise
-
Greetings to all who have replied,
My intention was not to change the official records, just the family ones. I will however make a note om the family tree about the change I have made and why. Also I will enter a copy of the certificate for future generations to see for themselves.
Thank you all for taking the time to reply.
Mackiwi :) :) :)
-
I guess when you are transcribing your leftovers you are in the same position as those people that constructed the 1901 indexes. As you are probably aware they got quite a few things wrong and some people have taken the trouble to submit corrections (including me).
ENTERING THE CORRECT SURNAME IS IMPERATIVE
I have one surname in particular that is wrong on every single census: HIORNS.
It can be entered as Hearns, Hyams or Harris. In other words confused transcribers have entered a name that begins with H and ends in S. It seems like guesswork and it probably is with strange looking names.
If you come across a strange or illegible name then try searching for it at:
http://www.1901census.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ or ancestry.co.uk if you are a member and see what they have entered. Bear in mind they may have got it wrong as well! If the person is over 20 years old then you might be able to find them on the 1881 census at:
http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Search/frameset_search.asp?PAGE=census/search_census.asp
It seems like a lot of work but accuracy of the surname is the most important thing.
PLACE NAME PROBLEMS
If you have a problem with a place name then go to the familysearch site (link above) and near the bottom of the search they ask for the census country and then the census county and finally they have an option list of all the towns in the county. Scroll down the dropdown list until you find your obscure town or village.
I agree that you should not alter legible information just because you have inside knowledge. You even have to resist common sense alterations e.g.
On the IGI index there is the following baptism entry:
Alice Slater son of Charles and Jane Wakeham
A boy called Alice in the Victorian age? His name was Ellis Slater Wakeham.
Alice and Ellis sound similar, hence the mistake. But historically the mistake has to stand.
downside
-
I disagree with most comment. What is written should stay. A transcription error is one thng, but the transcription must reflect what is written.Otherwise it is not a transcription
Bob
-
Bob
I think that's what Downside was saying - you transcrbe what is on the census sheet, but you need to do your best to make it accurate.
The test must be - does what you have transcribed match the original?
JULIAN
-
A transcription error is one thing
How do you know when something is a transcription error?
When transcribers see an illegible name they have to enter something but it can sometimes be a guess. For instance I transcribed a census return today.
The surname looked like Ponson.
I checked at the 1901census link and they had indexed it as Ponson. As I don't necessarily trust this source due to the high number of errors it contains I looked elsewhere for confirmation.
I checked at the familysearch on the 1881 census but couldn't find them.
I checked at freeBMD for births of Ponson in Epsom and couldn't find any.
So I had to enter something and I've had to go with the name Ponson, but I have my doubts as to whether it is actually correct.
downside
-
Hi Folks,
Mine was a search in Scotland. All suggestions have been checked , thank you. :)
Mackiwi
-
Hi All
When I transcribed some villages for the 1881 Census I was given a book instructing me exactly how to transcribe and even the way I had to do my letters.
It is a ideal thing to leave in my family history memorabilia as it shows the detailed instruction book and my own hand-writing.
Sandy :)
-
hi there,
I know the IGI welcome anyone who can truthfully correct mistakes as I have done so in the past; With the proof you have I would have thought it was the best and most honest thing to do;
I have found people missing from census forms even though the front sheet you see says this person is there; I actually wrote to ancestry.com about this issue;
Search said that Catherine Charlotte Hardiment was there; The front sheet said the same with all the household included; But the actual census form does not show either Catherine or her family??
I am still awaiting correction of this error after 6 months;
Eise
-
Hello To All RootsChat Members,
How is this for Incorrect Transcription Errors?
We recently took out a months subscription with ‘FindMyPast’ to ‘Passenger Lists Leaving UK’ . With in the first couple of days we came across incorrect ages on the Transcription Pages.
It was while checking the Transcription Pages against the original Shipping Record, we found that the female Passenger we were checking out, her age had been swapped with the person (a male) listed above, she was transcribed incorrectly as 16yrs, when she was actually 32yrs.
The next entry we came across listed this certain person as having an age of well over 900 years (can not remember exactly), however I do recall giving them a comment to the fact that: “According to the Bible, Methuselah lived 969 years, this one seems to have lasted longer”. I also mentioned to them that: “On the original record it appeared to be [-7], it was hard to read but could be a [27] not sure”.
