Hello Barrie, Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two possible causes can be errors. I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any way. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users get the warning /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event or contact your syndicate coordinator./ the most likely causes are: * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for * they have transcribed the wrong quarter * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a file has been transcribed for. Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than being upgraded to an error. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Barrie, Why not remove the cause: "* they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for" from this Warning/error and then the other two possible causes can be errors. I fail to see why the fact that the person has not been added to the syndicate at the time of the upload should constitute a problem in any way. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 28 July 2010 17:08 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Non-syndicate transcriptions The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users get the warning /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event or contact your syndicate coordinator./ the most likely causes are: * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for * they have transcribed the wrong quarter * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a file has been transcribed for. Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than being upgraded to an error. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Allan, Further to my last email: In the case of rkingsley/52B41492 where 65% of pages are outside the range according to the report, my check suggests that this is invalid. The scan is difficult to read and it is possible that some of the pages are incorrect but only a few and certainly not 65%. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Allan Raymond Sent: 28 July 2010 14:06 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: Suspect Files I would still be interested in knowing from Brian an example of one file which was corrected a couple of months ago but which still appears in the Suspect Report. Strictly if was corrected in line with the original details in the Suspect Report then after amendment (taking into an update) it should disappear from the report. Either the file wasn't corrected in line with the suspect report details or there is a bug in the system? Allan Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: Barrie To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: Re: RE: Suspect Files Brian, The list is updated approximately weekly. The actual date is in the introductory paragraph. However, some tests are performed during the update and will only change after an update; where this applies to a particular problem it is mentioned in the description of the problem. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were > corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Suspect Files > > Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the > associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are > not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing > SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. > > Barrie > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Allan, christy26 uploaded 66D10010 on the 29th June but is still on the list. In the case of sjp159/62B20727 the system obviously ignores the fact that there are entries after a +BREAK in the middle of the data. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Allan Raymond Sent: 28 July 2010 14:06 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: RE: Suspect Files I would still be interested in knowing from Brian an example of one file which was corrected a couple of months ago but which still appears in the Suspect Report. Strictly if was corrected in line with the original details in the Suspect Report then after amendment (taking into an update) it should disappear from the report. Either the file wasn't corrected in line with the suspect report details or there is a bug in the system? Allan Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: Barrie To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: Re: RE: Suspect Files Brian, The list is updated approximately weekly. The actual date is in the introductory paragraph. However, some tests are performed during the update and will only change after an update; where this applies to a particular problem it is mentioned in the description of the problem. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were > corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Suspect Files > > Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the > associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are > not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing > SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. > > Barrie > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The error that caused transcriptions to erroneous get reported as _not_ being done within a user's syndicate has now been corrected. If users get the warning /You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event or contact your syndicate coordinator./ the most likely causes are: * they have not been added to the syndicate they are transcribing for * they have transcribed the wrong quarter * they have specified the wrong year or quarter or event in the file Please note that files identified by this warning will not be allocated to any syndicate and therefore coordinators will not be able to use coordinator facilities (such as UploadReport for a particular syndicate or downloading the file) for such a file. If the issue is that the transcriber has not been added to the syndicate, it should be possible to correct this by the transcriber uploading the file again (once the transcriber has been added to the syndicate). You can use http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to check which syndicate a file has been transcribed for. Because of feedback received this will remain a warning rather than being upgraded to an error. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--

I would still be interested in knowing from Brian an example of one file which was corrected a couple of months ago but which still appears in the Suspect Report. Strictly if was corrected in line with the original details in the Suspect Report then after amendment (taking into an update) it should disappear from the report. Either the file wasn't corrected in line with the suspect report details or there is a bug in the system? Allan Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: Barrie To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 1:49 PM Subject: Re: RE: Suspect Files Brian, The list is updated approximately weekly. The actual date is in the introductory paragraph. However, some tests are performed during the update and will only change after an update; where this applies to a particular problem it is mentioned in the description of the problem. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were > corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Suspect Files > > Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the > associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are > not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing > SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. > > Barrie > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Brian, The list is updated approximately weekly. The actual date is in the introductory paragraph. However, some tests are performed during the update and will only change after an update; where this applies to a particular problem it is mentioned in the description of the problem. Barrie On 19:59, Brian Smart wrote: > Hello Barrie, > How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were > corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. > Regards > > Brian Smart > > > -----Original Message----- > From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com > [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie > Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 > To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com > Subject: Suspect Files > > Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the > associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are > not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing > SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. > > Barrie > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--

