> ... primary objective of building a database to connect GRO references with marriage locations Is this true? -----Original Message----- From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Peter Alefounder via Sent: 09 January 2015 12:13 To: goons@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [G] Guild Marriage Index Paul Millington said: > Peter Alefounder wrote: > > ""The GMI was not intended to be a store of members' data." > > As one of the original proposers of the index, I can tell you very definitely it was. I would regard that as an incidental benefit of the GMI. It is not mentioned on the Guild Marriage Index introductory page (http://www.one-name.org/members/GMI/gmi.html), and in any case is not really compatible with the error correction and data additions that have been made to fulfil the primary objective of building a database to connect GRO references with marriage locations. Marriages within the scope of the GMI would form only a fraction of the information collected by Guild members. Use of other Guild projects intended for the purpose would be a far better option for those wanting to preserve their ONS data. Peter Alefounder. _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Got any law enforcement folks in your study? Quite by chance I came across this website a few weeks ago: http://www.norfolk.police.uk/aboutus/ourhistory.aspx You can search for your study name(s) there and if you find one, can request a copy of what the force holds about them. Their service took a week to get back to me but were able to send me brief information on each of the people, varying from places they lived to rate of pay, severance pay and so on. I asked them also about another man whom I knew about from census information. He had served in Norwich, which for hundreds years was a separate local government body from the county, but even there they were able to track down something for me. Happy hunting Paul -- Paul Howes www.howesfamilies.com Researching House, Howes, Hows, Howse & Howze worldwide

Mary Rix has asked me to post the following, as she is unable to post for some reason: I beg to differ with Paul Millington. I set up the Guild Marriage Index to get members to communicate and co-operate with each which was not happening much. As a marriage unites two (or more) families this was set us to facilitate that, not as a "store for members records". It developed with Howard Benbrook's help into a "Marriage Finder" from being randomly able to link a church to a GMI page to defining which pages covered a particular church. Mary Rix (Ex-Guild Marriage Index Co-ordinator)

Paul Millington said: > Peter Alefounder wrote: > > ""The GMI was not intended to be a store of members' data." > > As one of the original proposers of the index, I can tell you very definitely it was. I would regard that as an incidental benefit of the GMI. It is not mentioned on the Guild Marriage Index introductory page (http://www.one-name.org/members/GMI/gmi.html), and in any case is not really compatible with the error correction and data additions that have been made to fulfil the primary objective of building a database to connect GRO references with marriage locations. Marriages within the scope of the GMI would form only a fraction of the information collected by Guild members. Use of other Guild projects intended for the purpose would be a far better option for those wanting to preserve their ONS data. Peter Alefounder.

Mary - I couldn't agree more. That's the exact same reason I pushed for the Worldwide index after I learned that the GMI couldn't really be expanded to encompass the world and still keep all its other functions. A marriage index is a great tool to introduce members to each other. I just wish more would use them. We've got just over 150 thousand marriages in the WorldWide in just one year and I've got another 500+ German marriages to add shortly. So come on folks. The more marriages you contribute - the better your chances of lining up with another member - especially now that Nigel's search will return hits from all the indexes. Every marriage in your database can find a home with either Mary(or her successor) or me. At 2600 members x a midsize estimate of 1000 marriages per member (some people have several smallish studies) - we're looking at 2million plus marrIages. Considering my average contributor has supplied about 3,000 marriages - that number could jump to over 6 million - a very good sized dataset to explore from the mountains of Wales to the mountains of Peru and beyond. Marie (GOONS 5318) Bringing the world together one surname at a time. 