A quick favour to ask Syndicate Coordinators. Could you please have a check of "Current Submitters" window on your Maintain Syndicate page and delete any volunteers shown with the following message format? ** ID (e.g XYZ123) - DELETED ** ** Please Remove** ID (e.g XYZ123) The deleted volunteers will be collected together and shown at the end of the complete list of volunteers. Actually deleting the volunteers will assist my administration aspects. Thanks Allan Raymond

Hi, Please could somebody (anybody!) advise when the numbers in districts problem when using WinBMD will be resolved. I have tried contacting the author on a number of occasions without getting a reply. Regards Brian Smart

Hello Barrie, The first problem file listed against my syndicate (Brian's Scan Syndicate) has been corrected but I have a problem with the two files from the 1910B3 series. In both cases the 'or' relates to the Surname field but the information is in the Forename field. The standard method of dealing with 'or' in a field does not seem to apply in these cases. What is the correct course of action. In the case of file 37M4a009 I am unable to make the correction as I have never had contact with the transcriber following the transfer of the responsibility for this group of scans from a syndicate that stopped work. If you can get this transcriber transferred to me (sallisl) I will make the necessary correction. Regards Brian Smart -----Original Message----- From: freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:freebmd-syndicates-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of qa-coord@freebmd.org.uk Sent: 20 September 2009 23:06 To: FreeBMD-syndicates@rootsweb.com Subject: Suspect files Could I please draw syndicate co-ordinators' attention to the suspect files listing (http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html) and request that you review the issues that it identifies for files transcribed for your syndicate. If an issue indicates a problem with a file, then please could you arrange for it to be corrected. If there is no problem with a file, please let me know and I will arrange for the file to be removed from the listing. Whilst the listing is not 100% accurate in most instances it gives an indication of a quite serious problem - quite serious, that is, based on the number of records affected. At the bottom of the listing is an explanation of the errors. I have noted the following causes: Pages outside range - page number slipped, presumably by a transcriber doing per column input, or wrong quarter Unexpected number of entries - failure to transcribe all columns in a multi-column scan There is also a listing which gives all the files with possible alias problems - this is http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html. This has been separated because it is so long, but we do need to get these problems fixed as well, so action is also requested for this listing albeit less urgently. Regards 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

Hi Barrie, Most of the files listed under SuspectFilesAlias for my syndicate belong to people not heard of since 2007 at best 2008. If you could get me temporary access I could change these files, but I don't want to take them over. It should be only a matter of converting the single line to the 3 line format. Kind regards, John ----- Original Message ----- From: <qa-coord@freebmd.org.uk> To: <FreeBMD-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 11:06 PM Subject: Suspect files > Could I please draw syndicate co-ordinators' attention to the suspect > files listing (http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html) and request > that you review the issues that it identifies for files transcribed for > your syndicate. > > If an issue indicates a problem with a file, then please could you arrange > for it to be corrected. If there is no problem with a file, please let me > know and I will arrange for the file to be removed from the listing. > > Whilst the listing is not 100% accurate in most instances it gives an > indication of a quite serious problem - quite serious, that is, based on > the number of records affected. > > At the bottom of the listing is an explanation of the errors. I have noted > the following causes: > Pages outside range - page number slipped, presumably by a transcriber > doing per column input, or wrong quarter > Unexpected number of entries - failure to transcribe all columns in a > multi-column scan > > There is also a listing which gives all the files with possible alias > problems - this is http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html. This > has been separated because it is so long, but we do need to get these > problems fixed as well, so action is also requested for this listing > albeit less urgently. > > Regards > > Barrie > FreeBMD Quality Assurance Coordinator > >

The three files listed for the Ian Brooke syndicate are from 1910M3. This is a quarter when spouse's name was not routinely recorded. In each case there is a handwritten entry which appears to include alternative spouse's surnames. eg 1910M3S0831, line 45 I have previously asked for suggestions about how to deal with this and had no replies. At the moment there is a #COMMENT Ward or Winspear entered by hand in the forename column. Christopher Richards

