I was pleased and dismayed to receive a correction request recently!! Dismayed to learn that I had made an idiot mistake and pleased to know that the feed back system is actually working. The scans may at times be less than best, but if corrections can be made from clearer sources, then I don't find that a problem! I looked at the scan that Kevin had been working on and agree that without spiritual guidance it is very difficult to produce a "perfect" entry. I then turned to an alternative source (which I suspect was exactly the method adopted by the alias team) and I was able to read the whole page perfectly!! Yes! The alias team's correction is exactly right. Well Done! Keep the corrections coming! Best wishes Chris Preece Barossa South Oz > ---------- > From: Dave Mayall[SMTP:david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk] > Sent: 09 February 2004 22:43 > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com > Subject: RE: Corrections > > Quoting Brian Smart <brian.smart@blueyonder.co.uk>: > > > Hello Dave and Kevin, > > I am sorry but I do not agree with what is happening. > > If there are specific problems, then they can be addressed, but those > specific > problems don't IMO negate the value of carrying out corrections. > > Also, as I said in my original message, discussion of the rights and wrongs > of > how we do things does NOT belong on the syndicates list. Can any further > discussion please be directed to the DISCUSS list. > > > Most of the > > corrections are coming from the District alias group and as far as I can > see > > they are doing what transcribers are told not to do. Assumptions are being > > made about volumes based on the districts. Some clearly cannot be read but > > miraculously they are specified in full. There other examples where I would > > not agree with what is indicated. Look at scan: > > > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/GUS/1849/Births/September/UKD-02/I-R/1849B3-R-09 > > 54.tif > > Many corrections come from the District Alias Team, but I don't think "most" > would be an accurate analysis. > > Yes, the team use all the information available to them to try and assist > with > their reading of the entries, but at the end of the day, that must be backed > up by a scan that fits with the extrapolated information. > > > and the change proposed below. > > > > Current Entry: RABY,Lucy,_landf* _r,XIV,571 > > Proposed Entry: RABY,Lucy,Glandford B,XIV,371 > > > > While 'Glandford B' may be correct, it certainly can't be read, and the > > correction to the page number is clearly wrong. > > I agree that the page number correction seems wrong (although looking at > other "3"s and "5"s on this page, it isn't as obvious as all that). > > As to the reading of the District, I believe that the initial "G" can be made > > out quite easily, as can the distinctly separate terminal "B", so what is in > dispute is "ord" > > I see 3 characters, all incomplete, consisting of; > a small stroke which moves right as it ascends > a small, heavy stroke which has a uniform right lean > a longish, light stroke with a more pronounced right lean > > Now, looking at the spacing of the marks, it is clear that the first two form > > the left of a character, and that the third is the right part of a character. > > For each character, it is now necessary to consider which characters the > extant mark could possibly be a part of. > > Worked this way, I don't believe that reading those 3 mards as "ord" is > unreasonable. > > > I know that transcribers have the option of not making the changes but most > > will believe that if the change comes from an 'official' source, it must be > > correct. > > In which case, part of what must be done is to disabuse them of that notion! > > > Most of the changes are the removal of doubt from the entry. You stated: > > "If we do (leave the errors), it could lead to adverse reactions from > > searchers who would lose confidence in the FreeBMD database." > > This is more likely if doubt is removed. At least an incomplete entry will > > ensure that the entry is fully checked before money is spent on > > certificates. > > I agree that removal of doubt where there is doubt is a bad thing. > > > I repeat what I said before, I have serious doubts about this process and > > changes which are the result of the district alias team seem to be the most > > questionable. > > Where there is a problem, we will fix it. > > -- > Dave Mayall > > ---------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net > > > ============================== > 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 > >