'A Pepler Name' http://pepler.tribalpages.com 'Hedgerow - the Ancestors' http://cranberry.tribalpages.com Pepler DNA Study http://www.familytreedna.com/public/pepler-ow/ 'Scroops, Scropes and Scroopes' http://dentonlk.tribalpages.com ________________________________ From: Peter Alefounder via <goons@rootsweb.com> To: goons@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 7:16 AM Subject: Re: [G] Guild Marriage Index Mary Rix has asked me to post the following, as she is unable to post for some reason: I beg to differ with Paul Millington. I set up the Guild Marriage Index to get members to communicate and co-operate with each which was not happening much. As a marriage unites two (or more) families this was set us to facilitate that, not as a "store for members records". It developed with Howard Benbrook's help into a "Marriage Finder" from being randomly able to link a church to a GMI page to defining which pages covered a particular church. Mary Rix (Ex-Guild Marriage Index Co-ordinator) _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have never had any problem buying a certificate from the Adopted Children's Register, as long as you have the full name and GRO index details and the correct money! The details given on the certificate are the adoptive name of the child, its date of birth, the name(s) of the adoptive parent(s) - if a couple you just get Mr & Mrs X, no mother's maiden name given - and the date and court of the adoption order. Indexes less than 18 years old do not give the full name of the adoptive child, so purchasing those certificates probably would be a problem, but I believe more recent certificates do give the place of birth of the child as well. Recently though I know of an adopted child who was told to obtain their original birth certificate when applying for a passport here. Of course that is not a problem for the adopted child themselves; although now easier for other members of the family since the new Children's Act. But the marriage certificate should give the adoptive father's name and so might be the easiest way to answer your query. I have one where it states that the father is adoptive, and also gives the original birth surname of the child - so you might be lucky. Polly ----- Original Message ----- From: "June Willing via" <goons@rootsweb.com> To: "Brian Horridge" <brian.horridge@btinternet.com>; <goons@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [G] GRO Adoption Indexes (2nd attempt) Hi Brian Yes, I think you are correct in your understanding. The names are definitely the adoptive names, and I assume you would not be allowed to purchase a recent adoption entry, although I have not tried to do so. I have a handful of adoption index entries. Those I have identified have generally been because by chance I happened to make contact with one of the parents, who has told me. Don't forget there is nothing to stop you purchasing a recent marriage certificate, other than the expense. I have identified a few people that way, whose birth certificate I could not purchase. It is also worth bearing in mind that you may have no birth for someone marrying (or dying) in England and Wales because they were born elsewhere. I found a recent death in England, where the person turned out to have been born in "Rhodesia". June Willing Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Willing/ Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus-2/ On 8 Jan 2015, at 17:55, Brian Horridge via wrote: > I sent this before but something went wrong with it so I'm re- > sending it. > > Can someone help me with my understanding of the GRO Adoption > indexes (from 1927 onwards). > > Am I correct in assuming that the names on the indexes are the > adopted name of the child and is an equivalent of a normal birth > certificate?? > > If so, is there anyway of identifying the adoptive parents without > buying the certificate (which I could probably not do as I am not > related to the individual). > > My assumption is based on finding GRO marriage entries for some but > without equivalent GRO birth (due to uncommon combination forenames). > > Many thanks > > Brian

Hi to Sherlock, Fiona, Merryl and others on the theme of when to publish a family tree Colleagues may have read my postings about two John Vayro or Varo and the quandary of having the wrong John and his whole se that of descendants attached to a particular couple in my database. Perhaps my original postings caused a little confusion so I hope the following will clarify the situation. So let me explain the circumstances of how this was discovered. With the assistance of several colleagues I started looking into the ancestors of two new contacts that had passed on details of their Great Grandfather a certain Thomas H Vayro, ( possibly born Belper Derbyshire) who had three sons, Percy, Norman and Dennis. Firstly Thomas Henry aged 20 was found on the 1911 Census as a groom at Willoughby House in Warwickshire. His place of birth was shown as Pickhill in Yorkshire. So there was definitely another Thomas Henry Vayro, but not yet in Belper, Derbyshire. On the 1901 Census Thomas Henry aged 10 was living with his parents a John Vayro aged 38 and Martha A Vayro aged 33 at Harlsey Grove Cottage in East Harlsey, In the Hambleton District of North Yorkshire, 10 miles north of Northallerton. Following the trail of John and Martha A Vayro they are then found on the 1891 Census at a Farm Hind’s Cottage in West Tanfield area near Masham. With them is a Thomas Vayro aged 9 months. (Born late 1990?) John was then 28, Martha 23 and they also had two daughters Christiana 3 and Sarah aged 6. Other important factors were that John is shown as being born at Clifton Lodge in Bedale and Martha at Thirsk. Calculations show that John could have been born in 1863 and Martha in 1868. So I had moved back one more generation, and it was now important to start looking for John’s parents. There were two clues in the names of John and Martha’s daughters, Sarah and Christiana. It is often the case that parents pass on a particular Christian name to the next generation. In this case I thought that the Sarah was probably the name of John’s mother. And it turns out that the only