On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:36:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time), you wrote: > >I am new as a FreeBMD transcriber but would ask why are we calling them >corrections? I have had one scan that will have to be rescanned because I >couldn't read everything. I put in * and _ as needed. I think it is more >of an update than a correction. That is what we are looking at. Give us some time to work through it though. -- Dave Mayall

Thank you. Just curious. I think it is a marvellous project. On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Dave Mayall wrote: > That is what we are looking at. > > Give us some time to work through it though. -- Elizabeth (Blake) Kipp mailto:kippeeb@magma.ca

The best example I can think of regarding a valid "corrections" report Assuming you had a good scan and assuming you mistranscribed a clear entry. It would be quite legitimate for anyone finding such an error to issue a "corrections " report. This would not be to update your entry it would be to correct your entry. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Elizabeth Kipp <kippeeb@magma.ca> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 14 March 2004 22:39 Subject: Re: Correction Requests > >I am new as a FreeBMD transcriber but would ask why are we calling them >corrections? I have had one scan that will have to be rescanned because I >couldn't read everything. I put in * and _ as needed. I think it is more >of an update than a correction. I gave permission to have my email address >attached to my work so that one could email me and query as I have kept >the scans on my hard drive. I shall put them into folders with enough >wording to identify them and make it easier for myself. > >Plus if people send in their comments because the original transcript from >which we are working had errors they are not really our errors we are just >typing what we see. I liked the idea of making my email available so that >I can make the changes after verifying with John Slann. > >Elizabeth Kipp > >On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Dave Mayall wrote: > >> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:59:17 EST, you wrote: >> >> >Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: >> > >> >Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we can >> >understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to an >> >individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. >> >> Given that the corrections have NOT been generated by anybody acting >> in an official capacity for FreeBMD, it is difficult for me to comment >> on the methodology. >> >> > >-- >Elizabeth (Blake) Kipp >mailto:kippeeb@magma.ca > >webpage: http://www.magma.ca/~kippeeb/ > > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

Jennifer To add to Dave's separate comments. I had my own personal concerns about what appeared to be a systematic approach to multiple error corrections. Following my initial response to your query on 6 March 2004 I've been actively involved with other members of the Project team on the way forward. I've identified the instigator of the large number of systematic corrections and we've finally been in contact with each other within the last couple of days. This individual was working on his own initiative to improve the accuracy of our records and assumed his systematic methodology in identifying and reporting any perceived errors would aid the Project. Whilst the accuracy of his correction reports is not in doubt the method by which he generated them is of concern , based on your and other volunteers comments. The individual has now ceased the practice of systematic corrections and it would be impractical to backtractck on the corrections issued to date. I would however recommend that any corrections which have been sent to volunteers are acted upon if the corrections are deemed to be valid. As Dave mentioned we are still discussing the issue and will report back when we have something more positive. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: CLARK1528@aol.com <CLARK1528@aol.com> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 14 March 2004 22:00 Subject: Re: Correction Requests >Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: > >Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we can >understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to an >individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. > >I am now up to at least 10 separate requests to correct one particular file. >And, this is happening with multiple files. > >One would think that pages are checked from beginning to end, with errors >noted, then going on to the next page. But, this is not what appears to be >happening. > >Thank you, >Jennifer Clark > >In a message dated 3/14/04 2:39:11 PM Central Standard Time, >david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk writes: >Discussion is still ongoing. > >However, that discussion is centred around whether there are certain >types of correction which are unlikely to result in transcribers >making changes in accordance with TWYS. > >There is a possibility that we will refine the filtering of >corrections to cut out some of the ones that tend simply to waste the >time of transcribers. > >However the advice to transcribers as to how they should deal with >corrections received will not change, and it will not be practical to >tell each transcriber which corrections already sent would not have >been sent under the new guidelines, so there is no point in holding >back from dealing with corrections that you have already received. > >-- >Dave Mayall > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:59:17 EST, you wrote: >Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: > >Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we can >understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to an >individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. Given that the corrections have NOT been generated by anybody acting in an official capacity for FreeBMD, it is difficult for me to comment on the methodology. -- Dave Mayall

