RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: LouiseA on Tuesday 30 August 11 11:17 BST (UK)
-
I was looking at my Dodge relatives on Ancestry last night and found that one of them was apparently born in "Not Captized, London".
When I looked at the actual census form, she was born in the City of London and in the "deaf, blind" column at the end had been written "not baptized".
I seriously wonder about the Ancestry transcribers sometimes! ;D
-
I seriously wonder about the Ancestry transcribers sometimes! ;D
Apparently the censuses were transcribed in China which, if true, explains a lot.
-
It is strange that sometimes you find such mistakes and e.g. on the W Yorkshire records that some baps are down as burials and the surnames are also missing
On the other hand some of the record where the original image is badly degraded they have done a fantastic job - I have enhance the image in photoshop elements and they have done a really good job
-
I agree that, on the whole, they've done a great job and I am grateful to everyone who's put the work in, but I get so frustrated sometimes that I'm paying a monthly subscription but often can't find the people I'm looking for because of a glaring transcription error (Caroline Dodge transcribed as Cawline Dodge being another I found last night).
If it's true that the records were transcribed in China then that DOES explain a lot. Names that would be familiar to someone whose first language is English are probably guessed at by someone for whom it's not. It's a shame, but something I'll have to live with I suppose! :)
-
I think you'll find that the China myth started as a joke by a forum poster. Ancestry have used American geological societies in the past for their census transcriptions, and these days they also use volunteers who work for the World Archive Project.
Anyone (whether an Ancestry member or not) can volunteer for the WAP. And if you think transcribing is easy, then feel free to volunteer ! Remember that transcribers can only transcribe what they see, and do not have the help of context or hindsight :)
http://community.ancestry.co.uk/wap/dashboard.aspx
-
I think you'll find that the China myth started as a joke by a forum poster. Ancestry have used American geological societies in the past for their census transcriptions, and these days they also use volunteers who work for the World Archive Project.
You do amaze me, Nick, after some of the transcription errors I've found!
My personal favourite - and this was from perfectly clear, copperplate handwriting - was 'Percival Terry', who I eventually found transcribed as 'Peruval Lacey'.
Cati
-
Anyone (whether an Ancestry member or not) can volunteer for the WAP. And if you think transcribing is easy, then feel free to volunteer ! Remember that transcribers can only transcribe what they see, and do not have the help of context or hindsight :)
http://community.ancestry.co.uk/wap/dashboard.aspx
I did some transcribing for Familysearch a couple of years ago. It is very rewarding but very difficult too. It would be useful if you could transcribe areas that you know but most of mine was US census with all the Italian mafia involvements (or so it seemed). I suppose it depends what is priority at any given time. Anyone can sign up for it and just download a programme onto your own PC.
Unfortunately the family history bug got me and the rest, as they say, is history.
Rishile
-
I think you'll find that the China myth started as a joke by a forum poster.
Fair enough. 8)
-
Cati, I'm just amazed that people believe that the Chinese could do it at all ? Another theory which is often quoted on genealogy forums is that some censuses were transcribed by computer, using Optical Character Recognition (OCR), despite the fact that OCR stuggles even with typewritten text, let alone handwriting :)
I see 'howlers' on a very regular basis, but unfortunately about 50% of these were created by the enumerators themselves, which transcription can do nothing about :)
-
Cati, I'm just amazed that people believe that the Chinese could do it at all ?
Well, I hadn't heard the one about China, but I've been told several times that the trancribers were in India!
Cati
-
I think some of the problem could be 'looking' or 'reading'
I say that because I have a certificate for Robert Stables and if you just look quickly at his surname it appears to read Stubbs but if you look at the letters it is obviously Stables.
I think in the long run most transcribers are doing a great job especially looking at some of the writing on census images that in some cases having to be posted on RC for others 'eyes' to translate.
I think we should be thankful that there are dedicated people out there doing all of us a great service.
Jean
-
We see the errors more readily because we know the name that we're looking for, and we often get angry when the transcriber didn't see what we knew. However, when you put yourself into the position of a transcriber (which I have done in the past for Ancestry in their WAP project), and you see record after record after record, and you don't have any clues to work out what the handwriting actually says, then it becomes an entirely different ball game :)
-
I think in the long run most transcribers are doing a great job especially looking at some of the writing on census images that in some cases having to be posted on RC for others 'eyes' to translate.
I think we should be thankful that there are dedicated people out there doing all of us a great service.
Oh, I agree with you Jean - I'm very grateful for anyone who has helped me by transcribing etc - and I must admit that I have enough problems transcribing for my own records when I'm pretty sure what the name ought to be: but nonetheless there are some wonderful howlers.