Hullo Barrie, I only have 1 file for my syndicate in the SuspectFiles list and this falls into your category of having nothing wrong and can be removed from the list. mitch180/1880B3M0354 In line 314 the entry is as follows :- MILES,Bend Or J,Camberwell,1 d,803 #THEORY Forename Or is assumed to be correct and not alternate to J. I'm sure the forename ' Or ' is a name (presumeably of scandanavian origin) but of course FreeBMD is picking it up as meaning an alternate name. Cheers, Ted Southcombe . ----- Original Message ----- From: <qa-coord@freebmd.org.uk> To: <FreeBMD-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 11:06 PM Subject: Suspect files > > Could I please draw syndicate co-ordinators' attention to the suspect > files listing (http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html) and request > that you review the issues that it identifies for files transcribed for > your syndicate. > > If an issue indicates a problem with a file, then please could you arrange > for it to be corrected. If there is no problem with a file, please let me > know and I will arrange for the file to be removed from the listing. > > Whilst the listing is not 100% accurate in most instances it gives an > indication of a quite serious problem - quite serious, that is, based on > the number of records affected. > > At the bottom of the listing is an explanation of the errors. I have noted > the following causes: > Pages outside range - page number slipped, presumably by a transcriber > doing per column input, or wrong quarter > Unexpected number of entries - failure to transcribe all columns in a > multi-column scan > > There is also a listing which gives all the files with possible alias > problems - this is http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html. This > has been separated because it is so long, but we do need to get these > problems fixed as well, so action is also requested for this listing > albeit less urgently. > > Regards > > 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 > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > This message has been processed by Firetrust Benign. >

Could I please draw syndicate co-ordinators' attention to the suspect files listing (http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html) and request that you review the issues that it identifies for files transcribed for your syndicate. If an issue indicates a problem with a file, then please could you arrange for it to be corrected. If there is no problem with a file, please let me know and I will arrange for the file to be removed from the listing. Whilst the listing is not 100% accurate in most instances it gives an indication of a quite serious problem - quite serious, that is, based on the number of records affected. At the bottom of the listing is an explanation of the errors. I have noted the following causes: Pages outside range - page number slipped, presumably by a transcriber doing per column input, or wrong quarter Unexpected number of entries - failure to transcribe all columns in a multi-column scan There is also a listing which gives all the files with possible alias problems - this is http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html. This has been separated because it is so long, but we do need to get these problems fixed as well, so action is also requested for this listing albeit less urgently. Regards Barrie FreeBMD Quality Assurance Coordinator

Could I please make a little request for Co-ordinators to check their "Syndicate Maintenance" page for details of any volunteers deleted from the database as part of the process in http://www.freebmd.org.uk/delete_submitterID.html ? The deleted volunteers are shown at the bottom of the "Current submitters for syndicate" window of the Maintain Syndicate page in the format: ** ID (e.g XYZ123) - DELETED ** ** Please Remove ** ID (e.g XYZ123) Any volunteer shown with this comment should be deleted from the Syndicate by clicking the DeleteUsers button. This will help with my adminstration aspects. Thanks Allan Raymond

My regular reminder to Syndicate Co-ordinators about the ongoing process to delete from the FreeBMD database those volunteers who haven't uploaded any records even though they have been registered on FreeBMD for 8 months or so. Co-ordinators are advised in advance of any volunteer to be deleted from the database and given a nominal two weeks in which to respond. (Note: Any Co-ordinator who doesn't wish to receive the advance notification is quite welcome to advise me of this requirement, in fact it saves me some work - see list at bottom of "opt" out Co-ordinators) Co-ordinators are requested to check their "Syndicate Maintenance" for details of any volunteers deleted by me as explained in http://www.freebmd.org.uk/delete_submitterID.html . The deleted volunteers are shown at the bottom of the "Current Submitters" window of the Maintain Syndicate page. This will give Co-ordinators opportunity to reallocate any transcription work given to the deleted volunteers. As this is a two way exercise, I would highly recommend to all Co-ordinators they check their "Upload Reports" via http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/upload-report.pl in conjunction with "Show file" at: http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/show-file.pl to establish if long standing allocations to their volunteers have been transcribed and uploaded to FreeBMD. I have assumed this process to be part of the checking process adopted by all Co-ordinators. This check should identify volunteers who registered a while ago but have not uploaded any files. This will prevent me inadvertently deleting a volunteer in error. There are safeguards in place to prevent me deleting a volunteer who has uploaded one or more records. Regards Allan Raymond Co-ordinators who have advised they DO NOT wish to receive advance notification. Ian Brooke Tony McHugh Debbie Valentine Kevin Howell