Christiana May Hudson I have on the database is the wife of a William Vayro married in Thornton Watlass in 1936, a grandson of a Thomas Vayro and Sarah Todd. So I needed to prove that Thomas and Sarah could also be John’s parents. There was a marriage between Thomas Vayro and Sarah Todd registered in the Northallerton area in 1959 (CRO reference entry 9D page 882 line 3) they went on to have thirteen children, most at Clifton Lodge on the Clifton Castle Estates in North Yorkshire, and all baptised at Thornton Watlass. They include a William born 1861 and a John Vayro baptised 16th February 1863. John was not born when the 1861 Census was taken so a colleague located William Vayro and a John Vayro entered as “Nephew” and living in Walworth with a William and Dorothy Todd. So I accepted that John and his older brother William were on the 1871 Census, and both William and John are recoded as born in “Watlass”, and aged 10 and 8. The fact that they were living with a family called Todd was another piece of the jigsaw that fitted. William Todd is shown as 46 born Brompton Yorkshire, and Dorothy Todd aged 50 born Osmotherley Yorkshire. My thought was that William may well be the brother of Sarah Todd ie John Vayro’s mother. Whereas I have not yet located Sarah Todd’s birth details or William Todd on the 1851 or 1861 Census I did locate the following. On the 1851 Census for Horsforth, Askwith there were a William Todd aged 51 (born 1800) and a Sarah Todd aged 45 (born 1806) and their daughter Sarah A Todd aged 12 (born circa 1839). They are still at Askwith on the 1861 Census, William Todd age 61 and Sarah Todd age 56 If this is the same Sarah Todd then she would have been 20 years old when she married Thomas Vayro, and the mother of both the William Vayro and John Vayro living in Walworth with their Uncle and Aunt. So whereas I do not have absolute proof, and often this is the case, I am some 90 % certain that Thomas Vayro and Sarah Todd are John Vayro’s parents. Namely in this case, the John Vayro who married Martha Anne Rose, in the THIRSK AREA ( Findmypast CRO record) in 1884 Q4 October to December JOHN VAYRO marriage to MARTHA ANNE ROSE Vol 9d p791 Now from time to time it is worth reviewing the facts and information collected on a particular branch of the ancestors, to determine whether or not there is still evidence supporting a direct line back to a particular man and wife that you know lived in a particular part of the country in the distant past. So when I looked at my database I actually found that I had a completely different John Vayro and his set of descendants attached to Thomas Vayro and Sarah Todd. Namely:- KIRBY MALZEARD (Mif 614 Marriages 1837-1905) entry 403 - 17 December 1884 JOHN VARO Bachelor aged 22 Farm Servant of Kirby Malzeard Father JAMES VARO MARY JANE GATTENBY spinster aged 22 Domestic Servant of Kirby Malzeard Mary shown as illegitimate My task is to store safely all of the data on John Vayro and Mary Ann Gattenby, and remove them from their present location and replace that data with the new John Vayro and Martha Anne Rose. And of course give the other John Vayro and Mary Jane Gattenby their rightful place attached to a James Vayro who I have already located on my database. However if any one has not yet switched off from this diatribe, I would hesitate to ask whether my theories and deductions appear to be correct, and would welcome an opinion, direct or through the group. More importantly if anyone is familiar with the intricacies of Family Tree Maker I would welcome assistance on the actual method of moving whole groups of individuals and re-attaching them. Thanks for your patience Rennison Rennison's List on http://www.upperdalesfhg.org.uk/rennisons.htm The Vayro Ancestry on http://www.vayro.name Vayro Database on http://vayro.tribalpages.com Vayro Guild of One-Name Studies Profile http://one-name.org/name_profile/vayro/ http://www.rennisonprimarydesigntechnology.info Searching for VAYRO, VARO, VARAH and variations worldwide

Hi Brian Yes, I think you are correct in your understanding. The names are definitely the adoptive names, and I assume you would not be allowed to purchase a recent adoption entry, although I have not tried to do so. I have a handful of adoption index entries. Those I have identified have generally been because by chance I happened to make contact with one of the parents, who has told me. Don't forget there is nothing to stop you purchasing a recent marriage certificate, other than the expense. I have identified a few people that way, whose birth certificate I could not purchase. It is also worth bearing in mind that you may have no birth for someone marrying (or dying) in England and Wales because they were born elsewhere. I found a recent death in England, where the person turned out to have been born in "Rhodesia". June Willing Guild of One-Name Studies member no 2117 Willing/Willings One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/Willing/ Willing/Willings DNA Project http://www.familytreedna.com/public/Willing/ Dominicus One-Name Study http://one-name.org/name_profile/dominicus-2/ On 8 Jan 2015, at 17:55, Brian Horridge via wrote: > I sent this before but something went wrong with it so I'm re- > sending it. > > Can someone help me with my understanding of the GRO Adoption > indexes (from 1927 onwards). > > Am I correct in assuming that the names on the indexes are the > adopted name of the child and is an equivalent of a normal birth > certificate?? > > If so, is there anyway of identifying the adoptive parents without > buying the certificate (which I could probably not do as I am not > related to the individual). > > My assumption is based on finding GRO marriage entries for some but > without equivalent GRO birth (due to uncommon combination forenames). > > Many thanks > > Brian > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message