Cati
-
I find FindMyPast are very good at correcting transcribing mistakes if you notify them. Just the other day I found one address which must have been divided into rooms or something, which had 4 families living there. The transcriber had started with the first lady, a widow, and then - although the enumerator had divided each household clearly with lines - the transcriber had missed out the next 2 households and given the 4th household the same surname as the widow. I notified FindMyPast and within about 3 days it had all been corrected.
Lizzie
-
I think you'll find that the China myth started as a joke by a forum poster ...
Quoted from Ancestry's 2009 IPO filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission when they put up shares for public ownership:
"In 2008, one of our transcription vendors, Beijing Formax, performed a majority of our data transcription as measured by cost."
www.formax.com.cn (http://www.formax.com.cn)
-
I thought it was a fact that the first transcriptions had been done abroad. It's good to have it confirmed, because as some have said there are glaring errors - it is much easier to transcribe if you know the country and possible names.
I have transcribed for both FreeBMD and WAP - WAP is quite a different ball-game from FreeBMD due to the variety of projects. But with both WAP and FreeBMD they are transcribed twice by different people and there are arbitrators who sort out any difference between two transcriptions. With WAP it happens before they are published. AND I have worked on some very interesting projects. It's worth having a go
-
Anyone (whether an Ancestry member or not) can volunteer for the WAP. And if you think transcribing is easy, then feel free to volunteer !
http://community.ancestry.co.uk/wap/dashboard.aspx
Where did I say that I thought transcribing was easy?
-
I think the transcribers of the West Yorkshire records have done a fantastic job. There are a lot of errors, but as Nick says we can find our names because we know what we are looking for.
I'm working through mine, and that's all my tree, correcting the names where they are wrong. I can find them, because I had the dates and places from the incredible transcription work done by local FHSs. I've got quite a few who don't show up on a search, but I have found almost all by browsing.
Some of the pages don't have an index at the bottom at present, so they are clearly not going to show up on a search.
Ancestry were reasonably quick in removing "Nomina" as a parish, and replacing it with Huddersfield St Peter. Some of the unindexed pages might be because of that error - maybe they are having to be redone.
-
Anyone (whether an Ancestry member or not) can volunteer for the WAP. And if you think transcribing is easy, then feel free to volunteer !
http://community.ancestry.co.uk/wap/dashboard.aspx
Where did I say that I thought transcribing was easy?
I said IF
-
Ancestry have used American geological societies in the past for their census transcriptions
So are they set in stone then ???
-
:D :D :D :D :D
-
Oh yes, very droll. Criticising people's spelling is the lowest form of wit on internet forums, and won't win you any friends :P
-
Oh yes, very droll. Criticising people's spelling is the lowest form of wit on internet forums, and won't win you any friends :P
I don't think any criticism was implied. Perhaps a grinning smiley should have been added to show it was a joke?
-
Making jokes out of other people's spelling mistakes and typos is not funny at all.
In fact, it goes against 'netiquette'.
"Messages and articles should be brief and to the point. Don't
wander off-topic, don't ramble and don't send mail or post
messages solely to point out other people's errors in typing
or spelling. These, more than any other behavior, mark you
as an immature beginner."
Internet 'netiquette', drawn up in 1995 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855)
Of course the real joke is that this thread is about someone's intolerence of someone else's mistakes !
-
i watched a news article the other week about inmates in jail, actually learning basic computer skills by transcribing old documments and learning to put them to PC. i have no idea what documnets they were as the news piece was about re training convicts rather than what they were transcrbing but to me it sounds like a good idea.
-
Getting back on topic, it seems to me that the best transcriptions are always going to be from people who are interested in the subject ? Ancestry have used a variety of sources for their transcriptions, including genealogist societies, and volunteers in the WAP project. Another popular site, The Genealogist, has a limited number of census returns which have been transcribed by volunteers, allegedly with a better accuracy. Find My Past appear to use their own transcribers, but they appear to be a little cagey over who they are.
To be honest, I have a lot more problems with mistakes made by enumerators than with mistakes made by transcribers :)
-
Of course the real joke is that this thread is about someone's intolerence of someone else's mistakes !
Precisely!
Sorry Nick, no criticism was intended but I couldn't resist the irony. My post was meant to be read in the spirit of 'The Lighter Side' - JenB makes a good point though, and I'll make better use of smileys in future.
Carol
-
My favourite so far was BUOR in a census transcription (from FindMyPast).
The name, clearly written, was PRIOR. It took a while to find that one.
Regards to all,
Carol
-
I came across a whole page of ridiculous transcriptions today, the best ones though, were:
'Lusder Adanos' for Susan Adams!