‘FindMyPast’ - do have the facility for reporting any errors that anyone may come across. The errors were also rectified within a matter of 2 or 3 days. By the way they also credit your account with 3 credits (for each report) for taking the trouble to report the transcription amendment.
**********
Also recently on Ancestry.com, we decided to check out an address on the 1891 UK Census. Where it is known that a person we are researching had been employed by the 'PYSER’ family, the surname came up as ‘TYSER’.
We then went to the 1901 UK Census, this time they were listed as ‘PYSER’. We checked the original Census records and could definitely see the letter as a [P]. The other documents we viewed, which listed ‘PYSER’, were Birth and Marriage Certificates.
I guess one must always try to view the original document, and not take all that we see transcribed as being factual.
Although where would we be, without the many people who do give up their time to transcribe the many and varied resources, we need in our research? We just, must be prepared to check and re-check everything.
**********
Jeanette H.
-
I know Ancestry does offer the facility to correct transcript errors and have used it myself when I have been absolutely sure of the information but the original transcript is not changed - it just pulls the correction up when your searching
I always do it because I know these documents can be hard to read when transcribing and also local dialect can be misheard
I think the rule should be as said earlier - transcribe as it is on the census - if you come across it later when searching submit a correction
I dont know how findmypast deals with this problem but hopefully its something similar
Willow x
-
Hello Willow 4873,
In response to your post
.............I dont know how findmypast deals with this problem but hopefully its something similar
Willow x
as you will see I did make reference to this in my previous post.
Hello To All RootsChat Members,
.......................... ‘FindMyPast’ - do have the facility for reporting any errors that anyone may come across. The errors were also rectified within a matter of 2 or 3 days. By the way they also credit your account with 3 credits (for each report) for taking the trouble to report the transcription amendment......................
Jeanette H.
Hope this helps to explain.
Jeanette H.
-
Thanx Jeanette - missed that
Have just found a Best transcribed as Bast (not suprised the writing is terrible) which I have corrected as I was following the line and knew who it was.
Saying that I think I have followed completely the wrong line as the originator of the Best line - George - married an Ann Toovey not an Ann Hughes who I was expecting out of my line :(
Back to the drawing board to see if I'm right or wrong
Willow x
-
I have suggested alternatives on Ancestry when I know it is the same person (living in the same house as 10 years earlier, with the same family, birthdate etc)
Ancestry leaves the original transcription, and gives the alternative underneath, and the option to check the reason given by the person who has corrected.
Most of the alternatives were the same family - Groggins - I have a list of the variery of names used for them. As it is quite an unusual name, I can forgive and understand the confusion.
-
Saying that I think I have followed completely the wrong line as the originator of the Best line - George - married an Ann Toovey not an Ann Hughes who I was expecting out of my line :(
Willow x
Yes had followed the wrong family - oh well least whoever looks for Philip Best and his family will be able to find him easily now
Now just got to sort out my Best family :(
Willow x
-
Also remember that sometimes the enumerator just spelt the name wrongly
I have Booth written as Both
-
Jeanette H
Oddly, until a couple of days ago, I hadn't found any mistranscriptions on Findmypast, then I found 4. I reported them all and yesterday had e-mails advising me that they had all be altered. I only got 1 credit per wrong transcription though.
My question is, as I have an annual sub, what good are the credits. I'm not unduly worried about them as I was just happy that they can look at the census and alter wrong transcriptions so quickly.
Liz
-
Hello Liz,
Sorry to hear that the credits for finding incorrect transcriptions may have altered. This I cannot check out at present, as we currently do not have a subscription to 'FindMyPast'.
It was back in July / August that we had a 'Passenger Lists' subscription. We did not have any other subscription at that time. Maybe they were trying to encourage us to take out further subscriptions to BDMs etc., by tempting us to check out the other areas while we were using the facilities.
Who knows!
Jeanette H.
-
Also remember that sometimes the enumerator just spelt the name wrongly
And sometimes the enumerator wrote down what he heard - I spent ages and ages looking for 2 x great grandad Carroll on the 1851 - they are on as Carle. This was probably not a mis-spelling but a phonetic rendering of Carroll with a strong Irish accent, I decided.
Nice to imagine them with that accent !
-
That didn't seem to come out quite right
???
