Hello Without looking at the file I think you should type 3 lines. Wilson,John,Salford,XX #COMMENT(2) ENTRY SHOWS TYPED XX AND HAND-WRITTEN 477/S Wilson,John,Salford,477/S Maurice ======================================== Message Received: Oct 27 2011, 11:57 PM From: "Evan Biggs" To: FREEBMD-ADMINS@rootsweb.com Cc: Subject: Transcribing query Good Day Administrator. I have just transcribed and uploaded some entries for births 1846, March quarter. I have been given a message generated by the computer that an unusual entry was seen. The entry was and clearly the last set of digits is the "unusual" part. The first symbol on the original is unclear, hence the brackets. My query is, should I leave the entry as it is or should I add some comment in the downloaded file? If so, what? Sincerely, Evan Biggs (Evan59) FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Please see http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6q for details of how to transcribe this entry, i.e with the additional of a #THEORY,REF Please note that in sending to this list you are not sending to an "Administrator" but to everyone subscribed to the the Admins list - no problem, but just so you know. Barrie On 19:59, Evan Biggs wrote: > Good Day Administrator. I have just transcribed and uploaded some entries for > births 1846, March quarter. I have been given a message generated by the > computer that an unusual entry was seen. The entry was > <Wilson,John,Salford,XX,[S5]477/S> and clearly the last set of digits is the > "unusual" part. The first symbol on the original is unclear, hence the brackets. > > My query is, should I leave the entry as it is or should I add some comment in > the downloaded file? If so, what? > > Sincerely, Evan Biggs (Evan59) --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
Good Day Administrator. I have just transcribed and uploaded some entries for births 1846, March quarter. I have been given a message generated by the computer that an unusual entry was seen. The entry was <Wilson,John,Salford,XX,[S5]477/S> and clearly the last set of digits is the "unusual" part. The first symbol on the original is unclear, hence the brackets. My query is, should I leave the entry as it is or should I add some comment in the downloaded file? If so, what? Sincerely, Evan Biggs (Evan59)
If you make your own the best starting point would be the WinBMD districts file which is updated from data from the District Aliasing Team and contains information on the period when each district was in use. I imagine this is a completely different format from the BMDDIST file but its format is such that it can be easily manipulated using a spreadsheet and thus transformed into a BMDDIST file. If you would like a copy please let me know. Barrie On 19:59, Mike Sharp (France) wrote: > For transcribing, I use MacBMD. > > I have just been assigned some 1959 births and I find that my BMDDIST file has become obsolete as most districts have changed their volume numbers. Does anyone know from where I can download a 1959 compatible file or must I make my own? > > If the latter is the only option, when I have done it, can it be uploaded to FreeBMD so that it is available to other transcribers who are mac users? > > Thank you > > Mike Sharp > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--
Hi Mike I have updated my BMDDIST file for the new districts. However, there are some logic flaws with MacBMD in handling constructs such as 'St.' and 'Mt.' 'S.', 'N.' etc as it was not updated to reflect this. Regards Ralph E Snape On 24 Oct 2011, at 15:25, Mike Sharp (France) wrote: > For transcribing, I use MacBMD. > > I have just been assigned some 1959 births and I find that my BMDDIST file has become obsolete as most districts have changed their volume numbers. Does anyone know from where I can download a 1959 compatible file or must I make my own? > > If the latter is the only option, when I have done it, can it be uploaded to FreeBMD so that it is available to other transcribers who are mac users? > > Thank you > > Mike Sharp > > FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins > FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
For transcribing, I use MacBMD. I have just been assigned some 1959 births and I find that my BMDDIST file has become obsolete as most districts have changed their volume numbers. Does anyone know from where I can download a 1959 compatible file or must I make my own? If the latter is the only option, when I have done it, can it be uploaded to FreeBMD so that it is available to other transcribers who are mac users? Thank you Mike Sharp
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message and no other text. Jeff list admin
Dealt with Jeff list admin ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Bentley" <bentley@fairview1.freeserve.co.uk> To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 11:27 PM Subject: RE: FREEBMD-ADMINS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 128 > Please can I be deleted from the freebmd circulation list. > > Thank you,
Please can I be deleted from the freebmd circulation list. Thank you, Susan Bentley bentley@fairview1.freeserve.co.uk From: freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of freebmd-admins-request@rootsweb.com Sent: 17 October 2011 08:01 To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com Subject: FREEBMD-ADMINS Digest, Vol 6, Issue 128