I sent this before but something went wrong with it so I'm re-sending it. Can someone help me with my understanding of the GRO Adoption indexes (from 1927 onwards). Am I correct in assuming that the names on the indexes are the adopted name of the child and is an equivalent of a normal birth certificate?? If so, is there anyway of identifying the adoptive parents without buying the certificate (which I could probably not do as I am not related to the individual). My assumption is based on finding GRO marriage entries for some but without equivalent GRO birth (due to uncommon combination forenames). Many thanks Brian

Can someone help me with my understanding of the GRO Adpotion indexes (from 1927 onwards). Am I correct in assuming that the names on the indexes are the adopted name of the child and is an equivalent of a normal birth certificate?? If so, is there anyway of identifying the adoptive parents without buying the certificate (which

Peter Alefounder wrote: ""The GMI was not intended to be a store of members' data." As one of the original proposers of the index, I can tell you very definitely it was. Paul Millington Member No. 2181

Hi Fiona, You could look at the issue as a Need to know, does anyone Need to Know! If I was in your position where I suspected that I may have the wrong wife's I guess I would have two options those being; 1.Make a note that the wife's may be linked to the wrong husbands however further research is required to either prove or disprove what I suspect. 2.Leave as it is, however do the research that is needed to prove or disprove what I suspect and then make the changes if they are needed. If the research does prove that you do have a mismatch then and only then will you need to unlink the wife's from the current husband and children, you will need to ensure that no children are still linked to each wife before you link the wife's to the correct husband, you can do this easy as in legacy family tree, another option is to first print out the family group sheet for each couple as you have them and then edit the wife's details, meaning swap the wife's via editing, this will take a little longer than the other option of un-linking and relinking them. I tend to favor the second option of doing the research to either prove of disprove what I suspect then and only then correct my file if needed. If I have given descendants of that line information I then let them know that due to resent research their Branch of the family pedigree has changed and I then also send them an up dated version. Regard, David J Grimshaw (or is it Grimason?) Genealogical Researcher of the "Grimason" surname and variations of the "Grimason" surname World Wide. A One Name study registered with the Guild of One Name Studies (GOONS): 6138 formally 2962 The "Sherlock Holmes" of this family according to some. On 7/01/2015 11:07 p.m., Fíona Tipple via wrote: > Rennison, > > On 6 Jan 2015, at 18:59, RENNISON john.vayro@sky.com via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > >> I have a quandary at the moment which is a good example. Doing some research for two long distant cousins I have found that I have two different John Vayros born in 1862-3 in Wensleydale / Leeds areas and both marrying in 1884 in Wensleydale. The facts show that there are two wives obviously, two sets of children, but new evidence also suggests that my present published website has these two individuals attached to the opposite i.e. wrong parents. But until I am completely sure, having analysed and considered the new set of facts that they are the wrong way round the website on public display will stay as it is. If and when it is modified it will be stored and uploaded as a new gedcom database. >> > When you find a suspected mismatch like this, do you put a note on your website about it, pending a solution? Or do you just leave everything as it is, without comment, until you sort the problem out? > > Fiona > — > 5538 - Duignan & variants > > > > > >> Rennison's List on http://www.upperdalesfhg.org.uk/rennisons.htm >> The Vayro Ancestry on http://www.vayro.name >> Vayro Database on http://vayro.tribalpages.com >> Vayro Guild of One-Name Studies Profile >> http://one-name.org/name_profile/vayro/ >> http://www.rennisonprimarydesigntechnology.info >> Searching for VAYRO, VARO, VARAH and variations worldwide >> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 17:55, Christopher Gray via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >>>> Colin - while I agree with your view that early publication is beneficial - >>> I suggest that, in doing so, one accepts that many viewers will treat it as >>> "rock solid" no matter how many caveats one places around it. >>> >>> Personally I place my trees online as soon as I have them. Many, many of >>> the assumptions I make - for example that if a person is named as a son in a >>> census that he is a son - are not validated. I leave it to the viewer to >>> decide on the validity based on seeing the sources and drawing their own >>> conclusions. I have seen too many on-line trees with errors that are >>> obvious when one looks at the sources. While I would hope that most of mine >>> pass that initial scrutiny, I am sure that many of the assumptions would be >>> disproved if only there were a few more documents out there giving >>> independent views of what reality actually was. >>> >>> One benefit of publishing is to enable people to challenge one's findings. >>> Mind you, no one has challenged anything I've put on line over the last >>> twenty years - which is very disappointing. >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >>> Behalf Of Colin Stevenson via >>> Sent: 03 January 2015 16:34 >>> To: goons@rootsweb.com >>> Subject: Re: [G] when is a tree good enough to publish? >>> >>> It depends on why you want to publish the tree. If you claim it is the >>> definitive family history you need to be very certain of your facts. At the >>> other end of the spectrum if it is published as a work in progress with >>> appropriate caveats then it is a useful research tool for you and others. >>> Personally I think there is more to gain from 'early ' >>> publication rather than striving for accuracy. I can see no harm from >>> publishing a speculative tree provided it is described as such. >>> >>> Colin Stevenson (Cavie & Monnington) >>> >>

Hi, I just wanted to send out a reminder that we will be holding our first Guild Seminar for 2015 , in London at the Wellcome Library, to explore Medical & Healthcare Records. We have two talks by Christopher Hilton, the Chief Archivist of the Wellcome Library who hold one of the world's (not just the UK's) most important collections. The Chief Archivist has been with the Wellcome Library for (I believe) 20+ years and is very aware of records which could be of interest to us. Over our two morning sessions he intends to cover "- An Overview of the Wellcome Library: origins, types of records found here, facilities offered, etc. - Development of profession and the records you can find from various eras – doctors - Development of profession and the records you can find from various eras – nurses - a little bit on patient records - miscellaneous other records that you can find at the Wellcome Library – Quakers, etc. - our digitisation activities, which will touch both on records I’ve already mentioned, and also on some formats to be discussed later (e.g. asylum records)" It is a huge collection and I hope the talk will also include - surgeons records, army records (some of which are deposited at the Wellcome), and Apothecaries records (It would be great if Christopher also covered the Trade Card and Ephemera collections at the Wellcome ... trailed in a previous seminar) Our afternoon session will provide us three further talks : Asylum Records by Elizabeth Finn (Collections Development Officer, Kent County Council); Catholic Medical Care Records by Carmen M Mangion PhD; and last but far from least (I have seen the PowerPoint slides) “Find the Midwife – Midwives Records” by Penny Hutchins (Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Archivist and Organisation Records Manager). It should be a really interesting day even if you don't believe you have any Medical connections in your one name study . And as with the Warwick Seminar (where we covered Trade Union, Masonic, and Friendly Society Records) - this is a one off opportunity. So I do hope if have not booked as yet - that you will consider doing so . And if you have booked if you have any display's to bring just let us know and we will make sure we can accommodate you (I have had quite a lot of information from wider the Archive Community which will be shared for attendees on the day) http://one-name.org/seminar_2015feb_medhealth.html Please be reminded that the official booking closing date is Sunday January 25th 2015 Very Best Regards Richard Heaton

Anne Shankland said: >I would like to see two different fields on the GMI entries, one > for the member who actually provided the information, and one for > the member who has the study registered. Not so easy. As others have pointed out, a single entry may contain information supplied by several individuals: the original GRO reference from one ONS, the spouse name from another ONS, the location from a Marriage Challenger - and all that's before we move into the realm of corrections: Tony Mingay's "Puzzle" of a few months ago comes to mind. As Anne said: > But what should we do when a record submitted by member A for a > study name registered by member B is updated or corrected by > member C? A correction, even the fact that something is recognised as being wrong, may depend on the surrounding entries, which also may be the result of information supplied by several contributors. Keeping track of all that would be a huge task, and getting quite far from the original purpose of the GMI: a database to allow the location of marriages to be found from GRO references and a means of connecting members' studies where interests coincide in a marriage. When the GMI started, the right-hand columns were labelled as giving the contributor. Years ago, that was changed to "further details". Now you can see why! The GMI was not intended to be a store of members' data. We now have other databases for that purpose. Anything going in to the GMI has been subjected to at