> From: ovington1@sky.com > To: abruce@madasafish.com; angus@rootsweb.com > Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 19:16:58 +0100 > Subject: Re: [ANGUS] Aldershot - was Try again? > > Hi Adrian > > I would have been hugely surprised if I were the only one to question it but > as I said previously I already had the information from another source so > did not have the need to follow it up > {snip} > > As you can see they not only have the Theatre of War wrong they have swapped > the place of residence and enlistment > > Your suggestion is one possibility but still think my own suspicion that its > picking up the wrong database field is more likely and if so should be > relatively easily corrected This has been extensively discussed on soc.genealogy.britain as well, and the same conclusion was reached by about half the group - the database is referring to the wrong fields (I hadn't picked up on the birth/residence problem). The other half of the group backed the "transcription farmed out to people who couldn't read the writing" theory but since the original version of "Soldiers Who Died" is not handwritten, that doesn't really hold water (and the original version agrees with Find My past). I find Ancestry's attitude annoying because I'm paying them for data that should be accurate, but also offensive since the WW1 casualties deserve a bit more respect and care! Lesley Robertson _________________________________________________________________ What can you do with the new Windows Live? Find out http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/default.aspx

Hi Lesley As I said previously I am not surprised its been discussed before The categories under Theatre of War are a tad odd There are 560,103 = Aldershot 17,673 = British Expeditionary Force 32,566 = Brough - Sic 14,181 = Austria 30,014 = Antwerp 4,531 = Copenhagen There are also plenty with the Theatre of War blank which you cannot search on so don't know if that makes up the shortfall Red Cross offices perhaps? What Brough means I can't guess If I had found everything wrongly presented offensive I would have given up long since, thats not to say I don't think the fallen should have due respect but I feel our research into their lives shows far more respect than someone elses words If you wanted an example of something you could construe as disrespect, my grandfather died November 24th near Cambrai, I have his death scroll from the King, on it they have spelled his name wrong as YEOLL not YOELL But there again there were so many deaths its hardly surprising they got some names wrong, the people doing it were only human As I have said many times before, I would rather have the databases available now, warts and all than wait for the prefect article (which is totally unattainable anyway) Should I get an answer from Ancestry I will let you know the outcome but it will probably be the fob off that others have had Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > I find Ancestry's attitude annoying because I'm paying them for data that > should be accurate, > > but also offensive since the WW1 casualties deserve a bit more respect and > care! > > > > Lesley Robertson