Hi, (I know it was tongue in cheek, but its worth reiterating) Syndicate coordinators should not be asking people to go against the policy as defined by the organisers. If they do, then there is a risk that all the transcriptions by that syndicate will end up being next to useless in the matching process. It is important to understand that FreeBMD is made up of a lot of disparate syndicates following the rules. We cannot have one rule for one syndicate and another for the rest. When sections are double keyed, the differences will be thrown into full relief and may end up with huge ranges not matching. We want to avoid that which is why we go throught he time and effort to devise the strategy and the programs to go along with it. That strategy -has- to be decided centrally and by individual coordinators. Please do not advise people to work against the policy. Cheers Graham "Roger J. Legg" wrote: > > Dave Mayall wrote on 23/10/2001:- > > >Having reviewed the position that we find ourselves in now, in > particular > with regard to the large number of files that have been loaded without > transcribing the full stop, we will adopt the following strategy; > 1) The full stop *is* potentially valuable data. > 2) If transcribers can see a clear full stop at the end of a forename, > they should transcribe it. > 3) It is accepted that there will be occasions where transcribers cannot > *clearly* determine whether a full stop is present, and in such cases > it > can be omitted. > 4) There is NO requirement or expectation that transcribers will make > changes > to previously loaded files. > 5) The database routines will be amended to disregard the presence or > absence of the full stop in names (but the full data *will* still be > retained by FreeBMD.< > > I checked with my syndicate organizer after reading the above. My > syndicate organizer disagreed with Dave Mayall and told me not to enter > the period after forenames when transcribing the deaths index. > > With tongue in cheek I would urge all transcribers to check with their > syndicate organizer before making any decision as to the merits of > ........... > > Roger J. Legg > > > Surname Interests:- > CARR Broom Hill, Northumberland, England > HEAD / HEDE Kintbury, Berkshire, England > LEGG Saint Giles, Camberwell, Surrey, England > SHIELD South Shields, County Durham, England > WOODS Gorleston on Sea, Suffolk, England, Pre 1889 > WOODS Gorleston on Sea, Norfolk, England Post1889 > ICQ 129377740 > > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry's Library - The best collection of family history > learning and how-to articles on the Internet. > http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library