OPC Projects Nationwide

[stevew101]

Is there a listing of the OPC projects nationwide?

Steve

[Flattybasher9]

This post is somewhat confusing. The comment "We appreciate criticism good or bad but would wish that to be directed at us via our website rather than on public forums such as this." would seem to suggest that the criticism was posted on this forum. I have had a look for said criticism but could find nothing. Perhaps someone could enlighten me. 

As for "as useful as oil on water" the act of pouring oil on water was/is a known calming act for troubled seas.

Regards

Malky

[Berlin-Bob]

The criticiscm was made on other topics, and also on here, but the criticism here has been removed, as Trancegirl has specifically requested that it be made directly on the OPC site.

Bob

[sami]

Is there a listing of the OPC projects nationwide?

Steve

I'm also wondering if there is a overall site for OPC projects?

sami

[Trancesgirl]

This is a list of the schemes that we know of - there may be more that haven't been added

http://www.wiltshire-opc.org.uk/genealogy/index.php/research/national-opc-schemes

[majm]

Is there a listing of the OPC projects nationwide?

Steve

I'm also wondering if there is a overall site for OPC projects?

sami

Here's a link that may be of assistance.

http://www.ukbmd.org.uk/online_parish_clerk

Back in the 1930s one of my ancestors was one of the volunteers who helped transcribe the longhand of earlier NSW BDM scribes.  They were transcribing from well worn pages, under natural light, and were reading the script they were familiar with, as many of those volunteers were reading their older family members handwritten words.   Yet, there are many instances where it seems there are flaws in their efforts.   Those volunteers were aware they were not perfect, yet they strived towards excellence, to benefit not just their own generation, long before family history was the popular armchair hobby of today, but to benefit all generations that come after them.   

Several of my generation within my own family have been transcribing NSW records for decades.    We do it because we are aware that the NSW Education System changed the style of handwriting being taught to school children back in the 1960s.   So my generation is the last of the generations who are familiar with, and regularly use the longhand script found in the NSW official records.  Typewriters found their way into the NSW public service post WWI. 

So while I am not one who has transcribed for any of the English OPC volunteer organisations, I am one who has transcribed Church Registers, Shipping Lists, Correspondence to and from Govt officers, AIF Base Records, among many other handwritten NSW Records.

Yes, it is likely I have mis-interpreted some of the handwriting.  Yes, it is likely I have hit the wrong keys on my typewriter, or for the past 20 years, my puter keyboard.    Yes, it is likely I have made mistakes that neither I nor anyone else checking my work has picked up.   

However, it is also likely that much of my work has been helpful to anyone who has not had direct access to the primary records that I have transcribed.   That surely is the main reason for any transcriber sharing their transcribed efforts with others.   All transcribed work needs to be validated by reference back to the primary record, and so rather than anyone (RChatter or otherwise) making adverse comments across a number of forums, it is best that the lead organisation is contacted in a positive way, so they can investigate and make any adjustments.    Perhaps they may find that a transcriber needs a break, or a new pair of specs, or a new backlight in their reader.   Perhaps they may find that the enquirer is being a tad too pedantic, or perhaps there's any number of other reasons that become apparent.

Sorry for my long post.   

Cheers, JM.   

[Trancesgirl]

Thank you for all your support - we do try to achieve perfection under very difficult and challenging circumstances

[stevew101]

Thank you for the link majm.

Very useful.

Steve

[JohninSussex]

The criticiscm was made on other topics, and also on here, but the criticism here has been removed, as Trancegirl has specifically requested that it be made directly on the OPC site.
Bob

Bob, this is rather disturbing.  If Rootschat members post a criticism of another genealogy site, and assuming the criticisms are well written, not offensive, defamatory etc, surely they shouldn't be censored, just because it might hurt someone's feelings or because the people involved are volunteers.  People make criticisms of National Statistics, Ancestry etc, I have just posted a criticism of FamilySearch, does this mean if the Mormons object all criticism of their free service will be removed?

As far as OPC is concerned, it is of patchy quality.  As much of my family is in Kent, I use Kent OPC regularly and where a parish has a lot of information it is very useful, where there is none, the 'holding page' is pretty useless.  The aim of OPC seems to be much the same as FreeREG, part of the same stable as FreeBMD, but in both cases the geographical coverage is patchy, for the obvious reasons that volunteers needed to do the transcribing are in short supply.  Other OPC contents duplicates GENUKI sites, and in that case it is the latter that are fairly useless.  Most of the parish information on GENUKI seems to have been written a decade or so ago and barely updated since.  The county pages on Rootschat give another set of listings of sources for genealogy data. 

The fact that none of these sites truly gives a comprehensive and up to date picture of what resources are available is unfortunate.  In an ideal world all these non-commercial projects would coordinate their efforts and present a common face to the user community, making every effort to avoid duplication and pooling volunteer effort to the best effect.
John