Allan and Dave, Thank you very much for your responses. And Allan, thanks for working out this issue. I have no problem making corrections where needed - just sought some understanding on the whole process, and thought it could be a tad more efficient. I will follow up with the recommended corrections I've been holding. Appreciate your help. Jennifer Clark

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 15:10:36 EST, you wrote: >Just wondering if there has been progress on this issue? I've gotten a >number of correction requests this past week and am holding on to them pending a >decision. Discussion is still ongoing. However, that discussion is centred around whether there are certain types of correction which are unlikely to result in transcribers making changes in accordance with TWYS. There is a possibility that we will refine the filtering of corrections to cut out some of the ones that tend simply to waste the time of transcribers. However the advice to transcribers as to how they should deal with corrections received will not change, and it will not be practical to tell each transcriber which corrections already sent would not have been sent under the new guidelines, so there is no point in holding back from dealing with corrections that you have already received. -- Dave Mayall

I am trying very hard not to have any of those. John Slann was most direct in expressing the need to verify carefully before tramitting to BMD. I understand then what is meant by correction. Much appreciated. Elizabeth Kipp On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Allan Raymond wrote: > The best example I can think of regarding a valid "corrections" report > > Assuming you had a good scan and assuming you mistranscribed a clear entry. > > It would be quite legitimate for anyone finding such an error to issue a > "corrections " report. > > This would not be to update your entry it would be to correct your entry. > > Allan Raymond > > -----Original Message----- > From: Elizabeth Kipp <kippeeb@magma.ca> > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: 14 March 2004 22:39 > Subject: Re: Correction Requests > > > > > >I am new as a FreeBMD transcriber but would ask why are we calling them > >corrections? I have had one scan that will have to be rescanned because I > >couldn't read everything. I put in * and _ as needed. I think it is more > >of an update than a correction. I gave permission to have my email address > >attached to my work so that one could email me and query as I have kept > >the scans on my hard drive. I shall put them into folders with enough > >wording to identify them and make it easier for myself. > > > >Plus if people send in their comments because the original transcript from > >which we are working had errors they are not really our errors we are just > >typing what we see. I liked the idea of making my email available so that > >I can make the changes after verifying with John Slann. > > > >Elizabeth Kipp > > > >On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Dave Mayall wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:59:17 EST, you wrote: > >> > >> >Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: > >> > > >> >Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we > can > >> >understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to > an > >> >individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. > >> > >> Given that the corrections have NOT been generated by anybody acting > >> in an official capacity for FreeBMD, it is difficult for me to comment > >> on the methodology. > >> > >> > > > >-- > >Elizabeth (Blake) Kipp > >mailto:kippeeb@magma.ca > > > >webpage: http://www.magma.ca/~kippeeb/ > > > > > > > >============================== > >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > -- Elizabeth (Blake) Kipp mailto:kippeeb@magma.ca webpage: http://www.magma.ca/~kippeeb/

I am new as a FreeBMD transcriber but would ask why are we calling them corrections? I have had one scan that will have to be rescanned because I couldn't read everything. I put in * and _ as needed. I think it is more of an update than a correction. I gave permission to have my email address attached to my work so that one could email me and query as I have kept the scans on my hard drive. I shall put them into folders with enough wording to identify them and make it easier for myself. Plus if people send in their comments because the original transcript from which we are working had errors they are not really our errors we are just typing what we see. I liked the idea of making my email available so that I can make the changes after verifying with John Slann. Elizabeth Kipp On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Dave Mayall wrote: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 16:59:17 EST, you wrote: > > >Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: > > > >Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we can > >understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to an > >individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. > > Given that the corrections have NOT been generated by anybody acting > in an official capacity for FreeBMD, it is difficult for me to comment > on the methodology. > > -- Elizabeth (Blake) Kipp mailto:kippeeb@magma.ca webpage: http://www.magma.ca/~kippeeb/