- first time I've used quote - and my whole post came out in the blue box! Why was that, then ?
-
Hiya Mum44
You just didnt scroll down the message box far enough to get past the quote.
Willow x
-
Thanks Willow - I'll remember that for next time!
Mum44
-
No prob Mum44 have done it myself (yesterday actually - had to modify the post lol)
Willow x
-
hi there,
I know the IGI welcome anyone who can truthfully correct mistakes as I have done so in the past; With the proof you have I would have thought it was the best and most honest thing to do;
I have found people missing from census forms even though the front sheet you see says this person is there; I actually wrote to ancestry.com about this issue;
Search said that Catherine Charlotte Hardiment was there; The front sheet said the same with all the household included; But the actual census form does not show either Catherine or her family??
I am still awaiting correction of this error after 6 months;
Eise
I presume you mean the LDS. As far as I am aware they do not have any way of correcting errors.
The IGI has one of my family as Hock Wood Briscoe when he should be Stock Wood Briscoe. I have seen the film of the register and confirmed that the first word is "Stock", I contacted the LDS but it is still shown as Hock Wood Briscoe in the IGI.
Ancestry only accept corrections to names, they are added as an alternative and are found on searches. Any other errors have to be added as comments but don't show up in searches. The annoying thing with Ancestry is that you have to send a separate correction for each member of a family.
Martin Briscoe
-
[ The annoying thing with Ancestry is that you have to send a separate correction for each member of a family.
Well, this used to be the case, and it put me right off for a while, especially the old 13-child families. However, if you now correct just the father, and in the comments box put "joe bloggs , his wife and 13 children" then the remainder of the clan gets the correct surname as well
-
[ The annoying thing with Ancestry is that you have to send a separate correction for each member of a family.
Well, this used to be the case, and it put me right off for a while, especially the old 13-child families. However, if you now correct just the father, and in the comments box put "joe bloggs , his wife and 13 children" then the remainder of the clan gets the correct surname as well
Wish I had known that yesterday when I was correcting a family of 9 lol :)
There again I dont mind doing them seperately just wish there was a link back to the census transcript from the blooming correction page instead of having to press the back button all the time!
Willow x
-
[ The annoying thing with Ancestry is that you have to send a separate correction for each member of a family.
Well, this used to be the case, and it put me right off for a while, especially the old 13-child families. However, if you now correct just the father, and in the comments box put "joe bloggs , his wife and 13 children" then the remainder of the clan gets the correct surname as well
Thanks, I asked them about that a few years ago and was told to send separate messages. I will try it next time I send a correction.
Martin Briscoe
-
Yes, I also contacted them and got that reply - but, without any notification whatsoever, they now seem to do the whole family - albeit you get a blue blob+ on the original and a yellow triange on the remainder.
-
Think I have just found my best example of an enumerators error Lillywhite written has Lillysh*te and yes it does say that on the census not a transcript error on Ancestrys behalf lol
:D
Willow x
-
I agree with every statement by Enumerators, that it is a very eye straining, demanding service.
On another thread, I pointed out that the Census enumerators were under a tremendous handicap, which today most people cannot imagine.
Back in 1841 in the country areas, families would have kept the same spelling for surnames because the enumerator would be a member of the same community and understand the accent.
There was a dead line for the returns to be delivered so all forms had to be sent out, filled in (often by some who were illiterate) and the the enumerator had to collect and copy the entries..What by? candle or oil lamp.
Later Census's in Towns and cities many would have strong country accents ,open to misunderstandings.
During the war I stayed with a Great Uncle and Aunt who only had gas lighting.and it was a great strain on the eyes.So one just did not read for long ! I am not at all surprised that there were many mistakes.
However the question is, do you report a misinterpretation,? for which you have sure and certain proof.Certificates, researched Parish records or whatever. After all it will only be marked as a possible alternative spelling or a maiden name.
I think that one should, as I would not have been able to find five relatives without being given an alternative.
The classic being a florid hand which joined a second initial J to a Surname C ..it came out as an H ..Thanks to a Rootschatter who found my family in 1891!!Of course I corrected that on Ancestry, why should another researcher miss a contact with me or Visa versa.