Hi everyone, I'm a newbie and haven't been transcribing very long. It bothers me that there are numbers or letters that I simply can't see clearly enough, so I'll be very happy with corrections. I know how I'd feel if I got the wrong information from the site. When I first started transcribing I noticed there was a tool that sort of hovered over the page and you could enlarge a small section....... well, it seems to have gone walkabout almost from the first day. Is there any way I can retrieve it from wherever it went? :) margaret in curl curl . ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Preece" <Chris.Preece@unisa.edu.au> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: RE: Corrections > I was pleased and dismayed to receive a correction request recently!! > Dismayed to learn that I had made an idiot mistake and pleased to know that the > feed back > system is actually working. > The scans may at times be less than best, but if corrections can be made from > clearer sources, then > I don't find that a problem! > I looked at the scan that Kevin had been working on and agree that without > spiritual guidance it > is very difficult to produce a "perfect" entry. > I then turned to an alternative source (which I suspect was exactly the method > adopted by the alias > team) and I was able to read the whole page perfectly!! > Yes! The alias team's correction is exactly right. > Well Done! > Keep the corrections coming! > > Best wishes Chris Preece > Barossa South Oz > > > > ---------- > > From: Dave Mayall[SMTP:david.mayall@ukonline.co.uk] > > Sent: 09 February 2004 22:43 > > To: FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com > > Subject: RE: Corrections > > > > Quoting Brian Smart <brian.smart@blueyonder.co.uk>: > > > > > Hello Dave and Kevin, > > > I am sorry but I do not agree with what is happening. > > > > If there are specific problems, then they can be addressed, but those > > specific > > problems don't IMO negate the value of carrying out corrections. > > > > Also, as I said in my original message, discussion of the rights and wrongs > > of > > how we do things does NOT belong on the syndicates list. Can any further > > discussion please be directed to the DISCUSS list. > > > > > Most of the > > > corrections are coming from the District alias group and as far as I can > > see > > > they are doing what transcribers are told not to do. Assumptions are being > > > made about volumes based on the districts. Some clearly cannot be read but > > > miraculously they are specified in full. There other examples where I would > > > not agree with what is indicated. Look at scan: > > > > > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/GUS/1849/Births/September/UKD-02/I-R/1849B3-R-09 > > > 54.tif > > > > Many corrections come from the District Alias Team, but I don't think "most" > > would be an accurate analysis. > > > > Yes, the team use all the information available to them to try and assist > > with > > their reading of the entries, but at the end of the day, that must be backed > > up by a scan that fits with the extrapolated information. > > > > > and the change proposed below. > > > > > > Current Entry: RABY,Lucy,_landf* _r,XIV,571 > > > Proposed Entry: RABY,Lucy,Glandford B,XIV,371 > > > > > > While 'Glandford B' may be correct, it certainly can't be read, and the > > > correction to the page number is clearly wrong. > > > > I agree that the page number correction seems wrong (although looking at > > other "3"s and "5"s on this page, it isn't as obvious as all that). > > > > As to the reading of the District, I believe that the initial "G" can be made > > > > out quite easily, as can the distinctly separate terminal "B", so what is in > > dispute is "ord" > > > > I see 3 characters, all incomplete, consisting of; > > a small stroke which moves right as it ascends > > a small, heavy stroke which has a uniform right lean > > a longish, light stroke with a more pronounced right lean > > > > Now, looking at the spacing of the marks, it is clear that the first two form > > > > the left of a character, and that the third is the right part of a character. > > > > For each character, it is now necessary to consider which characters the > > extant mark could possibly be a part of. > > > > Worked this way, I don't believe that reading those 3 mards as "ord" is > > unreasonable. > > > > > I know that transcribers have the option of not making the changes but most > > > will believe that if the change comes from an 'official' source, it must be > > > correct. > > > > In which case, part of what must be done is to disabuse them of that notion! > > > > > Most of the changes are the removal of doubt from the entry. You stated: > > > "If we do (leave the errors), it could lead to adverse reactions from > > > searchers who would lose confidence in the FreeBMD database." > > > This is more likely if doubt is removed. At least an incomplete entry will > > > ensure that the entry is fully checked before money is spent on > > > certificates. > > > > I agree that removal of doubt where there is doubt is a bad thing. > > > > > I repeat what I said before, I have serious doubts about this process and > > > changes which are the result of the district alias team seem to be the most > > > questionable. > > > > Where there is a problem, we will fix it. > > > > -- > > Dave Mayall > > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net > > > > > > ============================== > > 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 >