After Installing WinBMD in Vista it helps to close down the computer and restart. If she does this she may well find that the error vanishes - and hopefully does not recur. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Debz" <debzv@vodafone.co.nz> To: <FREEBMD-SYNDICATES@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 12:28 AM Subject: Trouble with Vista > Hello All > I have recieved this email from one of my transcribers and wondered if > anyone has the answer > > > Valerie is running Vista, and after installing WinBMD she gets the 'Run > Time > Error 429' message when trying to start WinBMD. We have made sure that > User > Account Control is on, as described in Transcriber Knowledge Base 3(b) but > that doesn't cure the problem, and I can't find any other useful advice. > Ihave uninstalled and re-installed. Can you help please. > > > Regards > Debz > > > ------------------------------- > 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 All I have recieved this email from one of my transcribers and wondered if anyone has the answer Valerie is running Vista, and after installing WinBMD she gets the 'Run Time Error 429' message when trying to start WinBMD. We have made sure that User Account Control is on, as described in Transcriber Knowledge Base 3(b) but that doesn't cure the problem, and I can't find any other useful advice. Ihave uninstalled and re-installed. Can you help please. Regards Debz

Sorry list, Accidently copied the wrong address and sent to the list instead of to Dave. Please ignore. Melda Brunette

Hi Dave, This is a bit of a tough one for you and for all of us. I really appreciate the problems FreeCen might be having because at one point I did try to coordinate a bit of their transcribing with running my syndicate. It was about the time we moved back to New Zealand from Canada and the complexities of it, combined with everything else I was doing at the time, were overwhelming and I had to pull back. My syndicate is deliberately small and has always done handwritten originals With the second confirming transcriptions of handwritten quarters that we are now doing there's no substitute for experience. Where I didn't do a lot of the first transcription myself in the past I now do plenty of second, especially the more difficult stuff. In addition, when Alan Tyerman asked me to look at some very old Scan2 stuff I'd done, in the light of Ancestry scans becoming available, I redid both them and also now do some second level checking for then of other retired transcribers' work. We work with their IDs and passwords, as if we were that transcriber. This raises a question: the original aim of the project was to blind double transcribe each quarter. Clearly what I am doing for Scan2 falls somewhat outside this definition, but seems a not unreasonable way to go - though you have to have an automated checking system and people who are interested. In my own syndicate, that doesn't require automated checking, I call for PEC reports from Bob Phillips as and when a quarter is sufficiently transcribed as to make it worthwhile. Charles Hillman and I rework our own data on the basis of it, but I am somewhat reluctant to ask everyone to revisit everything they've already done, unless there are major surname issues. You have to have an interest. So I guess my question to you is what you see the project doing about second transcription and error reduction - beyond the obvious things like systemic corrections of wrong districts and the work done by the aliasing committees. By the way, the page range data is brilliant for those of us working in the early years. I insist on its use and I think most of my people use it fairly religiously. For myself I see no problem in continuing with what I do. For Charles, who essentially is my number 2, but with a young family has no interest in leading another syndicate, I can't be sure, but if the sort of work we do on second transcription dries up or changes I think he would be up for a new challenge. He works alone as it is and like a whole quarter to work through systematically. He would however be a good person to approach if you are looking for one of the very brightest with an abiding interest in history and research - he also does articles for Wiki and is always up for a challenge. Cambridge grad in I think history, very computer literate. Lives in Essex, general Epping Forest area - Greensted - not far from Chipping Ongar, so closer than I am in NZ! He also used to go up to London before the closure of access to the original books to confirm bad scans from the 1860s and did a lot of the rescanning for the project. So a good man to keep around. (We have met him and his family personally). charleshillman@hillmanc.fsnet.co.uk I am very willing to embark on second level checking along the lines of what I have started for Scan2 - or any other level of checking that you want to slot me into. My expertise is in reading old documents, so I probably am of more value working with handwriting than with pages of 300+ lines of typescript, but it's over to the project. Some of what I am currently doing for Scan2 (but don't tell them!) is of questionable value. The transcriber I am working on at present, syddell, is careless, but not excessively so - mostly missed lines and occasional careless picklists, but he also worked from some quarters that have good scans available. Equally, some of the quarters he worked with have already been second transcribed, so I am a third person correcting the work of the first person, when the second transcription is essentially perfect. If we were to go this reworking route, rather than second transcription - or do both - I feel that we would be better employed working through quarters that haven't already been through a second transcription round, would we not? It's a project wide issue, not a narrow-based syndicate one - or it ought to be. And as new Ancestry scans become available, ought we not to be concentrating (a) on quarters for which the original scans are very poor and (b) quarters or transcribers where the error rate is proven unacceptably high, irrespective of the syndicate of first transcription? As to more technical stuff, my husband, now retired, is a mining engineer who spent his working life leading a tech services IT group - modelling, developing software etc - for a very large gold mining company in Canada. He might be up for working with code and software, if you needed him and I could get him interested. Not sure this helps, but hope it gives a perspective on how I see the project at present. Regards, Melda Brunette, Brunette Syndicate, Auckland, New Zealand. charleshillman@hillmanc.fsnet.co.uk david mayall wrote: >FreeBMD has now been running for over ten years, and has a number of >co-ordinators who have built up considerable experience in that role (often >adding to considerable real life experience). We also benefit from a number >of highly competent people at the core of the project, and whilst we are >very keen to retain all this skill, we recognise that from time to time >people will wish to find a more challenging role, or a lighter weight role, >as their ability to contribute varies. > >One of the things that we have never been good at is succession and >development planning. Put bluntly, we have no idea who might step up to the >mark if needed, or who might like to step back, or who is getting a little >bored and looking for new challenges > >This message is asking for people to tell me this information. > >Vacancies do occur from time to time in the core team, and it would be nice >to know who would be interested, but perhaps more importantly at present, we >need to share our talent pool with our sister projects, FreeCEN and FreeREG. > >Because these projects have a much more difficult time getting their hands >on data to transcribe, the job of a co-ordinator there is a particularly >tough one, and the job of their core teams even tougher. Regrettably, this >tends to lead to syndicates remaining without leadership for periods of >time, and a difficulty in retaining a stable executive at times. > >If a new challenge in one of these areas appeals, then now is the time to >put your hand up. > >Those who are interested should respond to me direct (not to the list >please), stating; >Which projects they would be interested in (BMD/CEN/REG) >What type of role they are interested in (COORD/CORE/EXEC) >What particular skills they can bring to this role (please, no false >modesty) >Whether they wish to retain their existing role, or hand it over >Whether they have a candidate in mind to take over from them or deputise for >them (wow, succession planning) > > > > > >

