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

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 >