My belief is, that one should do so, It is certainly no reflection those who work so hard to get the records on line. And for them I am ever greatful ...Thankyou
Spring
-
I have make correction, when I know the entry is wrong and the original is correct, only been mis-read.
when the correction has been made, they have misread the correction making the entry worse, on one occassion i re-corrected the correction, so now I have given up trying to correct but am greatfull to some corrections made by others. :D
-
Spent yesterday evening tracing a Charles Simkiss and his family and ended up correcting the 1841, 1851, 1861, 1871, 1881 & 1891 census
On most of them he had been put down as Simkin - which doesn't register with the soundex. On most of the census images it was clear that it was Simkiss if you know what you were looking for but on the one it was down as Simkin so I put it as a variant
Though saying that on the one census he is down as Thomas Simkiss - the enumerator can only work with what hes told so if relatives do that we are on a good hiding to nothing lol
Willow x
-
Can I ask advise on a similar matter, does anyone know if the original census records are available to look at (in my case Nottinghamshire)?
I think on one of my family records, the births and the names have been wrongly transcribed.
Thanks,
Copperbeech5
-
Hiya Copperbeech
Welcome to Rootschat
Someone will correct me if I'm wrong on this
The orgininal census are kept at the National Archives and scans of them are available on Ancestry and Findmypast but the enumerators books that the census was compiled from were destroyed
Hope that makes sense
Willow x
-
Hi Willow,
Thanks so much for your comments, they are a great help.
I have now contacted the national archive...to see if they have any bright ideas!
Copperbeech5
-
No problem Copperbeech
Good luck
Willow x
-
I must say that I'm astounded by this thread.
Someone back there said they transcribe for FreeBMD and are told to "Type What You See"
I also transcribe for FreeBMD and have those instructions printed out and here in my desk.
I believe to deliberately change anything you are transcribing is simply wrong, no matter what
Who are we to say that someone a hundred years ago, or whenever, miss-heard the pronunciation, or any other excuse. We have no right to change anything.
Family history researchers use these transcriptions in good faith. Anyone who believes there has been an error in a transcription has the option to ask for a second opinion, in fact FreeBMD has a system of double checks before they publish.
Most web sites have the option of adding a Post-it to any entry you believe is erroneous. I have added Post-its to many entries where I know I have updated information or have found an error in a transcription.
When looking up family history information on any web site I always allow for any error in spelling or dating, but if I thought that someone somewhere was deliberately changing data then the whole exercise would be pointless.
Leonie.
-
I believe to deliberately change anything you are transcribing is simply wrong, no matter what
Who are we to say that someone a hundred years ago, or whenever, miss-heard the pronunciation, or any other excuse. We have no right to change anything.
I know that you should write down what you see but I have been transcribing a burial register and on quite a number of entries the person was buried before they died according to what was written down.
I corrected the position of the dates and put a note.
Martin Briscoe
-
Hiya Leonie
I think most of us are on about correcting transcriptions on Ancestry etc when they have already been transcribed
I agree with transcribing it should be 'write what you see' - though saying that the person who transcribed RG10/2833 Folio 12 Page 15 on Ancestry didn't (though it doesn't help that Maria is listed as Isaacs daughter - she isn't shes Thomas's and therefore Isaacs niece)
Yes I have corrected it
Willow x
-
Hiya Leonie
I think most of us are on about correcting transcriptions on Ancestry etc when they have already been transcribed
I agree with transcribing it should be 'write what you see' - though saying that the person who transcribed RG10/2833 Folio 12 Page 15 on Ancestry didn't (though it doesn't help that Maria is listed as Isaacs daughter - she isn't shes Thomas's and therefore Isaacs niece)
Yes I have corrected it
Willow x
Errors on Ancestry are different because they usually just add the correction as an alternative name which is then found when people are searching. They can then decide their own interpretation from the image.
Martin Briscoe
-
Hiya Martin
Yes I think it is a better alternative because at least you can make up you own mind if the correction is correct (and bang your head up the wall over the fact you spent days looking for them but hadn't thought of that variation on the name)
Willow x
-
Just as a follow up... After willow 4873's helpful suggestion, I have contacted the National archive, and explained my theory regarding my family Census record for the 1881C.
The National Archive have had a look at the census entry in question and have agreed with me and will now amend the record, to save any more confusion.
Success!
-
Yeah result!
