I agree census were difficult to read, but sometimes I feel that the people who have indexed Ancestry need to use just a little common sense. One of my ancestors is Emanuel and it indexed as EMANIUIT Jenny ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jacqueline Wilde" <jacqwilde@lineone.net> To: <BUCKS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 6:54 PM Subject: [BKM] Faults > After having searched for 40 years at my wonderful reference library I > now have a computer and find it so much easier BUT I had been looking > everywhere for one of my NEIGHBOUR souls and a very kind lister managed > to > find him under HUGHBAN!! in the Ancestry Census of 1871 Also my ROSAM > grandparent was under ROSLEN, in the 1901 I know how difficult the early > Census are to read and am only too thankful that they are now on line. > Jacqueline > > > ==== BUCKS Mailing List ==== > Questions about the list administration? Contact the listowners: > Dave Carlsen - davidcarlsen@charter.net (USA); Judith Young - > Arkleside@ntlworld.com (UK) > >

"Jenny Cross" <jenny@jennycross.freeserve.co.uk> wrote : >I agree census were difficult to read, but sometimes I feel that the people >who have indexed Ancestry need to use just a little common sense. One of >my ancestors is Emanuel and it indexed as EMANIUIT The problem is that these are commercial transcriptions, completed as quickly as possible for commercial gain. They are not undertaken by people with any local knowledge, nor with any real concern for accuracy; best guess will suffice. While they are useful, they simply can't be relied upon to be more than perhaps 40 or 50% accurate at best. John B Leic., Eng

Hi, I do think everyone is being a bit carping about Ancestry and the census on line. OK they might not be perfect, but they are a lot better than 40 or 50% correct. I have found loads of missing rellies with their index. When I think of how difficult it was to find some of the census returns, when I started doing family history, twelve years ago, well it'a a great help. Of course it is better to have a local CD, prepared by people who are experienced. But sometimes the wretched people aren't even in the County, where you expect to find them, and in those cases the index can be very useful. I found someone in Yorkshire not Bucks in 1891 which cleared up a long standing mystery. Let's be a bit less picky. By the way, I bet you all had a wonderful 'Feast' so sorry we missed it. Bad back, couldn't drive. Cheers Leila. Original Message ----- From: "John Brown" <john.dehavilland@btinternet.com> To: <BUCKS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 11:14 PM Subject: Re: [BKM] Faults > "Jenny Cross" <jenny@jennycross.freeserve.co.uk> wrote : > > >>I agree census were difficult to read, but sometimes I feel that the >>people who have indexed Ancestry need to use just a little common sense. >>One of my ancestors is Emanuel and it indexed as EMANIUIT > > The problem is that these are commercial transcriptions, completed as > quickly as possible for commercial gain. They are not undertaken by people > with any local knowledge, nor with any real concern for accuracy; best > guess will suffice. While they are useful, they simply can't be relied > upon to be more than perhaps 40 or 50% accurate at best. > > John B > Leic., Eng > > ==== BUCKS Mailing List ==== > To view recent downloadable photos of Bucks churches and village scenes, > courtesy of Peter and Kevin Quick, visit: > http://www.countyviews.com >