Hi Jane, Thank you for responding to my messages - very kind of you. However when I wrote these out - I had formatted all the individual steps in an easy to follow list.When the message appeared, these had all been merged into continuous text - much more difficult to follow. I don't know why that happens. I hope you find something of interest anyway. June Thanks June for both of those posts.... Not sure if I knew that or not but I haven't felt FMP useful in the past except for Devon.. So I will give it a go now for Lancs Wills. Jane >

Hi all, Filmed records of many Lancashire Marriage Licences and Bonds are available on Find My Past. As with Lancashire pre 1858 Wills - these are for people in those places South of the Ribble such as Colne, Burnley, Blackburn, Rochdale, Haslingden etc etc. (These are locations which you may not have considered to be south of the Ribble). To find these marriage licences you need to access the Cheshire records on Find My Past. Hence; 1. Click 'Search' on the ribbon menu at the top of the home page.2. Click 'A-Z of Record Sets'3. Start typing in 'Cheshire' (without the quotes) in the search box.4. Amongst the list of Cheshire records which appear - select 'Cheshire Marriage Licence Bonds and Allegations'5. Enter your search criteria in the search box which appears ----BUT DO NOT INSERT A PARISH --- you will see that many results do not show a location -- you will need to click on the filmed record to see where the marriage occurred. In many, many instances - this will be in Lancashire. I hope someone finds something of interest amongst these supposedly 'Cheshire' records. Regards June

Hi everyone, May I firstly say that many of you may know about the downloadable Lancashire Wills on Find My Past -- but I didn't - so other members of this list may not not know either. Hence this message and a FOLLOWING similar one about Marriage Licences and Bonds. As we know Lancashire used to be split between 2 Eccliastical Courts. Places in Lancs which were SOUTH of the Ribble came under the Archdeaconry of Chester - places NORTH of the Ribble came under Richmond, Yorks. The pre 1858 Wills held at Cheshire Archives have been filmed and are included on Find My Past. (Possibly not all --- but very many are). These include Lancashire Wills for those people who lived in Lancashire south of the Ribble. As the source of the River Ribble is in North Yorkshire - there are many locations in Lancashire which are south of this river --- Colne, Burnley, Rossendale, Blackburn, Bury Rochdale, Whalley -- and loads more. Hence the Wills for people from these places are within the Cheshire batch on Find My Past. To access these on that site;1. Click 'Search' on the ribbon menu at the top of the home page.2. Select 'Birth, Marriage, Death and parish Records' from the drop down menu which appears.3. In the section labelled ' Browse Subcategory' part way down the search screen - select 'Wills and Probate' (tick the adjacent box)-- and select 'Apply Filters' 4. Input your search criteria - but for your location input CHESHIRE!5. Check the results - BUT to find where the person was located you will need to look at the filmed copy of the Will. You will find lots are Lancashire locations. 6. PLEASE NOTE - many Wills consist of several pages - turn the pages by clicking the right hand arrow. You can download the Will page by page. I hope at least one of you didn't already know this and finds it of some help! Regards June

Mike said: >>> Hello Fiona, I am on a number of Facebook sites. Middleton, Hulme/Ardwick/Ancoats and another for Moss Side. I have never seen a query posted on these sites. Mike Morris Toronto Canada >>> Try Lancashire Genealogy, Ancestry UK, Ancestry Discussion UK.. they all seem quite lively. I lurk there, but rarely stick my head over the parapet unless I have a ‘for goodness sake’ moment On another note I was recently locked out from Facebook – I had to send photo ID to prove who I was with dob clearly showing – ridiculous!! Nearly flounced away, but as I am in charge of our Church and Toddler group pages and would miss the Archers Anonymous discussions (for non-Brits that’s a radio soap which is very contentious at them moment) Fiona

