Hi folks! Thought I would add my contribution to the note on corrections, for what its worth. The most common identified need for a correction seems to me to come to light when searching for a spouse of a known relative when looking up marriages. You find the marriage of your ancestor, then – as invited – you input the folio number to see who the others were on the same register page. Usually you come up with 4 – two of one sex (including your ancestor) and two of the other. You then know that you have a 50:50 chance of finding the spouse, and subsequent census returns will usually sort that out. However, I have had two occasions now where there have been only 3 entries! Despite TWYS, this means that the folio has been mis-input. A bit of searching can result in finding the correct person (on a page with 5 apparent entries!), but then there is the need to correct the folio number. When I input my source as “matching spouse from scan” (or something like that), it would not accept it. I ended up telling a ‘white lie’ and saying “FRC”, which was accepted. Shouldn’t there be an acceptable source which identifies this route for corrections? John Anderson

Yes John. There is an acceptable source. It's called the INDEX that WE are transcribing. IT IS NOT the John Anderson Little White Lie database. Most scans that the database is transcribed from are FREELY available for you to look at on the site. BOB PHILLIPS ----- Original Message ----- From: "john anderson" <andersontrainer@hotmail.com> To: <FreeBMD-Admins-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 8:46 PM Subject: Corrections > Hi folks! > > Thought I would add my contribution to the note on corrections, for what its > worth. The most common identified need for a correction seems to me to come > to light when searching for a spouse of a known relative when looking up > marriages. You find the marriage of your ancestor, then - as invited - you > input the folio number to see who the others were on the same register page. > Usually you come up with 4 - two of one sex (including your ancestor) and > two of the other. You then know that you have a 50:50 chance of finding the > spouse, and subsequent census returns will usually sort that out. > > However, I have had two occasions now where there have been only 3 entries! > Despite TWYS, this means that the folio has been mis-input. A bit of > searching can result in finding the correct person (on a page with 5 > apparent entries!), but then there is the need to correct the folio number. > When I input my source as "matching spouse from scan" (or something like > that), it would not accept it. I ended up telling a 'white lie' and saying > "FRC", which was accepted. > > Shouldn't there be an acceptable source which identifies this route for > corrections? > > John Anderson > > > > ==== FreeBMD-Admins Mailing List ==== > Want to help FreeBMD? > Go to http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/Signup.html to find out how. > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >

Hi John, Actually, you will also find that there are spouses who are MISSING from the quarterly indices, in that way back when the original indices were prepared they omitted recording the partner. There has been discussion over on the FREEBMD-DISCUSS mailing list about this matter and whether we should be looking to "improve" the index either now or in the future. Dave Mayall addressed the matter well. Can I ask that any future discussions about this matter be taken over to FREEBMD-DISCUSS as we are getting into that realm, not the helping of transcriptions. Regards Andrew List-admin for FreeBMD-Admins mailing list -> Visit http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com On 25 Nov 2005 at 20:46, john anderson wrote: > Hi folks! > > Thought I would add my contribution to the note on corrections, for what its > worth. The most common identified need for a correction seems to me to come > to light when searching for a spouse of a known relative when looking up > marriages. You find the marriage of your ancestor, then – as invited – you > input the folio number to see who the others were on the same register page. > Usually you come up with 4 – two of one sex (including your ancestor) and > two of the other. You then know that you have a 50:50 chance of finding the > spouse, and subsequent census returns will usually sort that out. > > However, I have had two occasions now where there have been only 3 entries! > Despite TWYS, this means that the folio has been mis-input. A bit of > searching can result in finding the correct person (on a page with 5 > apparent entries!), but then there is the need to correct the folio number. > When I input my source as “matching spouse from scan” (or something like > that), it would not accept it. I ended up telling a ‘white lie’ and saying > “FRC”, which was accepted. > > Shouldn’t there be an acceptable source which identifies this route for > corrections? > > John Anderson > > ______________________________