Hello Allan, Having rechecked , one month would have been more correct! Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Allan Raymond Sent: 27 July 2010 13:25 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: Suspect Files Brian Do you have an example of one file which was corrected a couple of months ago but still appears in the Suspect Report? Allan Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Smart To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:08 AM Subject: RE: Suspect Files Hello Barrie, How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Suspect Files Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Brian Do you have an example of one file which was corrected a couple of months ago but still appears in the Suspect Report? Allan Raymond ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian Smart To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2010 9:08 AM Subject: RE: Suspect Files Hello Barrie, How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Suspect Files Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Barrie - regarding the two files shown against the John Pain syndicate: 1947B3V0360 submitted by PLabott is an exception - file contains a large number of entries of the type "Van x" and as a result there are only 116 entries. This has been reported previously and the file should be recorded as an exception 19472V0397 has been amended and should no longer show up as suspect Regards John M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 9:02 PM Subject: Suspect Files > Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the > associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are > not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing > SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. > > Barrie > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hello Barrie, How often is this file updated. There are a number on the list that were corrected and uploaded a couple of months ago. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Barrie Sent: 26 July 2010 21:03 To: freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Suspect Files Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Please note that there is now only one Suspect Files <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html> list - aliases in the associate name are now incorporated into the Suspect Files list and are not in a separate list (SuspectFilesAlias). Viewing SuspectFilesAlias.html takes you to the standard Suspect Files list. Barrie --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--

I wonder whether it is worth adding some text to http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html and http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html suggesting that a Co-ordinator who are dealing with a transcriber who has done incomplete transcriptions (typically just one column of a 2 or 3 column page) might like to offer to send to the transcriber a copy of the existing file (obtained from Show File with Download) if the transcriber no longer has a copy of the file. Alternatively or additionally , a text about using the Download function in File Management might be useful. If you have only done 125 entries from a 375-entry page, it is not that easy to complete it online using 'Edit' in File Management, let alone verifying it. Jeff

Many thanks, Barrie That could be very useful. By chance I discovered not long ago that one of my transcribers had a consistent error in transcribing 'forward references' like See M'38. That is what led me to make the suggestion. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2010 11:03 PM Subject: Re: Re: Checking transcriptions > If you now use coord-show-file.p > <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl>l in the directory > listing there will be a letter W next to files with warnings. Click on > the W to see the warnings. > > Barrie > > On 19:59, Jeff Coleman wrote: >> <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">I am >> happy either way, continuing as at present or making it an error >> forcing rejection of the file, as long as either it is accompanied by >> a message asking the transcriber to contact their syndicate >> co-ordinator, or a report is generated to the co-ordinator concerned >> about the failed upload. >> >> Neither will deal with the transcriber who puts March instead of June, >> if the syndicate is working on both quarters, but our existing methods >> should find such instances. >> >> As a related issue, is there a way of indicating on Upload Report, or >> the list of files in Show File, whether a file has a 'Warning' >> attached to it? The existence of a warning might encourage us to look >> at the file on 'Show File'. >> >> If the text of the warning could be displayed on 'Show File' then we >> would know what issues to raise with our transcribers. >> >> Jeff >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "FreeBMD Quality Assurance >> Coordinator" <qa-coord@freebmd.org.uk> >> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:42 AM >> Subject: Checking transcriptions >> >> >>> Not long ago I enhanced the upload process so it checks if the >>> transcription (Sequenced files only) is for a quarter being done by a >>> syndicate the transcriber is a member of. If it is not a warning >>> <http://test.freebmd.org.uk:8084/error-help.html#BMDnotinsynd> is shown >>> asking the user to correct the error or contact their coordinator or >>> support, but the file _is_ uploaded. >>> >>> The purpose of this is to try to catch the error where the wrong quarter >>> is transcribed, an error that occurs fairly regularly. Sometimes the >>> transcription specifies the year/quarter/event corresponding to the >>> entries but sometimes the entries are right and the year/quarter/event >>> is wrong. >>> >>> I would like to change this to an _error_ rather than a warning because >>> >>> * with a warning the erroneous file is uploaded and incorrect >>> entries could get included in an update; with an error the file is >>> not uploaded >>> * experience shows that some users are just ignoring the warning >>> * it really is an error; something is wrong somewhere, even if it is >>> that the user has not been added to the syndicate >>> >>> Please note that transcriptions outside the syndicate >>> <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#5f> can still be uploaded if the >>> syndicate name is given as "Individual". So pages that have been >>> incorrectly transcribed can be uploaded and the effort is not wasted. >>> >>> I would welcome feedback from syndicate coordinators on this proposal. >>> >>> Barrie >>> FreeBMD Quality Assurance Coordinator >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >>> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> >> >> </div> > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner-- > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