Then, I guess I'm back to my original question: Could we please be informed how our records are being checked so that we can understand why we are getting multiple requests to make corrections to an individual file rather than one request with multiple corrections. I am now up to at least 10 separate requests to correct one particular file. And, this is happening with multiple files. One would think that pages are checked from beginning to end, with errors noted, then going on to the next page. But, this is not what appears to be happening. Thank you, Jennifer Clark In a message dated 3/14/04 2:39:11 PM Central Standard Time, david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk writes: Discussion is still ongoing. However, that discussion is centred around whether there are certain types of correction which are unlikely to result in transcribers making changes in accordance with TWYS. There is a possibility that we will refine the filtering of corrections to cut out some of the ones that tend simply to waste the time of transcribers. However the advice to transcribers as to how they should deal with corrections received will not change, and it will not be practical to tell each transcriber which corrections already sent would not have been sent under the new guidelines, so there is no point in holding back from dealing with corrections that you have already received. -- Dave Mayall

Just wondering if there has been progress on this issue? I've gotten a number of correction requests this past week and am holding on to them pending a decision. Jennifer Clark In a message dated 3/6/04 10:24:51 AM Central Standard Time, allan_raymond@btinternet.com writes: Hi If we could hang fire on any further discussions on the Corrections process for a short while. This is not meant to stifle discussion regarding the concerns by some of the recent corespondents. This issue is being discussed within the Project Team at the moment and I would assume Kevin, the Corrections Co-ordinator will report the outcome. It looks as if we can provide a solution which is more amenable to some recipients of bulk correction reports. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: John and Val Turner <val@mumsmadhouse.freeserve.co.uk> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 06 March 2004 16:04 Subject: Re: Correction Requests >I agree. Since my comment on this topic on wednesday (when I had 50 + >corrections outstanding) I've had a request for another 25 on Thursday >(after which I wrote to the originator telling him I was overwhelmed by the >amount of work I was being asked to do - and requested that he stop sending >requests until further notice). This was followed by a request today >(saturday) for another 17 corrections. > >To correct a file takes several minutes >- to download again the original scan >- to retrieve my previous transcribed file >- to locate the potential error >- to assess/correct it >- to save the corrected file back to FREEBMD >- to send the corrected file to my syndicate coordinator >- to save my corrected file back to my records > >Its frustrating therefore that I have been asked to revisit one file on 5 >separate occassions. It would have been so much easier to have corrected >everything for that file in one pass - and I'm beginning to feel that the >project doesn't really value my time. > >Is the correction process using this paricular system something that is >happening in the SCAN2 syndicate only - or is it a centrally controlled >function > >Val >----- Original Message ----- >From: <CLARK1528@aol.com> >To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:53 PM >Subject: Correction Requests > > >> It would really help me if someone could explain the process that is going >on >> regarding correction requests. >> >> From the requests I'm receiving, it appears on one hand that each page of >> submissions is being checked thoroughly. However, on the other hand, I'm >not >> getting one request for all the errors on a particular page at one time. >> >> Instead, I'm getting a list comprising 1 or 2 corrections each from 5-7 >> different submissions one day, and then several days later getting a anoth >list of >> more corrections (different than the first) for the same 5-7 pages. For >some >> pages, I've received at least 5 requests for corrections. And yes, some >are >> typos and some are characters I could not read. >> >> From my end, it would be much more productive to get all the corrections >> needed for ONE PAGE, then move on to the next. >> >> Jennifer Clark >> Scan2 >> >> >> ============================== >> Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >> Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >> > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > ============================== Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930

Hello All, I've just come across a very bad quality scan and found it necessary to request a re-scan. I then thought that it would be nice if the whole process could be automated within WinBMD under the File options. I know this would mean more work for our hard-working Techies (Ian?), but perhaps he/they could give it some thought. Regards, Colin