FreeBMD has now been running for over ten years, and has a number of co-ordinators who have built up considerable experience in that role (often adding to considerable real life experience). We also benefit from a number of highly competent people at the core of the project, and whilst we are very keen to retain all this skill, we recognise that from time to time people will wish to find a more challenging role, or a lighter weight role, as their ability to contribute varies. One of the things that we have never been good at is succession and development planning. Put bluntly, we have no idea who might step up to the mark if needed, or who might like to step back, or who is getting a little bored and looking for new challenges This message is asking for people to tell me this information. Vacancies do occur from time to time in the core team, and it would be nice to know who would be interested, but perhaps more importantly at present, we need to share our talent pool with our sister projects, FreeCEN and FreeREG. Because these projects have a much more difficult time getting their hands on data to transcribe, the job of a co-ordinator there is a particularly tough one, and the job of their core teams even tougher. Regrettably, this tends to lead to syndicates remaining without leadership for periods of time, and a difficulty in retaining a stable executive at times. If a new challenge in one of these areas appeals, then now is the time to put your hand up. Those who are interested should respond to me direct (not to the list please), stating; Which projects they would be interested in (BMD/CEN/REG) What type of role they are interested in (COORD/CORE/EXEC) What particular skills they can bring to this role (please, no false modesty) Whether they wish to retain their existing role, or hand it over Whether they have a candidate in mind to take over from them or deputise for them (wow, succession planning) -- Dave Mayall