If you now use coord-show-file.p <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/coord-show-file.pl>l in the directory listing there will be a letter W next to files with warnings. Click on the W to see the warnings. Barrie On 19:59, Jeff Coleman wrote: > <div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed">I am > happy either way, continuing as at present or making it an error > forcing rejection of the file, as long as either it is accompanied by > a message asking the transcriber to contact their syndicate > co-ordinator, or a report is generated to the co-ordinator concerned > about the failed upload. > > Neither will deal with the transcriber who puts March instead of June, > if the syndicate is working on both quarters, but our existing methods > should find such instances. > > As a related issue, is there a way of indicating on Upload Report, or > the list of files in Show File, whether a file has a 'Warning' > attached to it? The existence of a warning might encourage us to look > at the file on 'Show File'. > > If the text of the warning could be displayed on 'Show File' then we > would know what issues to raise with our transcribers. > > Jeff > ----- Original Message ----- From: "FreeBMD Quality Assurance > Coordinator" <qa-coord@freebmd.org.uk> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:42 AM > Subject: Checking transcriptions > > >> Not long ago I enhanced the upload process so it checks if the >> transcription (Sequenced files only) is for a quarter being done by a >> syndicate the transcriber is a member of. If it is not a warning >> <http://test.freebmd.org.uk:8084/error-help.html#BMDnotinsynd> is shown >> asking the user to correct the error or contact their coordinator or >> support, but the file _is_ uploaded. >> >> The purpose of this is to try to catch the error where the wrong quarter >> is transcribed, an error that occurs fairly regularly. Sometimes the >> transcription specifies the year/quarter/event corresponding to the >> entries but sometimes the entries are right and the year/quarter/event >> is wrong. >> >> I would like to change this to an _error_ rather than a warning because >> >> * with a warning the erroneous file is uploaded and incorrect >> entries could get included in an update; with an error the file is >> not uploaded >> * experience shows that some users are just ignoring the warning >> * it really is an error; something is wrong somewhere, even if it is >> that the user has not been added to the syndicate >> >> Please note that transcriptions outside the syndicate >> <http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#5f> can still be uploaded if the >> syndicate name is given as "Individual". So pages that have been >> incorrectly transcribed can be uploaded and the effort is not wasted. >> >> I would welcome feedback from syndicate coordinators on this proposal. >> >> Barrie >> FreeBMD Quality Assurance Coordinator >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' >> without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > > > </div> --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--

Hi Mike Apologies for butting in. I see your point but I'm with Jeff on this one. I think there is a danger that we could link entries incorrectly, and that it could be difficult for transcribers to judge when it was warranted and when it wasn't. It would also make the rules more complicated, having implications for 6(g) on handling insertions, and 6(z) as well. We very often see "pairs" of handwritten entries, where the first has been crossed out and another very similar written in. Wouldn't your suggestion also apply to these? >Perhaps if you still don't agree, we should consider instead altering the >advice in TKB 6(d) by removing the reference to amendments at the bottom of >the page. The advice I give my volunteers is that 6(g) refers to separate complete entries, 6(d) to partial amendments -- it mentions "parts of an entry" and "if the original field" is or is not crossed out. That way it's easy to remember which rule applies. I can't help but feel the suggestion would make things a lot less clear for very little gain. -- Jackie Reynolds