Hazel You will find the correct aprroach to dealing with this problem is shown in our Transcribers' Knowledge Base (TKB) at http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html . Q&A 6 (d) refers which mentions: If the original field is not crossed out, transcribe the line twice, once with the original field value and once with the amendment. After the first entry add a comment such as: #COMMENT(2) original <fieldname> of <orginalvalue> had a handwritten amendment of <newvalue> where <fieldname> is the name of the field (surname, page number, etc.), <originalvalue> is the original value of the field and <newvalue> the amendment. (This form of comment causes the comment to be attached to both entries.) Allan Raymond FreeBMD Coordinator of Syndicates --- On Mon, 17/10/11, Hazel Kingston <hazelkingston@gmail.com> wrote: From: Hazel Kingston <hazelkingston@gmail.com> Subject: Too much info for page no. column To: FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com Date: Monday, 17 October, 2011, 7:27 I have a hand-written page number (1033/S) added to typed number 642. Normally the latter would be deleted. TWYS and left a space between. A warning came up stating there's not usually spaces in these boxed entries. Is there a better or alternative way of entering this? (1957B3B0148) Hazel FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hazel I also checked this out first time I came across it and the answer given was :- type 2 entries, one with page number 642 and one with 1033/S plus a comment between - #COMMENT(2) Original page number 642 has handwritten addition 1033/S Alan -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Hazel Kingston Sent: 17 October 2011 07:28 To: FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com Subject: Too much info for page no. column I have a hand-written page number (1033/S) added to typed number 642. Normally the latter would be deleted. TWYS and left a space between. A warning came up stating there's not usually spaces in these boxed entries. Is there a better or alternative way of entering this? (1957B3B0148) Hazel FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
I have come across a number of similar entries in 1958 Births and have been dealing with them, rightly or wrongly, as if they are alternative page numbers; i.e. create 2 entries, one with page number 642 and one with 1033/S and use a comment between them of the form: #COMMENT(2) Original page number 642 has handwritten addition 1033/S Phil
I have a hand-written page number (1033/S) added to typed number 642. Normally the latter would be deleted. TWYS and left a space between. A warning came up stating there's not usually spaces in these boxed entries. Is there a better or alternative way of entering this? (1957B3B0148) Hazel
I know there are at least a couple of people on this list who have been in software development. I have a question or two that they may be able to help me with related to registering dll and ocx libraries. If anyone knows anything about this could they please email me ianbrooke@hotmail.com Thanks Ian
With some enhancement I can just make out Templeman for the mother's name. I think this entry is feint because it has been erased following being entered in its correct place on the previous scan (1942B4W0316). Martin Cope ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Simpson" <keithfreebmd@gmail.com> To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 3:28 PM Subject: Unreadable Entry > Hello > On the bottom of column one page 1942B4W0317. There is what appears to be > a > handwritten entry it is so feint, and cannot be read. > I would like confirmation about what to insert on the file. I was going to > suggest the use of the asterisk but this does not seem right. > Keith > >
Keith Personally I can't enhance the image sufficient enough to be able to read the entry. I would suggest you use * UCF with a #COMMENT line underneath to say something like #COMMENT Unreadable handwritten addition on page. This will at least identify the handwritten entry for the time when we have access to a scan with a clearer entry. Allan Raymond --- On Mon, 10/10/11, Keith Simpson <keithfreebmd@gmail.com> wrote: From: Keith Simpson <keithfreebmd@gmail.com> Subject: Unreadable Entry To: "freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com" <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Date: Monday, 10 October, 2011, 15:28 Hello On the bottom of column one page 1942B4W0317. There is what appears to be a handwritten entry it is so feint, and cannot be read. I would like confirmation about what to insert on the file. I was going to suggest the use of the asterisk but this does not seem right. Keith FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hello All I found Wigan in the page range I had downloaded for that Year/Event/Quarter. Only a theory but the facts fit this - There is no reason there should be 5 entries per page number. 5 is only the theoretical maximum. Each institution has its own page range within a district and there will only be 5 entries per page if every institution has 10 events (right and left page). With enough feedback from existing certificates we should be able to map out the institutions within a district especially if the GRO always compiled institutions in the same order. cheers Bob Phillips ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 7:44 PM Subject: Re: Missing Page Range Data > To add to Jeff's comments. > > At the bottom of a Page Map result page is the following detail "The page > numbers in a quarter are examined and a page range is determined based on > frequency and contiguousness". > > A check on the distribution of the pages for Wigan for Deaths for 1839 > December shows the pages are not totally contiguousness and there is > great variation in the number of entries for each page. For page range > 547 to 613 the number of entries for any particular page can vary between > 1 and 5, whereas you would expect to see the same number for each page. > This problem is caused by the high incidence of UCF entries. > > Whilst using a spreadsheet