Further to the issue Brian Smart raised on the FreeBMD-admins list, it seems sensible to ask whether there might be any circumstances where a co-ordinator might ask a transcriber to delete a file, or even delete it himself or herself, if control of the file has been passed to him/her. Guidance for co-ordinators from the FreeBMD Project Team could be useful. This is my perception, as a co-ordinator who has run a syndicate for over five years, and as someone who has dealt with a variety of incoming queries and comments to FreeBMD in the role of assistant co-ordinator of the FreeBMD-admins list. It is a very rare occurrence that deleting a file is even considered, and it would often only be thinkable if a better transcription of the same page had been done by the same syndicate. http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SyndicateDuplicates.html shows cases where the same page appears to have been transcribed twice, by different members of the same syndicate. It could be helpful to advise co-ordinators what, if anything, we are asked to do about this. http://www.freebmd.org.uk/UCFusage.html shows cases where a large proportion of the entries contain UCF (Uncertain Character Format) characters. These are usually transcribed from very poor images. Some co-ordinators will be aware of a very small number of files which contain very large numbers of unnecessary errors, lines left out, etc. It seems reasonable in such cases to arrange a second, better, transcription of the same page in some cases. There may also be some 'random' files which are of dubious value, particularly from the early days of FreeBMD. Before considering deleting any file it seems to me that the following issues ought to be considered (1) Is the transcriber still contactable? (2) Has the transcriber been asked to correct it and given support to assist in doing so? (3) Has the transcriber made any effort to correct it? (4) Is it possible for the co-ordinator to access the file and make the appropriate corrections himself or herself? (5) Is there already within FreeBMD a way of 'downgrading' a file, so that its entries are not shown in search results, if any alternative transcription of the same page or entry exists? I seem to recall from previous correspondence that this is possible. Jeff Coleman Jeff.Coleman@ntlworld.com

It appears to me that this discussion is appropriate for the FreeBMD-Syndicates list, not the FreeBMD-Admins list. I would strongly recommend that it be continued there. I would hope that we can assure transcribers that there is a very small possibility that any of their completed files might be considered for deletion. http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#13i mentions one possible reason why the removal of a file might be considered desirable. As it is the holiday season in UK, it is quite possible that the people Brian originally asked to reply may not be at home or reading emails. Please bear in mind that we are all volunteers, and all fallible to some degree. In the majority of cases, if mistakes are identified in our work we are happy to correct them, if we are able to do so. May I strongly suggest that discussion of this subject on the FreeBMD-Admins list be brought to an end, and continued if appropriate on the FreeBMD-syndicates list. The only further response I would expect to see might be an authoritative comment on behalf of FreeBMD trustees etc. If anyone has any issues with this, please raise it with me off-list. Jeff Coleman Jeff.Coleman@ntlworld.com assistant list admin, FreeBMD-admins mailing list freebmd-admins-admin@rootsweb.com <freebmd-admins-admin@rootsweb.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Hattam" <mark@dxradio.demon.co.uk> To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 7:45 PM Subject: RE: Deleting files from the FreeBMD Database > Maybe it depends on what the "lots of problems" are > > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#10o > > Mark > > -- > > On Sun, August 9, 2009 18:39, Brian Smart wrote: >> Hello John, >> It you had all the facts you would not have made that comment. >> >> Brian Smart >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of JOHN SLANN >> Sent: 09 August 2009 11:16 >> To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com >> Subject: RE: Deleting files from the FreeBMD Database >> >> The thought of anyone deleting a transcribers work appals me, why is it >> necessary? Someone presumably has worked hard to create the >> transcription >> and if it is really necessary wouldn't it be better to ask the >> transcriber >> to delete the file? In a way their transcription is their property. >> >> John >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Brian Smart >> Sent: 09 August 2009 09:57 >> To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com >> Subject: RE: Deleting files from the FreeBMD Database >> >> Hello Nesta, >> The deletions only relate to files originally created by members of my >> syndicate. >> Regards >> >> Brian Smart >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com >> [mailto:freebmd-admins-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nesta >> Sent: 08 August 2009 21:13 >> To: freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: Deleting files from the FreeBMD Database >> >> Brian, can you please let me know if you have to delete any of mine? >> >> Thanks Nesta (Creswick 1872) >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Brian Smart" <brian.smart@blueyonder.co.uk> >> To: <FreeBMD-Admins@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 6:55 PM >> Subject: Deleting files from the FreeBMD Database >> >> >>> Hi, >>> Some time ago I deleted a file from FreeBMD because it had been >>> re-transcribed following the upload of re-scan. Following this, I >>> received >>> an email that was critical of the action I had taken. I now intend to >>> delete >>> a couple more for the same reason. Could the FreeBMD team members who >>> was >>> against this action please get in touch. >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Brian Smart