least some verification: many typographical errors are detected and removed at this stage. Where there is sufficient information in a particular area, it is even possible to spot GRO reference errors, such as the incorrect page number that led to Tony Mingay's posting. Sets of Cardinal Points for a Registration District can be checked for errors and omissions. There are some simple rules for CPs. Using the notation in the CP recording template on the Guild web site (www.one-name.org/members/GMI/CardPointCollect.html), s for a CP at the start of a quarter, f (finish) for one at the end and b (both) if the CP is the only marriage in the quarter, the first rule is that s must be followed by f in the same location, and f or b must be followed by s or b (with a different location). The second rule: if f or b is on an even-numbered page (call it p), the following CP is on page p+1; if f or b is on an odd-numbered page, the next CP is on page p+2. Checking for this can be done manually, but it is very tedious and prone to error: a computer is far better at that sort of thing. The result is that the GMI is more accurate than information supplied by any one contributor. Entries supplied by one member may be corrected by information supplied by others. It really is more than the sum of its parts. Peter Alefounder.

Hi Short answer is that I put a note on both explaining what my thoughts are and why before I change it Nikki #6552 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fíona Tipple via" <goons@rootsweb.com> To: "RENNISON john.vayro@sky.com" <john.vayro@sky.com>, goons@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, 7 January, 2015 10:07:38 AM Subject: Re: [G] when is a tree good enough to publish? Rennison, On 6 Jan 2015, at 18:59, RENNISON john.vayro@sky.com via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I have a quandary at the moment which is a good example. Doing some research for two long distant cousins I have found that I have two different John Vayros born in 1862-3 in Wensleydale / Leeds areas and both marrying in 1884 in Wensleydale. The facts show that there are two wives obviously, two sets of children, but new evidence also suggests that my present published website has these two individuals attached to the opposite i.e. wrong parents. But until I am completely sure, having analysed and considered the new set of facts that they are the wrong way round the website on public display will stay as it is. If and when it is modified it will be stored and uploaded as a new gedcom database. > When you find a suspected mismatch like this, do you put a note on your website about it, pending a solution? Or do you just leave everything as it is, without comment, until you sort the problem out? Fiona — 5538 - Duignan & variants > Rennison's List on http://www.upperdalesfhg.org.uk/rennisons.htm > The Vayro Ancestry on http://www.vayro.name > Vayro Database on http://vayro.tribalpages.com > Vayro Guild of One-Name Studies Profile > http://one-name.org/name_profile/vayro/ > http://www.rennisonprimarydesigntechnology.info > Searching for VAYRO, VARO, VARAH and variations worldwide > > > >> On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 17:55, Christopher Gray via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >>> Colin - while I agree with your view that early publication is beneficial - >> I suggest that, in doing so, one accepts that many viewers will treat it as >> "rock solid" no matter how many caveats one places around it. >> >> Personally I place my trees online as soon as I have them. Many, many of >> the assumptions I make - for example that if a person is named as a son in a >> census that he is a son - are not validated. I leave it to the viewer to >> decide on the validity based on seeing the sources and drawing their own >> conclusions. I have seen too many on-line trees with errors that are >> obvious when one looks at the sources. While I would hope that most of mine >> pass that initial scrutiny, I am sure that many of the assumptions would be >> disproved if only there were a few more documents out there giving >> independent views of what reality actually was. >> >> One benefit of publishing is to enable people to challenge one's findings. >> Mind you, no one has challenged anything I've put on line over the last >> twenty years - which is very disappointing. >> >> Chris >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >> Behalf Of Colin Stevenson via >> Sent: 03 January 2015 16:34 >> To: goons@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [G] when is a tree good enough to publish? >> >> It depends on why you want to publish the tree. If you claim it is the >> definitive family history you need to be very certain of your facts. At the >> other end of the spectrum if it is published as a work in progress with >> appropriate caveats then it is a useful research tool for you and others. >> Personally I think there is more to gain from 'early ' >> publication rather than striving for accuracy. I can see no harm from >> publishing a speculative tree provided it is described as such. >> >> Colin Stevenson (Cavie & Monnington) >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com >> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the >> body of the message >> > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Rennison, On 6 Jan 2015, at 18:59, RENNISON john.vayro@sky.com