Well.. while it’s quiet maybe I could pose a problem? My Gt. Grandfather was Michael Den(n)ison born abt 1841 according to Census records. He married Sarah Ellen Barton in 1871 in Southport, Lancashire. They had 9 children including my Grandmother Lucy. I’ve never been able to find baptism or death/burial record for Michael. He appears in the 1871/1881 and 1891 Census and always says he was born in Liverpool. But I’ve never found him anywhere before his marriage or after 1891. All the children stayed in the area and indeed the Bartons and Lucy Dennison’s husband were Southport/North Meols families which I can trace quite a long way back. My father and grandmother never mentioned him. As far as I know no family member knows anything. So the family stayed in the area, Sarah Ellen is buried there. Where did Michael come from and where did he die? I’ve tried Irish records on the grounds that maybe he didn’t know where he was born, but his Father Thomas appears as a witness at his wedding, so I think I’m clutching at straws there. I can’t find Thomas Dennison either. I’ve tried North Meols FHS.. found lots of ‘cousins’ there but no help re Michael Dennison. Any suggestions? Regards Jane Devon

I think we all have some records that are questionable. I am sure I have one in 1852 - that the bride aged 22 married a man aged 40 ( who is a widower) but down as a bachelor. And I suspect her uncle! They are the same common surname so who would know.? ,Quite a lot of people I guess. Can't be certain of anything in these old records , just made in good faith and sometimes ignorance. and sometimes turning a blind eye. On 8 Feb 2016 16:19, "w Simkins via" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All > > Yes, you cannot rely on a marriage certificate which does not qualify if > the father is deceased. > > Having transcribed many registers, you notice that siblings will sometimes > show father deceased; next sibling marries and there is nothing, suggesting > that the father is still alive. My personal belief is that this is due to > the minister not asking the question! > > We've also know the occasional one shown as deceased...who isn't! But > that is another can of worms... > > Jacqui > > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on > behalf of Jon via <[email protected]> > Sent: 08 February 2016 16:15 > To: Jane Lucas; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LAN] MICHAEL DENNISON c1841 > > Hi Jane, > > Just a quick question.... > > How do you know that Michael's father was present at his marriage in 1871? > > Could he have had a brother Thomas, a cousin Thomas? > > If it's because the marriage record doesn't state his father to be > deceased, > that's not really anything to go by, as I have a number of marriages in my > tree where the fathers weren't said to be deceased, although I know beyond > any doubt that they were. > > Best wishes, Jon > > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Jane I see your man in 1871, 1881 & 1891 By 1901 his wife is a widow So you have a window of 1891 to 1901, I did not find a death under any variation of the name I could find So either he died elsewhere (abroad?) or his death was registered under another name (unlikely) or missed completely (possible but unlikely) Or he legged it after 1891 and went elsewhere or changed his name and his wife used widow to save face In 1851 there is a DENNISON family in Manchester Patrick head aged 46 a tailor, wife E DENNISON Family of five including an M DENNISON aged 10 All born Ireland Some changed their birthplace to avoid stigma Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 08/02/2016 15:51, Jane Lucas via wrote: > Well.. while it’s quiet maybe I could pose a problem? > > My Gt. Grandfather was Michael Den(n)ison born abt 1841 according to Census records. He married Sarah Ellen Barton in 1871 in Southport, Lancashire. They had 9 children including my Grandmother Lucy. I’ve never been able to find baptism or death/burial record for Michael. He appears in the 1871/1881 and 1891 Census and always says he was born in Liverpool. But I’ve never found him anywhere before his marriage or after 1891. All the children stayed in the area and indeed the Bartons and Lucy Dennison’s husband were Southport/North Meols families which I can trace quite a long way back. My father and grandmother never mentioned him. As far as I know no family member knows anything. > So the family stayed in the area, Sarah Ellen is buried there. Where did Michael come from and where did he die? I’ve tried Irish records on the grounds that maybe he didn’t know where he was born, but his Father Thomas appears as a witness at his wedding, so I think I’m clutching at straws there. I can’t find Thomas Dennison either. > I’ve tried North Meols FHS.. found lots of ‘cousins’ there but no help re Michael Dennison. > Any suggestions? > > Regards > Jane > Devon --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Hi All Yes, you cannot rely on a marriage certificate which does not qualify if the father is deceased. Having transcribed many registers, you notice that siblings will sometimes show father deceased; next sibling marries and there is nothing, suggesting that the father is still alive. My personal belief is that this is due to the minister not asking the question! We've also know the occasional one shown as deceased...who isn't! But that is another can of worms... Jacqui ________________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Jon via <[email protected]> Sent: 08 February 2016 16:15 To: Jane Lucas; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] MICHAEL DENNISON c1841 Hi Jane, Just a quick question.... How do you know that Michael's father was present at his marriage in 1871? Could he have had a brother Thomas, a cousin Thomas? If it's because the marriage record doesn't state his father to be deceased, that's not really anything to go by, as I have a number of marriages in my tree where the fathers weren't said to be deceased, although I know beyond any doubt that they were. Best wishes, Jon :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Jane, Just a quick question.... How do you know that Michael's father was present at his marriage in 1871? Could he have had a brother Thomas, a cousin Thomas? If it's because the marriage record doesn't state his father to be deceased, that's not really anything to go by, as I have a number of marriages in my tree where the fathers weren't said to be deceased, although I know beyond any doubt that they were. Best wishes, Jon