Keith Simpson wrote: >Simple question put to me regarding Alias entries. > >The entry on the page is crossed out and then re written below it, so I >assume we enter a , > >#COMMENT entry reads BONUS or CHAPMAN for mother's name. > >And then enter the appropriate entries followed by. > >#COMMENT(2) Above two entries crossed through. Hello Keith Using your example, 1924B3M0338, here's what I's suggest. A #COMMENT has to go directly underneath the first entry to which you want it attached, so you'd enter the first crossed-through line, then the #COMMENT(2), followed by the second crossed-through line. You can combine the two things you need to mention about these entries -- that they're crossed through and that they have alternative mother's names -- in the one #COMMENT: McCarthy Mary J O'Brian Cardiff,11a See S'28 #COMMENT(2) Entry reads O'Brian or Bryant for mother's name and entry crossed through McCarthy Mary J Bryant Cardiff,11a See S'28 [I'd avoid phrases such as "above two entries" because you want the comment to make sense if a searcher is looking at a single entry from the search results in isolation.] > >Then for the entry that is not crossed out we enter the following. > > #COMMENT(3) entry reads BONUS or CHAPMAN for mothers name. > >Followed by the entries that are not crossed through. > Again, you'd need to enter the two lines with a #COMMENT(2) sandwiched between them. It would be a #COMMENT(2) not (3) -- that would attach to the next, totally unrelated, entry as well :-) McCarthy Mary J O'Brian Cardiff,11a See S'28 #COMMENT(2) Entry reads O'Brian or Bryant for mother's name McCarthy Mary J Bryant Cardiff,11a See S'28 Hope this helps a bit :-) > > >I hope this makes sense. Page 1924B3M0338, Is a prime example. > > > >If somebody can verify this is correct it would be appreciated. > -- Nowl

Simple question put to me regarding Alias entries. The entry on the page is crossed out and then re written below it, so I assume we enter a , #COMMENT entry reads BONUS or CHAPMAN for mother's name. And then enter the appropriate entries followed by. #COMMENT(2) Above two entries crossed through. Then for the entry that is not crossed out we enter the following. #COMMENT(3) entry reads BONUS or CHAPMAN for mothers name. Followed by the entries that are not crossed through. I hope this makes sense. Page 1924B3M0338, Is a prime example. If somebody can verify this is correct it would be appreciated. Thanks Keith

