Allan, There are two further refinements Check for +S, etc. This has thrown up a number of files that are in fact empty. Page number cannot be derived from either the file name or +PAGE. Not strictly speaking "suspect" in the normal sense but important if we are to succeed in linking entries to scans. There are very few of these - which is good news. Barrie > -----Original Message----- > From: Allan Raymond [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 08 October 2004 13:38 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Suspect files and syndicate names > > > Barrie > > You've just saved me a lot of work as I was about to start > the manual process of checking out 120 SubmitterIDs for the > appropriate Syndicate. > > Please don't have any qualms about refinements to the > checking process. I can say quite categorically that in the > many hundreds of files I've checked since Suspect Report was > introduced not one has been "duff" with regards to their > suspect nature. > > Unfortunately I can't say what percentage of the suspect > files had/have incorrect contents as I delete any records > once the file has been corrected. I would hazard a guess that > about 10 to 20% of the files have/had incorrect contents as I > have sent out quite a number of emails out to transcribers to > correct the content of their files. Also the Syndicate that > has been involved with sorting out large number of files > uploaded by their volunteers has also corrected contents of > some files (they may well ask how do I know that?). > > Allan Raymond > > -----Original Message----- > From: Archer Barrie <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > <[email protected]> > Date: 08 October 2004 07:58 > Subject: Suspect files and syndicate names > > > The Suspect Files list at > http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/SuspectFiles.html > now contains > the syndicate(s) of the transcriber. > > I would like to express my thanks to everyone for the work > done on addressing these anomolies, especially, of course, > Allan Raymond who must have put in many hours of work. > > I do have certain qualms when I find new ways of doing the > quality check because I known that when I incorporate them > into the Suspect Files process it means work for other people! > > As a matter of interest I would be quite interested to hear > (probably from > Allan) what the percentage is of wrong content against wrong > filename. Whilst getting the filename right has real > benefits, getting the content right is even more important. > > Barrie > > > > > > ==== FREEBMD-SYNDICATES Mailing List ==== > To find out about the FreeBMD project please start at http://FreeBMD.rootsweb.com ============================== 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