approach will provide the basis for determining > the page range it may very well be that the algorithm used to > automatically work out the page range maps is failing due to the > non-contiguousness of the pages together the wide variation in the number > of entries per page. Further reading is at > http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/freebmd-admins/2011-01/1296208095 > for anyone who may be interested? > > There is a good reason why the Richard Oliver Syndicate were allocated and > started transcribing from the UKD-01 scans as opposed to the ANC-05. Quite > simply the ANC-05 scans weren't available at the time I allocated 1839 > Deaths to his Syndicate as part of double keying. The good news is that > according to the uploads for the Richard Oliver Syndicate they have been > transcribing from the ANC-05 scans for quite a while and it only requires > a slight administration task to show Richard's Syndicate against the > ANC-05 scans, I'll discuss this further with Richard off list. > > Allan Raymond > FreeBMD Coordinator of Syndicates > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jeff Coleman > To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 2:41 PM > Subject: Re: Missing Page Range Data > > > Simply by searching for Deaths in Wigan District in December quarter > 1839, > without putting in any surname or forename, you get all the entries. > Judging by the number of UCF entries, the original images this quarter > were > transcribed from may well have been rather poor. This may well explain > why > there are also a number of entries which quite simply look wrong. > > By copying and sorting in a spreadsheet, it appears that there is a > continuous run of entries from around 547 to 615, but a considerable > scatter > of entries (which may have been misread) outside this range. 478 entries > are > found within this range, with 138 entries either outside it or UCF. > > By comparing with the other quarters of 1839 Deaths in > > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/district-page-map.pl?file=1839D1.csv%201839D2.csv%201839D3.csv%201839D4.csv > it appears that Wigan is the last district in volume XXI (21) and follows > on > after Todmorden. the last page for Todmorden is 546 in Dec qr 1839 > Deaths, > which agrees with my crude analysis above. > > However a page range is simply a transcribing aid. Type What You See, > even > if it is outside the range. > > The ANC-05 images look much better than the UKD-01 images, so I am > surprised > to see that http://www2.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/bmd-range.pl shows the Richard > Oliver syndicate as transcribing from UKD-01, not ANC-05. I do hope that > you > are using the ANC-05 images, and only using the rescans in the UKD-01 > series > as a second alternative source in case of doubt. > > Jeff > > Original Message ----- > From: "Malcolm Gill" <malcolm.gill@talktalk.net> > To: <FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 12:35 PM > Subject: Missing Page Range Data > > > > Good morning all > > > > I can’t find page range data for Wigan for 1839 December Deaths. Is > there > > any other way to find this info other than via > > Transcribers/Statistics/Districts/Page Ranges? > > > > Malcolm Gill, please send an email to > FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive > http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins > FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Hi Allan Thank you for your full explanation. As one of Richard's syndicate I'm as keen as you and he that we achieve the greatest possible accuracy. Kind regards Malcolm Gill -----Original Message----- From: Allan Raymond Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 7:44 PM To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Missing Page Range Data To add to Jeff's comments. At the bottom of a Page Map result page is the following detail "The page numbers in a quarter are examined and a page range is determined based on frequency and contiguousness". A check on the distribution of the pages for Wigan for Deaths for 1839 December shows the pages are not totally contiguousness and there is great variation in the number of entries for each page. For page range 547 to 613 the number of entries for any particular page can vary between 1 and 5, whereas you would expect to see the same number for each page. This problem is caused by the high incidence of UCF entries. Whilst using a spreadsheet approach will provide the basis for determining the page range it may very well be that the algorithm used to automatically work out the page range maps is failing due to the non-contiguousness of the pages together the wide variation in the number of entries per page. Further reading is at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/freebmd-admins/2011-01/1296208095 for anyone who may be interested? There is a good reason why the Richard Oliver Syndicate were allocated and started transcribing from the UKD-01 scans as opposed to the ANC-05. Quite simply the ANC-05 scans weren't available at the time I allocated 1839 Deaths to his Syndicate as part of double keying. The good news is that according to the uploads for the Richard Oliver Syndicate they have been transcribing from the ANC-05 scans for quite a while and it only requires a slight administration task to show Richard's Syndicate against the ANC-05 scans, I'll discuss this further with Richard off list. Allan Raymond FreeBMD Coordinator of Syndicates ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Coleman To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 2:41 PM Subject: Re: Missing Page Range Data Simply by searching for Deaths in Wigan District in December quarter 1839, without putting in any surname or forename, you get all the entries. Judging by the number of UCF entries, the original images this quarter were transcribed from may well have been rather poor. This may well explain why there are also a number of entries which quite simply look wrong. By copying and sorting in a spreadsheet, it appears that there is a continuous run of entries from around 547 to 615, but a considerable scatter of entries (which may have been misread) outside this range. 