Ref Suspect Files and Aliases I had no response to this email sent on 11 Jun. I believe that recors with Alias in the Forename field should be subject to TWYS for the reasons below. Derek Lowe ----- Original Message ----- From: "D LOWE" <derek_lowe@btinternet.com> To: <freebmd-discuss@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:56 PM Subject: Re: TWIS versus assumption > An alias is a pseudonym and In family names refers to an additional > component of a surname to distinguish its users from other families of the > same surname. So whereas an alias is used nowadays to hide someone's > identity, an alias was originally used to clarify identity. As an example, > a member of the Smith family who moved to Exeter might have called > themselves Smith Alias Exeter, or Exeter Alias Smith. > > Thus the advice given about alias entries in TKB6(u) makes some sort of > sense in the context of Surnames. > > However, I believe it was not used to mean 'or' for forenames. It is just > as likely, if not more so, that any Alias in the forename column is an > alternative spelling of Elias. This is supported by the fact that I have > not seen any occurrence of 'alias' in the forename column that does not > begin with an upper case A. (That's not to say there aren't any!) In > addition, in some cases the Alias in forenames is sometimes followed by an > initial, e.g, Smith,Alias K. or Smith Alias K.. It seems to me that the > second name would be given in full if Alias in these cases meant 'or'. It > also means that someone searching for Alias Jones when the full name was > James Alias K. Jones would not find him if such a record is transcribed as > per TKB(6u). Finally, a quick search on the database shows that there are > a number of entries for people who have Alias as their one and only names. > (How should transcribers deal with these? TKB 6(u)?) > > It therefore appears to me that the blanket instruction to interpret > 'Alias' as 'or' is wrong and that to do so is to encourage transcribers > not to TWYS but to interpret what they see. It would be better for all, > including researchers and the integrity of the data base if TKB (6u) was > amended to say that if 'Alias' appears as forename it should be treated as > such and only if it appears as 'alias' should it be treated as an > alternative name entry. > > Incidently, the suggested comment in Jeff's email should have 'Alias' not > 'alias' in it because what is on the image is Alias. > > Derek > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Coleman" <Jeff.Coleman@ntlworld.com> > To: <freebmd-admins@rootsweb.com>; <FreeBMD-Admins-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 8:34 AM > Subject: Re: TWIS versus assumption > > >> TKB 6(u) applies http://www.freebmd.org.uk/vol_faq.html#6u >> >> One entry Asher,Abraham,St.Luke's,II,270 >> #COMMENT(2) Forename shown as Abraham alias Albert >> second entry Asher,Albert,St.Luke's,II,270 >> >> Jeff >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "mal/wend" <mmi72121@bigpond.net.au> >> To: <FreeBMD-Admins-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 5:43 AM >> Subject: TWIS versus assumption >> >> >>> Hello all, >>> I have just extinguished a letter 'e' from a district name as requested, >>> my error. On sending the replacement correction I was again asked to >>> review an entry in the same file which was echoed by another >>> transcription.:.... >>> >>> 1841B4A0066 Thu Jun 11 04:00:00 2009 1649 >>> >>> >>>>Possible alternative name (should be transcribed as two entries): name >>>>"Abraham Alias Albert" at line 15 (Asher,Abraham Alias >>>>Albert,St.Luke's,II,270) (Help) >>> The content of file 1841B4A0066 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)." >>> >>> Your views & advice sought please, do I TWIS,...there are 8 other >>> 'Alias' >>> names in births between 1841 & 1861. I saw no problem with accepting it >>> as >>> such it even has a Capital 'A' on scan. >>> What think you? >>> >>> cheers Wendy >>> FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive >>> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins >>> FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>> FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >>> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> >> FreeBMD-Admins mailing list - archive >> http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/freebmd-admins >> FreeBMD http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> FREEBMD-ADMINS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without >> the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.62/2168 - Release Date: 06/10/09 > 18:30:00 >

One of my examples poses an interesting difficulty - 1880B3M0354 line 314. The forenames are definately 'Bend Or J.' which suggests a scandanavian origin. The O is plain without any umlaut or similar accent and is clearly a name. I have tackled this file before (the original submitter is long gone) and added a #THEORY line but clearly the SuspectFilesAlias report is still picking up on the 'Or'. Any ideas as to how to disguise the Or. Would quotation marks work "Or" ? Ted Southcombe . ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barrie" <freebmd@myarcher.net> To: <freebmd-syndicates@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, June 28, 2009 11:20 PM Subject: Suspect Files and Aliases > > In my posting to this list on Sun, 9 Nov 2008 I explained the difference > between the SuspectFiles report and the SuspectFilesAlias report. Both > these reports contain information about files that may contain erroneous > transcriptions. It is hoped that they will provide a useful resource for > syndicate coordinators to check the quality of the transcriptions done > by their syndicate. > > The report http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html (which is > referred to from the Transcribers' Page) includes aliases in the surname > and given name fields. It does NOT include aliases in the associate name > field. > > The report http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html (which is > NOT referred to from the Transcribers' Page) includes aliases in the > surname, given name and associate name fields. > > The reason for having two reports was that the latter was very large and > the associate name aliases overwhelmed other information. Having two > reports was always intended to be a temporary measure; > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html would eventually contain > associate name aliases. > > Currently http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html contains 134 > entries and http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html contains > 1412entries. Whilst this is a lot better than it was the latter still > rather overwhelms the former. > > Could I therefore ask syndicate coordinators to look at the report > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFilesAlias.html and try to get it > reduced so we can merge it with the report > http://www.freebmd.org.uk/SuspectFiles.html. > > Please note that the warning "Pages outside range" was intended to pick > up transcriptions where the quarter and/or event had been incorrectly > specified. However, the ones I have looked at are transcriptions where, > instead of using UCF for illegible words, transcribers have just made up > words (particularly districts and sometimes plainly wrong). > > I have also noted that there are a number of transcribers who are > ignoring the warning about aliases and are still uploading > transcriptions with aliases incorrectly transcribed. I will be sending > syndicate coordinators concerned the details. > > Thanks > > Barrie > FreeBMD Quality Assurance Coordinator > > > > --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 > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > This message has been processed by Firetrust Benign. >