via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > I have a quandary at the moment which is a good example. Doing some research for two long distant cousins I have found that I have two different John Vayros born in 1862-3 in Wensleydale / Leeds areas and both marrying in 1884 in Wensleydale. The facts show that there are two wives obviously, two sets of children, but new evidence also suggests that my present published website has these two individuals attached to the opposite i.e. wrong parents. But until I am completely sure, having analysed and considered the new set of facts that they are the wrong way round the website on public display will stay as it is. If and when it is modified it will be stored and uploaded as a new gedcom database. > When you find a suspected mismatch like this, do you put a note on your website about it, pending a solution? Or do you just leave everything as it is, without comment, until you sort the problem out? Fiona — 5538 - Duignan & variants > Rennison's List on http://www.upperdalesfhg.org.uk/rennisons.htm > The Vayro Ancestry on http://www.vayro.name > Vayro Database on http://vayro.tribalpages.com > Vayro Guild of One-Name Studies Profile > http://one-name.org/name_profile/vayro/ > http://www.rennisonprimarydesigntechnology.info > Searching for VAYRO, VARO, VARAH and variations worldwide > > > >> On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 17:55, Christopher Gray via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: >>> Colin - while I agree with your view that early publication is beneficial - >> I suggest that, in doing so, one accepts that many viewers will treat it as >> "rock solid" no matter how many caveats one places around it. >> >> Personally I place my trees online as soon as I have them. Many, many of >> the assumptions I make - for example that if a person is named as a son in a >> census that he is a son - are not validated. I leave it to the viewer to >> decide on the validity based on seeing the sources and drawing their own >> conclusions. I have seen too many on-line trees with errors that are >> obvious when one looks at the sources. While I would hope that most of mine >> pass that initial scrutiny, I am sure that many of the assumptions would be >> disproved if only there were a few more documents out there giving >> independent views of what reality actually was. >> >> One benefit of publishing is to enable people to challenge one's findings. >> Mind you, no one has challenged anything I've put on line over the last >> twenty years - which is very disappointing. >> >> Chris >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >> Behalf Of Colin Stevenson via >> Sent: 03 January 2015 16:34 >> To: goons@rootsweb.com >> Subject: Re: [G] when is a tree good enough to publish? >> >> It depends on why you want to publish the tree. If you claim it is the >> definitive family history you need to be very certain of your facts. At the >> other end of the spectrum if it is published as a work in progress with >> appropriate caveats then it is a useful research tool for you and others. >> Personally I think there is more to gain from 'early ' >> publication rather than striving for accuracy. I can see no harm from >> publishing a speculative tree provided it is described as such. >> >> Colin Stevenson (Cavie & Monnington) >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in >> the subject and the body of the message >> >> _____________________________________________ >> >> RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc >> http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com >> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the >> body of the message >> > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Karen I know its not the same as the pront copy, but they are on line http://announcements.telegraph.co.uk/deaths/185615/liddiard chris On 4 January 2015 at 20:21, Karen Rogers via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > Hi > > > > I have just received word that a relative of mine passed away in London on > the 30th of December. His death notice will appear in the Daily Telegraph > tomorrow the 6th of January, the day of the funeral. > > I was hoping someone could scan a copy of it for me. I would greatly > appreciate this as regretfully I cannot attend the funeral in London. Barry > and I worked together on our own family tree since 1999, I will miss our > collaboration and our dinner's together whenever I was in England. > > > > His name is Barry Liddiard. > > > > Regards > > > > Karen Rogers > > Member for the Guild of One Name Studies ( Goons) 3922 > > Researching the surname Liddiard & variants world wide > > > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Marie Byatt Sent: 03 January 2015 22:49 > But the software won't do it - the computer sorts and matches very fast and well, but I have to approve or reject each instance and I have to enter the details into the database to start with. Marie - I totally agree. From the first time I used a computer (nearly fifty years ago) I was taught that, unless you can do the job by hand, don't try and ask a computer to do it. The computers are much faster, can handle more information, etc, etc - but it is your judgement as to whether or not to reject or approve. Some of your rules you can program your computer to do - but there will always be instances where the computer still needs help.