Well done Copperbeech! Think of all the time you have saved those poor rellies trying to find them
Willow x
-
Looking for my ''Dallimore's'' which I've been doing so for over 2 years!! I came acrosss my 'family' listed as ''Dunsmore'' in one census instead of Dallimore. Now i would never have found them if it hadnt been for the rest of the family
ie mother remarried 3 times therefore all her other children had different surnames (searched everyone of them)
you know what its like, you cross reference and cross refernece again and again.....
The step father obviously given the info and having so many step children to care for probably couldnt remember half their names correctly!!
BUT...although it looks very much like Dunsmore instead of Dallimore do i correct it? I'm a Dallimore and I cant tell you how many variations of my name I get. It took me along time (more than a few days!!!) to make sure sure I was on the right track. I wouldnt want someone else not so patient as me to miss it!
-
when I dealt with the National Archive, they tell me that they add a note to the fact that this name ( the one it is listed under) may also be known as.. ( and the add the amended name) So nothing is lost but the correct info is there to save any confusion for the future hunters.
Hope that helps,
Copperbeech5
-
On a lighter note.................... I have family and friends who after many years still spell my name incorrectly, no matter how often I write it clearly.
Mackiwi ??? ???
-
I found a transcription on Ancestry yesterday, where 2 children aged about 5 & 6 had parents who were apparently well into their 50s when the children were born. When I looked at the actual copy of the census page, the transcriber has put two dwellings down as one, ignoring the double slash lines which seem to be used to separate out different families. The children were actually living with governess, housekeeper, various maids, nannies etc. but no parents. They had totally different names to the people before them on the census and there doesn't seem to be any connection.
As they aren't my ancestors, and anyone searching for the children will still find them, I've not bothered to send a correction to Ancestry. Not sure how I'd do it anyway.
Lizzie
-
You can only correct names in Ancestry anyway
You can add notes to records as well
-
Its not just census returns where spellings are incorrect I have had great trouble finding my great grandmother.
She was born under the name of PARCELL.
She married using the name PHAIRE (spinster so not second marriage) and where it lists the maiden name of mother for childrens births I have PARCELL - PA*EL - THEIRE - PHAIRE and PHAIR
so it isn't always a case of transcription errors but lots of confusion anyway
-
On a lighter note.................... I have family and friends who after many years still spell my name incorrectly, no matter how often I write it clearly.
Mackiwi ??? ???
So do I Mackiwi........you wouldn't believe the number of people who insist on adding an E to the end of my name >:(
Carol ( no E!)
-
I get people who automatically put Katy without bothering to ask... >:(
KatIE (lol... ought to be KatFirefox ;))
-
Today I had to pt in a note on my own marriage record on Ancestory as I nearly did not find it as they had it in Malton Yorkshire instead of Halton Cheshire, 5 other family marriages in Halton were also mis trancribed as Malton.
I have also done a lot of corrections for poor trancriptions on Find my past this week and they are very quick to check comments and get back to you the corrections can take up to 90 days according to their e mail.
-
It seems to me that there are errors of fact and of transcription.
In the first the person completing the census form has been misinformed, making a genuine error, but these should not be corrected, otherwise the integrity of the raw data would be threatened and we would quite quickly beome unsure of whether the information is fact or opinion.
In the second, where someone has simply misread the sometimes very difficult handwriting, this should be corrected as it is merely clarifying what was actually written. Looking for a realtively simple and commonplace name such as Dennis can be frustrating when it has been transcribed as Dennes, Denner and even Damos!
-
I totally agree with you Dionysus,I had trouble searching for an ancestor whose name was Fred (Frederick) it clearly said that,but had been mistranscribed as FROG ???
Possibly a case of a drop down list of names.................ermmm maybe not!
Carol
-
I have never found out what errors were made with my family on the 1881 census as produced by the LDS - from the microfilm copies in the local library I know they were all here in Dover, but many of them have simply disappeared from the transcriptions they issued on CD!
As I have all the details from the "original" I can't be bothered to do long-winded searches to find out how they were transcribed.
Bill
-
Transcription errors on things like Ancestry, FreeBMD etc should be corrected. They are someone's impression of what was written on the original, if that interpretation can be shown to be wrong it should not stand, although the fact of change should be recorded. This is simply a stage in correcting and improving the transcription.