And
Bretste Lubgel, Essex, instead of 'British Subject, France' for birthplace!
I always change them because I sometimes wonder if my 'missing' censuses for seemingly easy to spell relatives names aren't missing at all, and one day they'll turn up. :p
-
As a follow-on to the previous posts -
We all know that mistakes happen - whatever the cause
What is really needed is a comprehensive (and fast) correction/alternative facility, particularly on A***y
I have found several errors that I have been unable to report easily because their system is too rigid. And they take ages (if at all) to make corrections
Considering what we pay in subs, and the fact that we are willing to notify errors, I feel that 'they' could do a bit more in return
Linda
-
no problem with Ancestry. Its FindMyPast that wont play ball.
-
Tom - I've always found FindMyPast will correct any mistakes you find, and quickly too.
-
Tom,
I must disagree with you.
I submitted a large number the day before yesterday where the name had been listed as Newmann instead of Neumann.
All acknowledged the same day and yesterday and today they have confirmed that they are amending their records (with the exception of one where it is not possible to be certain what the enumerator wrote).
Peter
-
feel free to disagree! :)
my experience was different thats all I'm saying.
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Peter
-
do you know what drives me mad on a*****y? i make a correction for the surname of a family, then when i to add the rest of the famaily, even though it has given me the option to add the correction to the rest of the family, the other members except the head that i orginally coprrected are still with the wrong name!
my dad is an IT consultant and the amount of times he has said to me, it is so easy to change this or that to make this or that easier or simpler, and yet my mum pays a foprtune for her subs just to have silly little annoying things let the site down.
although i have to say broadly the site doesnt have that many problems that annoy me other than the one i have mentioned.
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Peter
If you had made a note that a name had been shown with a particular spelling in a given census, would you really want that spelling to disappear??
Much better to show all the options, as long as they are all searchable :)
Linda
-
Linda
They're not options; they're corrections.
If they have a entry in their database which is blatantly wrong then I expect them to correct it, not offer the correction as a "suggestion".
I don't make a note of the incorrect name. I make a note of the reference.
Peter
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Peter
Its not bonkers.
The way Ancestry is set up they included fields into which corrections could be put. This is what happens when you submit corrections and saves messing around with the original schedule.
If you have ever had to verify a computer schedule when corrections had been done to the original rather than as an add on you would appreciate how onerous this could be
-
nicely put Davidft.
I may have been remembering things about FindMyPast's attitude to the 1911 census corrections having just searched some threads.
-
Who actually 'owns' the transcriptions? My daughter and I are transcribing some local RC church records - voluntarily - and do 'searches' on the transcribed indexes for the parish - and provide info for 'enquirers'. We would love to print a copy for the local records office but the parish have never published/ shared any of the records. By the way - no money or fees are involved/ suggested/ implied - this is purely a voluntary project. Can we simply print a copy for the records office?
maryd
-
Can we simply print a copy for the records office?
maryd
You definitely should do
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Peter
If you had made a note that a name had been shown with a particular spelling in a given census, would you really want that spelling to disappear??
Much better to show all the options, as long as they are all searchable :)
Linda
I have seen 'corrections' on Ancestry which are actually incorrect. (the original transcription is correct, and someone has incorrectly corrected it. :P) So, a case for leaving both options. ;)
-
If you have ever had to verify a computer schedule when corrections had been done to the original rather than as an add on you would appreciate how onerous this could be
In the past I have transcribed for FreeBMD. Despite my best efforts I have on occasion made an error in transcription.
Some months later I might get an email from the corrections coordinator advising me of this error and requests that I review my transcription and amend it as appropriate.
At the next update the correct entry overrides the incorrect one.
So it's onerous. So what? What's the point in doing something if it's not done right?
Peter
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Peter
If you had made a note that a name had been shown with a particular spelling in a given census, would you really want that spelling to disappear??
Much better to show all the options, as long as they are all searchable :)
Linda
I have seen 'corrections' on Ancestry which are actually incorrect. (the original transcription is correct, and someone has incorrectly corrected it. :P) So, a case for leaving both options. ;)
On Ancestry you can enter an alternative name where the name has been correctly transcrived but is e.g. wrongly spelled
You mark it incorrect in original
People will then be able to find this family
-
That's right - that's why Ancestry calls them 'Alternatives' and not corrections. Sometimes transcription only comes down to interpretation, and often the correct interpretation can only be made by those whose research has revealed which interpretation is the correct one.
-
my MILs name is a long one that is spelt differently to the norm, her first name ends in ene instead of the usual ine. someone has entered an alternative. when i told MIL this she was very annoyed!