Hi Do you mean ParLoc? Google it and see if it is what you are looking for. Jennifer KITCHER ONS 4216 -----Original Message----- From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Caryl Gill via Sent: 05 January 2015 20:01 To: goons@rootsweb.com Subject: [G] Place finder Hi, At one time (quite a while back now) there was a free? Place finder. You either typed in the county, and it gave you all towns and villages, or you typed in a place and it gave you possible counties. Does anyone remember what it was called, and do you know if it still exists. Thanks Caryl Still looking for Pett _____________________________________________ RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Chris, and others following this thread. I agree that the family tree should be published as soon as you are satisfied with your research up to that point in time. Tomorrow you may find some piece of data that blows your theories apart and so get involved in evaluating modifying your data. But this will at least provide feedback and hopefully constructive criticism from viewers. I think members accept that complete guarantees cannot be given for every scrap of information contained in the material collected and presented, and it may be wise to incorporate a simple concise statement suggesting that it is accurate factual evidence of a family ancestry "as far as is reasonably practicable". This phrase is generally incorporated into Health and Safety Policies where one is also doing ones best to keep people safe but cannot give absolute guarantees or prevent what they call "perverted ingenuity" where someone deliberately breaks all of the rules and is set on harming themselves or others. The "legal high" drugs are a case in point where even a notice suggesting these are "not for human consumption" is still completely ignored. Sorry for straying a little but the mistakes contained within our family tree websites and presentations are more likely to be made by the original recorders for census returns and parish registry entries mis-interpreting information supplied by those present at the time of the census or ceremony for B M D. I have a quandary at the moment which is a good example. Doing some research for two long distant cousins I have found that I have two different John Vayros born in 1862-3 in Wensleydale / Leeds areas and both marrying in 1884 in Wensleydale. The facts show that there are two wives obviously, two sets of children, but new evidence also suggests that my present published website has these two individuals attached to the opposite i.e. wrong parents. But until I am completely sure, having analysed and considered the new set of facts that they are the wrong way round the website on public display will stay as it is. If and when it is modified it will be stored and uploaded as a new gedcom database. And I feel that is the natural process of development that we are all involved in. But I don't think we should ever be frightened of putting our work and theories on display, as long as it is accepted that it is "a work in progress" Rennison Rennison's List on http://www.upperdalesfhg.org.uk/rennisons.htm The Vayro Ancestry on http://www.vayro.name Vayro Database on http://vayro.tribalpages.com Vayro Guild of One-Name Studies Profile http://one-name.org/name_profile/vayro/ http://www.rennisonprimarydesigntechnology.info Searching for VAYRO, VARO, VARAH and variations worldwide > On Tuesday, 6 January 2015, 17:55, Christopher Gray via <goons@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Colin - while I agree with your view that early publication is beneficial - > I suggest that, in doing so, one accepts that many viewers will treat it as > "rock solid" no matter how many caveats one places around it. > > Personally I place my trees online as soon as I have them. Many, many of > the assumptions I make - for example that if a person is named as a son in a > census that he is a son - are not validated. I leave it to the viewer to > decide on the validity based on seeing the sources and drawing their own > conclusions. I have seen too many on-line trees with errors that are > obvious when one looks at the sources. While I would hope that most of mine > pass that initial scrutiny, I am sure that many of the assumptions would be > disproved if only there were a few more documents out there giving > independent views of what reality actually was. > > One benefit of publishing is to enable people to challenge one's findings. > Mind you, no one has challenged anything I've put on line over the last > twenty years - which is very disappointing. > > Chris > > -----Original Message----- > From: goons-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:goons-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of Colin Stevenson via > Sent: 03 January 2015 16:34 > To: goons@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [G] when is a tree good enough to publish? > > It depends on why you want to publish the tree. If you claim it is the > definitive family history you need to be very certain of your facts. At the > other end of the spectrum if it is published as a work in progress with > appropriate caveats then it is a useful research tool for you and others. > Personally I think there is more to gain from 'early ' > publication rather than striving for accuracy. I can see no harm from > publishing a speculative tree provided it is described as such. > > Colin Stevenson (Cavie & Monnington) > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in > the subject and the body of the message > > _____________________________________________ > > RootsWeb lists - surnames, regions, software, etc > http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the > body of the message >