Factual errors, where the name or other information is wrong on the original should be transcribed as such but with a note of the error, if and when this comes to light, to help following researchers. Many of my late 18th c Davey ancestors were literate, or at least could write their name, it was always written by them as Davey, but when written by parish clerks or clergymen etc is always given (wrongly) as Davy. Davy should be the transcription but I always note that the family used Davey in my records (and some sites will allow this sort of information to be added).
Robert
-
I would always advise where an error has been made that it should be corrected were there is no doubt a transcription error has occured...The transcribers do a magnifience job when you consider how difficult some of the pages are to decipher.
I spent almost a year looking for my rellie who according to the 1901 census was born in Alford, Lincs....I found her in Salford, Lancs. after purchasing a certificate...For the most part... get their in the end....somtimes it's just a question of thinking outside the box ;)
Carol
-
Many years ago I found what I thought was a LDS transcribing error. A relative was described as "son of ", whereas the child was a girl (who subsequently went on to have 6 children of her own child). Although I tried to correct the error, I got nowhere.
Several years later, when I had the opportunity to see the register, the child was indeed recorded as " son of". Perhaps the curate took too much liquid refreshment???
Not all errors down to poor transcribing or optical recognition software inadequacies.
-
I found something similar in a parish record whilst looking for my ancestors. It was a baptism of a child who died soon afterwards and had a correction saying that (can't remember the exact names now, I have notes somewhere) Robert Smith baptised on xxx, is not a boy but a girl and his name has been changed to Eliza Smith.
Lizzie
-
When I come across a transcription error on Ancestry, I make an entry on the lines of "See also" in the make comment box. This at least alerts others that the entry has been questioned.
-
I've just found an error on a 1901 census transcription on ancestry - George Saunders is down as 79, with wife Mary - 18, and son George 27. Is there a "report an error" button somewhere that I can use? Unless of course George had shed loads of money and Mary was thinking he might shuffle off his mortal coil fairly soon ;D
I've looked at the image and it looks like 68 to me, which fits with Mary's previous appearances in the census. There are also some very obvious number 1's on the page to compare her age with.
-
If you have a copy of his birth certificate and can prove what you say - then go ahead and report any transcription error. Ancestry uk respond positively to being alerted to errors.
-
The only problem I have with Ancestry is that when you report a mistranscripton (known to be true because it's your own ancestor), they still show the transcribed name first and it's not until you've looked at that record that you can find out that there has been an alteration. If they don't want to change what their transcribers have done, they could at least add an extra entry to the names on the census so that people will be able to find the person they are looking for.
-
I would suggest the crucial thing is not whether the census record reflects true age, but whether the transcript fairly reflects the original record - even if that was in error. If you have other information that corroborates your understanding of the facts, such as other census records and entries of BMD, you can use these to support a reported transcription error.
-
The only problem I have with Ancestry is that when you report a mistranscripton (known to be true because it's your own ancestor), they still show the transcribed name first and it's not until you've looked at that record that you can find out that there has been an alteration. If they don't want to change what their transcribers have done, they could at least add an extra entry to the names on the census so that people will be able to find the person they are looking for.
But if you search for the corrected name (once accepted) you will find it
-
I've just found an error on a 1901 census transcription on ancestry - George Saunders is down as 79, with wife Mary - 18, and son George 27. Is there a "report an error" button somewhere that I can use?
When looking at the original entry (the hand-written page), click on the green "Index" button, bottom left.
If you hover over the age in question, the age turns orange. click on that, and a new box comes up which allows you to add an alternative entry.
I've made hundreds of these "alternative entries", and always get an acknowledgement from Ancestry!
-
I transcribe parish records. We are told to transcribe exactly what we see. There is the capacity to make notes. There you can note unclear writing, spellings which are obviously wrong etc. The only exception is when the clergyman's spelling of a name differs from that of the signatures of the people involved. In those cases, we enter as the person spells their own name. I think that's how it should be done. It's up to the researcher to interpret the information.
-
I am pleased this issue has been raised thanks, as I have found quite a few errors in my ancestry, names birth dates ages in censuses etc.
I have not informed ancestry , but if I know the information is one hundred percent incorrect and some one else as the same person in their tree . I will contact them .and mention it,
a couple of members have checked again and put the correction in their tree.
it can be confusing to have incorrect information, we found some one with my grandmothers name and birth place but the age on her birth certificate and her marriage certificate did not match,
seems she lied to make herself appear younger when she married so It is alwys worth checking.