Thanks for replying Jeff. I'd like to stress that I'm not suggesting any deviation from TWYS. I'm only trying to make a small improvement in consistency between TKB 6(d) and TKB 6(q). You write "If two separate entries appear, they should be treated as two separate entries, even if it seems probable that they refer to the same birth, and even if they are identical." I certainly agree with you that we should transcribe them as two entries. But if we apply TKB 6(d) to the situation where there's a handwritten amendment at the bottom of a column to an original entry that isn't crossed out, then we should also add a #COMMENT(2) between the original entry and the amended one. I agree too about not jumping to conclusions, but I also think there's a judgement to be made here. In all three of the examples I gave, the Surname, Forename and initials, Mother's Maiden Surname, and District fields all matched. The surnames are relatively uncommon. In my judgement these pairs of entries definitely refer to the same people, and so we're justified in treating the handwritten entries as amendments rather than separate, unrelated entries. Far from jumping to conclusions, I think not to do so would be to ignore the obvious and so make our transcriptions slightly less useful. Perhaps if you still don't agree, we should consider instead altering the advice in TKB 6(d) by removing the reference to amendments at the bottom of the page. Cheers, Mike On 21 July 2010 23:23, Jeff Coleman <Jeff.Coleman@ntlworld.com> wrote: > My advice to transcribers (we are transcribing 1948 births with some > similar > situations) is Type What You See. > > If two separate entries appear, they should be treated as two separate > entries, even if it seems probable that they refer to the same birth, and > even if they are identical. > > We should not jump to conclusions. There is a risk that we may link > together erroneously entries which do not refer to the same person. We are > also giving transcribers extra work if we expect them to look for such > links. > I would therefore oppose Mike's suggested change to TKB 6(q) > > If a handwritten addition such as J67 or See M51 appears on the typed > line (either next to the page number or occasionally elsewhere on the line > where there is enough space, such as after the surname) then TKB 6(d) > applies. > > Sometimes there are two such annotations , such as 1234/S J54. In this > case each is transcribed separately with a #COMMENT(2) or #COMMENT(3) in > between, depending on whether the original page number has been crossed > through (following TKB 6(d) and 6(am)). > > Jeff > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Thomas" <mikethomas2@gmail.com> > To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 7:27 PM > Subject: Transcribers' Knowledge Base advice on Late Registration > references > > > > My syndicate is currently transcribing 1946 births. A transcriber has > > asked > > me about transcribing hand written late registration references when they > > appear to duplicate or amend original typed entries which have not been > > crossed out (obviously the page column will be different, and often the > > volume). > > > > There are examples of such entries in 1946B2A0002: > > ACKLAND,DAVID,ACKLAND,SOUTHAMPTON "A",6B,J66 > > appears to be an amendment to: > > Ackland,David,Ackland,Southampton,2c,183 > > and in 1946B3A0001: > > Abbott,Rita C.,Smith,Chatham,5B,see S.63 > > appears to be an amendment to: > > Abbott,Rita C.,Smith,Chatham,5b,675 > > and: > > Abbott,Terence S.,Bailey,York,2D,see J.60 > > appears to be an amendment to: > > Abbott,Terence S.,Bailey,York,2d,see J60 > > In this last example the original page number has been crossed out. > > > > The transcriber originally asked whether late registration references > > needed > > a #COMMENT after them - I referred her to TKB section 6(q) > > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6q and said no. She then > explained > > that she'd come across examples like the ones above and asked whether TKB > > section 6(d) http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6d should apply, > and, > > if > > so, suggested that the advice in section 6(q) could be extended to cover > > this situation. > > > > It seems to me that #COMMENT(2) lines linking these entries would be > > appropriate (as advised in 6(d)), as surely any FreeBMD user finding one > > half of any of these pairs of entries would want to be alerted to the > > existence of the other. Perhaps we could add a sentence to TKB section > > 6(q) > > along the lines of: > > "If the late entry appears to be an amendment to an original entry in the > > index then 6(d) also applies." > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mike > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Please bear with me while I sort this out. In spite of these false responses the system is picking up incorrect transcriptions. Barrie On 19:59, Richard Oliver wrote: > I return to my message of Monday 19th July at 10.59 h. I have now myself fallen victim to the new rule instituted by our Quality Control Assurance Co-ordinator. > > I have just now taken over File Management for SubmitterID gemqueen, a retired member of my Syndicate (joined October 2007), and - following a request by Kevin Howell - corrected a file uploaded by her on 23rd December 2007. > > On pressing the Send button to upload the corrected file I am faced with a message reading: > > __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > a.. You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event or contact your syndicate coordinator. (Help) > The content of file 1918D4W0195 has been replaced. However, please check the above warnings and amend the file if necessary (click on the Help link if you need further information about any of the warnings). > > ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Not only was my Syndicate assigned Quarters June, September and December of 1918 Deaths, and not only am I a member of the Syndicate concerned...... I was, and am, the Co-ordinator! Something has gone wrong with the system if I have to spend time worrying about inappropriate messages received on upload, of which this is the second instance this week. > > Richard Oliver > Madrid, Spain > richol@arrakis.es > > > > > > --Certified Virus Free by 4SecureMail.com ICSA-Certified Scanner--