On Sat, 6 Mar 2004 18:37:07 -0000, you wrote: >Is there any way that the results from a search can be saved to a >spreadsheet and then sorted? Not at present, but we are hoping to introduce this feature soon. -- Dave Mayall

Is there any way that the results from a search can be saved to a spreadsheet and then sorted? Kind Regards Peter Scan2 216

Hi If we could hang fire on any further discussions on the Corrections process for a short while. This is not meant to stifle discussion regarding the concerns by some of the recent corespondents. This issue is being discussed within the Project Team at the moment and I would assume Kevin, the Corrections Co-ordinator will report the outcome. It looks as if we can provide a solution which is more amenable to some recipients of bulk correction reports. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: John and Val Turner <val@mumsmadhouse.freeserve.co.uk> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 06 March 2004 16:04 Subject: Re: Correction Requests >I agree. Since my comment on this topic on wednesday (when I had 50 + >corrections outstanding) I've had a request for another 25 on Thursday >(after which I wrote to the originator telling him I was overwhelmed by the >amount of work I was being asked to do - and requested that he stop sending >requests until further notice). This was followed by a request today >(saturday) for another 17 corrections. > >To correct a file takes several minutes >- to download again the original scan >- to retrieve my previous transcribed file >- to locate the potential error >- to assess/correct it >- to save the corrected file back to FREEBMD >- to send the corrected file to my syndicate coordinator >- to save my corrected file back to my records > >Its frustrating therefore that I have been asked to revisit one file on 5 >separate occassions. It would have been so much easier to have corrected >everything for that file in one pass - and I'm beginning to feel that the >project doesn't really value my time. > >Is the correction process using this paricular system something that is >happening in the SCAN2 syndicate only - or is it a centrally controlled >function > >Val >----- Original Message ----- >From: <CLARK1528@aol.com> >To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> >Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:53 PM >Subject: Correction Requests > > >> It would really help me if someone could explain the process that is going >on >> regarding correction requests. >> >> From the requests I'm receiving, it appears on one hand that each page of >> submissions is being checked thoroughly. However, on the other hand, I'm >not >> getting one request for all the errors on a particular page at one time. >> >> Instead, I'm getting a list comprising 1 or 2 corrections each from 5-7 >> different submissions one day, and then several days later getting a anoth >list of >> more corrections (different than the first) for the same 5-7 pages. For >some >> pages, I've received at least 5 requests for corrections. And yes, some >are >> typos and some are characters I could not read. >> >> From my end, it would be much more productive to get all the corrections >> needed for ONE PAGE, then move on to the next. >> >> Jennifer Clark >> Scan2 >> >> >> ============================== >> Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >> Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >> http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >> > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >

I agree. Since my comment on this topic on wednesday (when I had 50 + corrections outstanding) I've had a request for another 25 on Thursday (after which I wrote to the originator telling him I was overwhelmed by the amount of work I was being asked to do - and requested that he stop sending requests until further notice). This was followed by a request today (saturday) for another 17 corrections. To correct a file takes several minutes - to download again the original scan - to retrieve my previous transcribed file - to locate the potential error - to assess/correct it - to save the corrected file back to FREEBMD - to send the corrected file to my syndicate coordinator - to save my corrected file back to my records Its frustrating therefore that I have been asked to revisit one file on 5 separate occassions. It would have been so much easier to have corrected everything for that file in one pass - and I'm beginning to feel that the project doesn't really value my time. Is the correction process using this paricular system something that is happening in the SCAN2 syndicate only - or is it a centrally controlled function Val ----- Original Message ----- From: <CLARK1528@aol.com> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:53 PM Subject: Correction Requests > It would really help me if someone could explain the process that is going on > regarding correction requests. > > From the requests I'm receiving, it appears on one hand that each page of > submissions is being checked thoroughly. However, on the other hand, I'm not > getting one request for all the errors on a particular page at one time. > > Instead, I'm getting a list comprising 1 or 2 corrections each from 5-7 > different submissions one day, and then several days later getting a anoth list of > more corrections (different than the first) for the same 5-7 pages. For some > pages, I've received at least 5 requests for corrections. And yes, some are > typos and some are characters I could not read. > > From my end, it would be much more productive to get all the corrections > needed for ONE PAGE, then move on to the next. > > Jennifer Clark > Scan2 > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 >

