Incorrect Census transcriptions on Ancestry

[kerryb]

That's interesting to know Carol, but I agree with Barbara I find so few mistakes on FindMyPast.

I guess if Ancestry adopted that strategy, they would fast run out of money 

Kerry

[carol8353]

I guess if Ancestry adopted that strategy, they would fast run out of money 

Kerry

 

[bedfordshire boy]

Dancing Master - the transcription on the Ancestry site is a completely different transcription to the one done by Qinetiq for TNA.

They did not "allow it to be on their site unchecked in anyway by themselves knowing full well the problems that pre-existed their involvement" because it was their own transcription, probably even worse than the Qinetiq one.

They (Ancestry) were not "paid good money to do that job" - it was Qinetiq who was paid.

[Willow 4873]

My gripe about Ancestry isn't so much the mis-transcribing its the blooming search engine!

We all know there can be problems with the software reading the census but human error doent help at times as local dialect, bad spelling (bad hearing!) all contribute

But when I can't find a relly and end up doing an advanced search - why can't it just give me a list of the names I've asked for!

I tried to find in the 1871 census a Charles Bowkett b 1826 +/- 2 years Herefordshire who married to Ann so why when I search on that criteria does it give me Charles married to any other name but Ann! Then it gives me names I havent asked for and then its several pages down before I find another Charles married to an Ann. On three stars it only gave me 14 names of which only 1 Charles out of the 7 given was married to an Ann and on 4 stars and above it gave me nothing.

I have e-mailed them about it

Willow x

The e-mail I got back was much the same advice I received on here - use the exact matches facility. Still didnt explain why the search facility is so haphazard in bringing up names though.

I've corrected quite a few transcript error this week - Anlow written as Anslou - Best down as Bert. Plus a Harter Jame to Hester Jane

Also on the one census the children were put down as initials - I corrected it to the proper names as I knew what they were

I do it because I think it might make someone elses search easier and if I have to go back and check something I dont want to have to try and remember the rigmarole I went through to find them in the first place!

I've received e-mails thanking me for my corrections - something that has never happened before

Willow x

[Ecneps]

I've received e-mails thanking me for my corrections - something that has never happened before

You don't mean e-mails from ancestry 
Do you mean from other researchers, like the one I received the other day?

Barbara 

[Willow 4873]

No Barbara - actually from Ancestry!

It read

 
Dear Ancestry Member,

Thank you for taking time to submit a corrected name to Ancestry.com. Your correction has been added to our indexes so other Ancestry members can also see the information you shared.

Correction Details:

Title: 1881 England Census

Original Given Name:
Corrected Given Name:

Original Surname: Anslou
Corrected Surname: Anslow

Click here to see your correction in context.

We appreciate your efforts to help us improve the quality of our genealogical records.

Sincerely,
Ancestry Member Services


and yes I was well suprised!

Willow x
 

[Ecneps]

So I can expect to receive at least 20 in the next few days then

 

[Willow 4873]

Yeap - theres 15 sitting in my recycle bin at the moment lol

Willow x

[millymcb]

I added a correction and it took a few weeks to make it's way onto the site...but eventually it did.  And the very next day I had a mail from someone who had been looking for the family for ages and had finally managed to find them because of my correction. I think he turned out to be a 4th cousin or something like that and we swapped a bit of family info. Apparently his aged mother was thrilled to have found out all the information on the family he was then able to give her. And I was happy to have helped