My advice to transcribers (we are transcribing 1948 births with some similar situations) is Type What You See. If two separate entries appear, they should be treated as two separate entries, even if it seems probable that they refer to the same birth, and even if they are identical. We should not jump to conclusions. There is a risk that we may link together erroneously entries which do not refer to the same person. We are also giving transcribers extra work if we expect them to look for such links. I would therefore oppose Mike's suggested change to TKB 6(q) If a handwritten addition such as J67 or See M51 appears on the typed line (either next to the page number or occasionally elsewhere on the line where there is enough space, such as after the surname) then TKB 6(d) applies. Sometimes there are two such annotations , such as 1234/S J54. In this case each is transcribed separately with a #COMMENT(2) or #COMMENT(3) in between, depending on whether the original page number has been crossed through (following TKB 6(d) and 6(am)). Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Thomas" <mikethomas2@gmail.com> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 7:27 PM Subject: Transcribers' Knowledge Base advice on Late Registration references > My syndicate is currently transcribing 1946 births. A transcriber has > asked > me about transcribing hand written late registration references when they > appear to duplicate or amend original typed entries which have not been > crossed out (obviously the page column will be different, and often the > volume). > > There are examples of such entries in 1946B2A0002: > ACKLAND,DAVID,ACKLAND,SOUTHAMPTON "A",6B,J66 > appears to be an amendment to: > Ackland,David,Ackland,Southampton,2c,183 > and in 1946B3A0001: > Abbott,Rita C.,Smith,Chatham,5B,see S.63 > appears to be an amendment to: > Abbott,Rita C.,Smith,Chatham,5b,675 > and: > Abbott,Terence S.,Bailey,York,2D,see J.60 > appears to be an amendment to: > Abbott,Terence S.,Bailey,York,2d,see J60 > In this last example the original page number has been crossed out. > > The transcriber originally asked whether late registration references > needed > a #COMMENT after them - I referred her to TKB section 6(q) > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6q and said no. She then explained > that she'd come across examples like the ones above and asked whether TKB > section 6(d) http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6d should apply, and, > if > so, suggested that the advice in section 6(q) could be extended to cover > this situation. > > It seems to me that #COMMENT(2) lines linking these entries would be > appropriate (as advised in 6(d)), as surely any FreeBMD user finding one > half of any of these pairs of entries would want to be alerted to the > existence of the other. Perhaps we could add a sentence to TKB section > 6(q) > along the lines of: > "If the late entry appears to be an amendment to an original entry in the > index then 6(d) also applies." > > Cheers, > > Mike > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

On 21 July 2010 17:38, Richard Oliver <richol@arrakis.es> wrote: > I return to my message of Monday 19th July at 10.59 h. I have now myself > fallen victim to the new rule instituted by our Quality Control Assurance > Co-ordinator. > > I have just now taken over File Management for SubmitterID gemqueen, a > retired member of my Syndicate (joined October 2007), and - following a > request by Kevin Howell - corrected a file uploaded by her on 23rd December > 2007. > > On pressing the Send button to upload the corrected file I am faced with a > message reading: > > > __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > a.. You do not appear to be a member of a syndicate transcribing this > quarter. Please check you have the correct Year, Quarter and Event or > contact your syndicate coordinator. (Help) > The content of file 1918D4W0195 has been replaced. However, please check > the above warnings and amend the file if necessary (click on the Help link > if you need further information about any of the warnings). > > > ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Not only was my Syndicate assigned Quarters June, September and December of > 1918 Deaths, and not only am I a member of the Syndicate concerned...... I > was, and am, the Co-ordinator! Something has gone wrong with the system if > I have to spend time worrying about inappropriate messages received on > upload, of which this is the second instance this week. > > Richard Oliver > Madrid, Spain > richol@arrakis.es > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > FREEBMD-SYNDICATES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > The new warning message hasn't been introduced on a whim, or as an exercise in annoying co-ordinators! It has been introduced because we do have a problem with whole files being uploaded for an incorrect quarter, and it is not unreasonable that is a transcriber uploads a file apparently for a quarter not allocated to his syndicate we put up a message asking the transcriber to check that this is correct. Clearly there have been a couple of teething troubles, and we need to work out why. Once the teething troubles have been sorted, we will have a system that traps mistakes before they get into the database, which has to be a good thing. -- Dave Mayall