-
Not an Ancestry howler, but there really cannot be any excuse for this as a transcribed occupation on the 1911 census:
'Jakes in washing'
Cati
-
I could`nt find the Tucknott family (1851) on FindMyPast,so looked on Ancestry.
The Tucknott surname had been transcribed,Suckrott ;D,Tucknob & Tucknote
Found the ones i was looking for,right spelling.
omega
-
I like Ancestry's approach of adding the correction to the index and not replacing the original.
That's bonkers/nonsense/rubbish (choose one or all) ;D ;D ;D
What is the point in perpetuating an error when a correction is offered?
Something you haven't taken into account is that the document being transcribed may itself be a transcription, and as such may itself contain errors.
The census returns before 1911 are an example: we are looking at copies that the enumerator made of the original forms, which no longer exist. He may have made errors when copying, for instance he may have read a poorly-written Berry as Barry. It may then have been correctly transcribed (by Ancestry or whoever) as Barry, but someone researching the family would know that it should have been Berry.
No harm is done by including alternatives in the index. We can make our own judgement when we look at the 'original' - but we need to be able to find it, and that is all an index is for.
-
I'm firmly convinced that there were as many (pre-1911) census transcription errors made by enumerators as there were errors made by transcribers for indexing purposes. We have to realise that transcribers are human, and they make human errors. If a transcriber is transcribing 'awkward' names and sees one close to one that they have come across before (or even someone that they know), then it's very easy to be swayed by that, and the transcriber puts down what they know, and not what they see.
-
I'm quite surprised that in six pages of this thread, no-one's raised errors in placenames in transcriptions. I have every sympathy with transcribers who make errors in personal names which seem 'obvious' to the relatives of the person concerned. Not only do we (I count myself in this, having transcribed for FreeBMD and WAP) have to cope with enumerators, priests etc. who are obviously descended from a long line of spiders, and with damage/fading to the original documents, but also personal names come in all sorts of varieties, both official (e.g. Katherine/Catherine/Kathryn) and as a result of parental choice or semi-literacy (all the Margrets, Jhons, Sharlots and such). Trying to second-guess your way through that lot will result in a transcription that is probably further still from what the enumerator actually intended to write.
But with place names, there is a finite number of places in the UK, most of them have standardised spellings and most of them can be fairly confidently associated with one or two specific counties. Yes, for relatively small places, especially those geographically distant from the enumerator, the same problems occur as with personal names, but I've seen real howlers in spelling and county attribution with large cities that any enumerator would have heard of, and any transcriber should have. I have a relative who according to an Ancestry transcriber was born in Wolverhampton, Co. Durham. On the census page it says 'Wolverhampton, Staffs' perfectly clearly.
On changing the record: I agree with those who have said Ancestry's approach leaves something to be desired. I prefer FindMyPast's/FreeBMD's approach where it's a question of a definite transcription error. The Ancestry 'alternative' field should be left for enumerator errors, or instances of married women being enumerated under their maiden name and other such oddities. Perpetuating errors that have no historical or documentary relevance is, I agree, bonkers, as someone else phrased it.
-
The instructions to transcribers of Ancestry (and most other outfits) is perfectly clear "Type what you see". Now, no-one can tell why this particular transcriber chose to read Staffs as Co. Durham, but according to the rules, any alternative interpretations have to be alternative suggestions, and not corrections.
As for "But with place names, there is a finite number of places in the UK" - this reminds me of when I found the birthplace of one of my UK ancestors born in 1644 in the Isle of Wight, Virginia, USA. I immediately thought "Silly Ancestry transcribers !", until I researched it a bit more and found that this particular family was documented in the early settlerment records of this far-flung colony. At the time I wasn't even aware that there was an Isle of Wight in the USA.
-
Making jokes out of other people's spelling mistakes and typos is not funny at all.
In fact, it goes against 'netiquette'.
"Messages and articles should be brief and to the point. Don't
wander off-topic, don't ramble and don't send mail or post
messages solely to point out other people's errors in typing
or spelling. These, more than any other behavior, mark you
as an immature beginner."
Internet 'netiquette', drawn up in 1995 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855)
Of course the real joke is that this thread is about someone's intolerence of someone else's mistakes !
Actually, I'm not intolerant of other people's mistakes, we all make them. My original post finished with a "grin" icon and was posted on The Lighter Side board - it was meant as a light-hearted comment.
Unfortunately there are some very pompous, humourless people on here who are too full of their own self importance and have their heads up their own backsides. If I'd realise that posting a glib comment about Ancestry was a hangable offence, I would have thought twice about it.
Anyway, I won't be coming back to this forum, I've got better things to do with my time.
-
I honestly don't know why you chose to post this again - we've all moved on.