Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ancestry moan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ancestry moan

    Another one!

    Having just trudged through 56 pages of a district looking for The Disappeared, I noticed that at least four pages in that district appeared twice, with consecutive page numbers.

    Example: p42 appears again, called page 43. Contents identical. The REAL page 42 or 43, is therefore missing.

    One doesn't matter as it has just been filmed twice and there is no break in the continuity of the addresses. But the other three do matter, to me especially, as I cannot believe a whole family of two adults and seven children can all die in ten years.

    OC

  • #2
    Which census is it? Have you tried looking on the FindMyPast index instead? (unless it's 1851 or 1901 which they don't have)

    Comment


    • #3
      At least it's working for you,OC. I can't even get as far as the little boy!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Libby

        It's playing silly beggars with me though which is why I gave up searching by name and decided to plod through the images.

        Thanks Merry, it's the 1881 and they don't appear on family search either.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          OC

          1871 for the village of Shimpling in Suffolk is the same. 7 pages either missing or duplicated.
          I wrote to the CRO ar Bury St Edmunds a few years ago and they sent me photocopies of all the missing pages.

          Didn't cost a lot either.

          I needed them as I am doing (on and off) an unofficial one place study of the village.

          Comment


          • #6
            Margaret.
            How far back are you going into Shimpling history. If you are going back into the 1500 and 1600s I would be interested in any Corder or Wordley info.

            Thanks.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
              Thanks Merry, it's the 1881 and they don't appear on family search either.

              OC
              That's a shame, as I think the 1881 is the only census where all the different online companies are working from the same transcription!

              Might be worth contacting the local RO though.

              My Somerset lot appear on a set of pages (with about a thousand names) that were missed from the 1881 LDS version because someone got confused about a registration district that is mostly in Gloucestershire, but partly in Somerset......the Somerset bit got missed by the LDS altogether, but it is available at the RO.

              Comment


              • #8
                Ah, thanks, I didn't think of the Records Office.

                Another strange thing...I found a relative transcribed with an Ancestry flag thingy - not the yellow triangle.

                The name appeared in the correct version but when clicked on the thingy it took me to a page I have never seen before which said

                "Be the first Ancestry subscriber to correct this name"

                Unh? They have already corrected it. But also was a long list of "trees in which this name appears" - the wrong version of the name.

                Do they want someone to submit a yellow triangle correction or what? The correct version of the name is very clear on the image.

                OC

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SuffolkSue View Post
                  Margaret.
                  How far back are you going into Shimpling history. If you are going back into the 1500 and 1600s I would be interested in any Corder or Wordley info.

                  Thanks.
                  I have transcribed the parish registers from 1750-1900 completely, but I do have the PR's on fiche.

                  I have just checked and do have some early stuff transcribed and there are Corder's and Wordley's.

                  If you pm me your email addy I will send you what I have.

                  I haven't done anything to it for a while but the really early stuff was easy to read but about 1650-1750 was really hard to read and I gave up at the time.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X