Dear All, I've now put online Bob Chown's transcription of the 1881 census for Woodchurch. Bob was assisted by two other members of the Woodchurch 14+ group: Robert Sear and Jennie Light. You'll find the transcription, along with the rest of the growing Woodchurch Census Collection, at: www.goldbern.co.uk/woodchurch/census Thanks again to Bob, Robert and Jennie. Gary Samson Canterbury, Kent Woodchurch Then & Now www.goldbern.co.uk/woodchurch/thenandnow.htm

Dear Gary Many thanks. The search screens and criteria are the best!!! It might be helpful to note in your introduction page that the Centre for Kentish Studies at Maidstone have a full set of Census Images on film. Thanks again - Bob Chown Gary Samson <gsamson@goldbern.co.uk> wrote: Dear All, I've now put online Bob Chown's transcription of the 1881 census for Woodchurch. Bob was assisted by two other members of the Woodchurch 14+ group: Robert Sear and Jennie Light. You'll find the transcription, along with the rest of the growing Woodchurch Census Collection, at: www.goldbern.co.uk/woodchurch/census Thanks again to Bob, Robert and Jennie. Gary Samson Canterbury, Kent Woodchurch Then & Now www.goldbern.co.uk/woodchurch/thenandnow.htm ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-KEN-WOODCHURCH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi folks, This is an excellent resource and a great addition to the site. Checking out my Holyers (all present and correct), I was reminded that the Jane Holyer shown in 1861 as the grandaughter of Martha Hook was actually her great-grandaughter and her registered name was Sarah Jane Holyer. Moral: even an accurate transcription inevitably repeats the errors of those enumerated and the enumerators themselves. Of course, ideally we would have some way of annotating these records where we have more information about the individual, but I realise that this is non-trivial (though I do wonder if a self-service wiki would be something we could all contribute to, either on Gary's site or my 14+ site). In the meantime, many thanks to all concerned. By the way, I must apologise, but it looks as if I won't be able to make the 7th July meeting - I have to take my daughter on a university open day. Best Wishes Peter Walker Hollyer~Holyer~Hollier One Name Study Web: http://www.hollyer.name Blog: http://hollyer.blogspot.com/ DNA: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Hollyer

Dear Peter Many thanks for your kind words. I now include two fields in the transcribed Census databases. The first is 'Details' where the enumerator writes something that is outside the normal classifications. The other is 'Notes' where I include some information that I think would help anyone trying to sort out their Woodchurch family genealogy. Clearly I have the benefit of all the CMB, MI and Census databases online and an unlimited use contract with Findmypast. If the original entry has anything odd about it I try to double check it elsewhere. I would suggest the 'Notes' Field is a suitable place for annotating the records. I will include your notes on Sarah Jane Holyer in the next release I send to Gary. This is probably a good place to add a few comments about the quality of the Woodchurch Findmypast household transcriptions on which all searches of that database are based. When transcribing the 1861 Census, I started to compare my transcription with the Findmypast household transcriptions to find that about 90% had errors. Preparing these, sending them and recording their implementation was very time consuming and labourious. About 15% of surnames were wrong. Ages, addresses and town where born had about the same error rate. Forenames were good. I wrote Transcription Error Reports for most of those I found but have not done so for the 1891, 1881 or 1841 Census transcriptions. I just got fed up with it after about 200. It is something I would appreciate member's help with if their find the same situation with their Woodchurch ancestors in any of the Findmypast, Ancestry.com etc. transcriptions. I believe all other transcriptions may have the same problem e.g. KING/ RING, BARMAN/BANNAN. I am currently transcribing the Woodchurch Christenings/Baptisms 1675 to 1989 and I used the KFHS transcriptions as a start point. I transcribed 1813-1842 to find the KFHS transcription only contained about 20% for that period. This represented nearly 1000 missed. I have also done 1675 to 1702 and that seems close to 100%. I would appreciate some feedback. Best wishes - Bob Chown Peter Walker <peter.john.walker@gmail.com> wrote: Hi folks, This is an excellent resource and a great addition to the site. Checking out my Holyers (all present and correct), I was reminded that the Jane Holyer shown in 1861 as the grandaughter of Martha Hook was actually her great-grandaughter and her registered name was Sarah Jane Holyer. Moral: even an accurate transcription inevitably repeats the errors of those enumerated and the enumerators themselves. Of course, ideally we would have some way of annotating these records where we have more information about the individual, but I realise that this is non-trivial (though I do wonder if a self-service wiki would be something we could all contribute to, either on Gary's site or my 14+ site). In the meantime, many thanks to all concerned. By the way, I must apologise, but it looks as if I won't be able to make the 7th July meeting - I have to take my daughter on a university open day. Best Wishes Peter Walker Hollyer~Holyer~Hollier One Name Study Web: http://www.hollyer.name Blog: http://hollyer.blogspot.com/ DNA: http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Hollyer ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-KEN-WOODCHURCH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Dear Peter, I had thought of adding an additional field to each of the census databases. This new field would be modifiable, only by Woodchurch 14+ members, so that individual records could be annotated, as you suggest. We already have a limited-access wiki successfully running behind the scenes, managing information and organisation for the 1871 exhibition. It would certainly be possible to link software like this to the census transcription databases but, I think, an editable field for each of the censuses might be easier to implement. I'll investigate and see what the more practical solution might be. All the best Gary Peter Walker said the following on 31.05.2007 08:39: > Of course, ideally we would have some way of annotating these records where > we have more information about the individual, but I realise that this is > non-trivial (though I do wonder if a self-service wiki would be something we > could all contribute to, either on Gary's site or my 14+ site). In the > meantime, many thanks to all concerned.

Dear Gary A good idea. Bob Chown Gary Samson <gsamson@goldbern.co.uk> wrote: Dear Peter, I had thought of adding an additional field to each of the census databases. This new field would be modifiable, only by Woodchurch 14+ members, so that individual records could be annotated, as you suggest. We already have a limited-access wiki successfully running behind the scenes, managing information and organisation for the 1871 exhibition. It would certainly be possible to link software like this to the census transcription databases but, I think, an editable field for each of the censuses might be easier to implement. I'll investigate and see what the more practical solution might be. All the best Gary Peter Walker said the following on 31.05.2007 08:39: > Of course, ideally we would have some way of annotating these records where > we have more information about the individual, but I realise that this is > non-trivial (though I do wonder if a self-service wiki would be something we > could all contribute to, either on Gary's site or my 14+ site). In the > meantime, many thanks to all concerned. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-KEN-WOODCHURCH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message