OPR Images now on SP

[jillruss]

Thanks ibi.

I'll drop them an email as you suggest.

I can only imagine what a mammoth task has been undertaken and I'm delighted to have the opportunity to see the originals.

I didn't mean to sound as if I was complaining - just didn't want to contact them if the work was ongoing as I'm sure they could do without that!

Thanks again,

Jill

[trish251]

Hi Jill

If you don't have it - this is a list of parishes & registration districts from gro Scotland. I find it very handy when I can't find things (given that your parish may simply just be missing)

http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/famrec/hlpsrch/list-of-parishes-registration-districts.html

Trish

[dkmcad]

Hi Jill,  not sure what else you are looking for, but
Longforgan is included.  Try the drop down menu for "all counties" or the "Angus" drop down menu.

Dorothy

[Gadget]

I have a marriage entry  for Kells, Kirkcudbrightshire, 1807 that was obtained from the film at an LDS centre.

The entry is not on the index, neither are any of the other names that are on the same page.

Why would this be?

Gadget

[jillruss]

Thanks for that, Trish. I've printed off the parish list for future reference.

Dorothy, thanks - I found Longforgan in the all counties drop down list. I thought it was still in Perthshire! Doh!

 Doesn't seem to have done me any good though - I still can't find the baptism I'm looking for!

Heigh ho!!   

Jill

[ibi]

I have a marriage entry  for Kells, Kirkcudbrightshire, 1807 that was obtained from the film at an LDS centre.

The entry is not on the index, neither are any of the other names that are on the same page.

Why would this be?

Gadget

If it's an OPR as opposed to the parochial register of a non-established church, because this facility on SP is limited to the OPRs of the Established Church.

If it's the latter, then this is an omission that should be reported by the "contact form" route to SP in the first place.

BTW, apart from the missing parishes for Selkirk (all but one lonely parish ), there's a few glitches in terms of parishes being allocated to the wrong counties (they are there on the full list, but not in the correct county list).  The former will be solved asap, from what I understand, as will the latter.

ibi

[Gadget]

Thanks ibi.

It's definitely an OPR. It is a bit tattered around the edges as far as I can see but there's certainly enough to index/digitise.

Gadget

[ibi]

Fortunately, the GROS approach has most often been a so-called "soft launch", i.e. you don't hit all the possible media on the morning of the day of the availability of the new data, including multiple appearances on breakfast TV programmes.

Instead, it's there one or more days previously, and the word soon gets around, so that you don't get the "(English) 1901 effect", in the first few hours, of hunners o' thoosans of folk logging on to find their granny.

In addition, it's not all that difficult to arrange that either (a) there's some extra site capacity in the first few days, and/or (b) when the level of site hits exceeds a predetermined level, arranging for there to be a message along the lines of "the site is very busy at the moment, please try again later" ..... without the whole site crashing.

Did anyone ever come across an explanation of why the English 1901 went offline for weeks, or was it months, after the day 1 problems?

ibi

[ibi]

Thanks ibi.

It's definitely an OPR. It is a bit tattered around the edges as far as I can see but there's certainly enough to index/digitise.

Gadget

This question won't surprise you!, - have you submitted a contact form to SP?

ibi