It would really help me if someone could explain the process that is going on regarding correction requests. From the requests I'm receiving, it appears on one hand that each page of submissions is being checked thoroughly. However, on the other hand, I'm not getting one request for all the errors on a particular page at one time. Instead, I'm getting a list comprising 1 or 2 corrections each from 5-7 different submissions one day, and then several days later getting a anoth list of more corrections (different than the first) for the same 5-7 pages. For some pages, I've received at least 5 requests for corrections. And yes, some are typos and some are characters I could not read. From my end, it would be much more productive to get all the corrections needed for ONE PAGE, then move on to the next. Jennifer Clark Scan2

Ah! Thanks for that reminder. I'll make sure that I don't compromise FreeBMD. Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allan Raymond" <allan_raymond@btinternet.com> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 6:58 PM Subject: Re: Systematic correction requests > The only problem I can see is that you don't inadvertently contravene the > requirements contained in http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/vol_faq.html#13i > regarding '1837online'. > > Allan Raymond > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Southcombe <ted@southcombe1.freeserve.co.uk> > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: 05 March 2004 16:58 > Subject: Re: Systematic correction requests > > > >Chris Preece asked :- > > > >> For the moment quality source material is not always available, but I > have > >> found that a second copy from LDS of the same source is sometimes > helpful. > >Are > >> there any other ways of obtaining quality material? > > > >This may raise a hackle or two, but whenever I use '1837online' I take the > >opportunity to download any scans which have troubled me. At effectively > 10 > >pence per page this is cheaper than occasional visits to my nearest Records > >Office which I used to do and often the scans are of better quality; > >sometimes however they look just the same. I can then edit my uploaded > >files with corrections especially to any unreadable characters. > > > >Ted > > > > > > > >============================== > >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > > > > ============================== > Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration > Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237 > >

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:56:44 -0000, you wrote: >Chris Preece asked :- > >> For the moment quality source material is not always available, but I have >> found that a second copy from LDS of the same source is sometimes helpful. >Are >> there any other ways of obtaining quality material? > >This may raise a hackle or two, but whenever I use '1837online' I take the >opportunity to download any scans which have troubled me. At effectively 10 >pence per page this is cheaper than occasional visits to my nearest Records >Office which I used to do and often the scans are of better quality; >sometimes however they look just the same. I can then edit my uploaded >files with corrections especially to any unreadable characters. I must just issue a reminder that using 1837online scans to transcribe from is a breach of their terms and conditions, and could place FreeBMD in a very difficult position legally. -- Dave Mayall

The only problem I can see is that you don't inadvertently contravene the requirements contained in http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/vol_faq.html#13i regarding '1837online'. Allan Raymond -----Original Message----- From: Ted Southcombe <ted@southcombe1.freeserve.co.uk> To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Date: 05 March 2004 16:58 Subject: Re: Systematic correction requests >Chris Preece asked :- > >> For the moment quality source material is not always available, but I have >> found that a second copy from LDS of the same source is sometimes helpful. >Are >> there any other ways of obtaining quality material? > >This may raise a hackle or two, but whenever I use '1837online' I take the >opportunity to download any scans which have troubled me. At effectively 10 >pence per page this is cheaper than occasional visits to my nearest Records >Office which I used to do and often the scans are of better quality; >sometimes however they look just the same. I can then edit my uploaded >files with corrections especially to any unreadable characters. > >Ted > > > >============================== >Gain access to over two billion names including the new Immigration >Collection with an Ancestry.com free trial. Click to learn more. >http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=4930&sourceid=1237