478 entries are found within this range, with 138 entries either outside it or UCF. By comparing with the other quarters of 1839 Deaths in http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/district-page-map.pl?file=1839D1.csv%201839D2.csv%201839D3.csv%201839D4.csv it appears that Wigan is the last district in volume XXI (21) and follows on after Todmorden. the last page for Todmorden is 546 in Dec qr 1839 Deaths, which agrees with my crude analysis above. However a page range is simply a transcribing aid. Type What You See, even if it is outside the range. The ANC-05 images look much better than the UKD-01 images, so I am surprised to see that http://www2.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/bmd-range.pl shows the Richard Oliver syndicate as transcribing from UKD-01, not ANC-05. I do hope that you are using the ANC-05 images, and only using the rescans in the UKD-01 series as a second alternative source in case of doubt. Jeff Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Gill" <malcolm.gill@talktalk.net> To: <FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 12:35 PM Subject: Missing Page Range Data > Good morning all > > I can’t find page range data for Wigan for 1839 December Deaths. Is there > any other way to find this info other than via > Transcribers/Statistics/Districts/Page Ranges? > > Malcolm Gill, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1522/3943 - Release Date: 10/07/11
To add to Jeff's comments. At the bottom of a Page Map result page is the following detail "The page numbers in a quarter are examined and a page range is determined based on frequency and contiguousness". A check on the distribution of the pages for Wigan for Deaths for 1839 December shows the pages are not totally contiguousness and there is great variation in the number of entries for each page. For page range 547 to 613 the number of entries for any particular page can vary between 1 and 5, whereas you would expect to see the same number for each page. This problem is caused by the high incidence of UCF entries. Whilst using a spreadsheet approach will provide the basis for determining the page range it may very well be that the algorithm used to automatically work out the page range maps is failing due to the non-contiguousness of the pages together the wide variation in the number of entries per page. Further reading is at http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/freebmd-admins/2011-01/1296208095 for anyone who may be interested? There is a good reason why the Richard Oliver Syndicate were allocated and started transcribing from the UKD-01 scans as opposed to the ANC-05. Quite simply the ANC-05 scans weren't available at the time I allocated 1839 Deaths to his Syndicate as part of double keying. The good news is that according to the uploads for the Richard Oliver Syndicate they have been transcribing from the ANC-05 scans for quite a while and it only requires a slight administration task to show Richard's Syndicate against the ANC-05 scans, I'll discuss this further with Richard off list. Allan Raymond FreeBMD Coordinator of Syndicates ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Coleman To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 2:41 PM Subject: Re: Missing Page Range Data Simply by searching for Deaths in Wigan District in December quarter 1839, without putting in any surname or forename, you get all the entries. Judging by the number of UCF entries, the original images this quarter were transcribed from may well have been rather poor. This may well explain why there are also a number of entries which quite simply look wrong. By copying and sorting in a spreadsheet, it appears that there is a continuous run of entries from around 547 to 615, but a considerable scatter of entries (which may have been misread) outside this range. 478 entries are found within this range, with 138 entries either outside it or UCF. By comparing with the other quarters of 1839 Deaths in http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/district-page-map.pl?file=1839D1.csv%201839D2.csv%201839D3.csv%201839D4.csv it appears that Wigan is the last district in volume XXI (21) and follows on after Todmorden. the last page for Todmorden is 546 in Dec qr 1839 Deaths, which agrees with my crude analysis above. However a page range is simply a transcribing aid. Type What You See, even if it is outside the range. The ANC-05 images look much better than the UKD-01 images, so I am surprised to see that http://www2.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/bmd-range.pl shows the Richard Oliver syndicate as transcribing from UKD-01, not ANC-05. I do hope that you are using the ANC-05 images, and only using the rescans in the UKD-01 series as a second alternative source in case of doubt. Jeff Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Gill" <malcolm.gill@talktalk.net> To: <FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 12:35 PM Subject: Missing Page Range Data > Good morning all > > I can’t find page range data for Wigan for 1839 December Deaths. Is there > any other way to find this info other than via > Transcribers/Statistics/Districts/Page Ranges? > > Malcolm Gill, please send an email to FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message