Hello Everybody, This subject crops from time to time and as I subscribe to at least 30 lists I find it is a recurring theme. Like other people I learn a lot from the lists about things I have never queried but often pondered over. I think Nivard has hit the nail on the head with his response and I can do no better than agree with him. Regards Rod, in wet and windy Hampshire. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

No , you are in good company! Long live these lists. Stuart ----------------------------------- Stuart Phethean Hampshire, Uk Researching the Phethean families http://www.phethean.org.uk ----------------------------------- On 08/02/2016 13:11, "Sheila Smith via" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I'm sick to death of Facebook .......does no one realise that oldies like > me, would prefer to speak to others properly like over the Mailing Lists. > > To me Facebook is a nightmare !!!! I don't care if I'm a luddite > Fiona..... > > Sheila (Fife) >

Hello Fiona, I am on a number of Facebook sites. Middleton, Hulme/Ardwick/Ancoats and another for Moss Side. I have never seen a query posted on these sites. Mike Morris Toronto Canada From: Fiona Hall via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 7:41 AM Subject: Re: [LAN] quiet mailling list All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook –  the ones I belong to are really lively. <snip>

I have quite often had people telling me that I should be on Facebook but my answer has always been "Why?". I can't see any advantage to me except feeding more personal information to a large American (tax avoiding) corporation so they can profit from it. A few weeks ago I was told that one Facebook user was using some of my images without asking permission, the person who told me had already got some of his removed. I went to the Facebook page and it took ages to find mine - I tried clicking on the link to all his images but it was trying to display hundreds (if not thousands) of images on one page so impossible to view. I eventually found mine but then could not send a message to the owner of the page without registering with Facebook - this is one aspect that always annoys me, Facebook like to keep their users in a separate world to the rest of the Internet. So I put in a formal complaint to Facebook and got them removed. Unfortunately many newcomers to the Internet have never heard of mailing lists, USENET and many other older features, and often think that newer services are original. Martin Briscoe Fort William [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Penny Trueman via Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 1:10 PM To: Nivard Ovington <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] quiet mailling list

Hi Fiona (stranger!) I am scared stiff of Facebook - I'm not a member nor do I intend to be in the foreseeable future. It is sad though that Forums and Lists are not as lively as they once were. This subject (Quiet Mailing List) has inspired me -- and I will shortly post a message about something I have just discovered. I will post this in the hope that others, like me - were unaware of this info and it may help someone (I'm just trying to build up the anticipation now!) June From: Fiona Hall via <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, 8 February 2016, 12:41 Subject: Re: [LAN] quiet mailling list All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook –  the ones I belong to are really lively. BUT, searching for that elusive ancestor is a NIGHTMARE on facebook as messages vanish into thin air after a day (or so it seems to me) Am I just being a luddite ?  Lots of folks seem to go straight for Facebook and I don’t  think it’s a very efficient way of doing FH Fiona :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list.  No fees!  The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi I'm sick to death of Facebook .......does no one realise that oldies like me, would prefer to speak to others properly like over the Mailing Lists. To me Facebook is a nightmare !!!! I don't care if I'm a luddite Fiona..... Sheila (Fife)

Totally agree: "Long live the lists I say :-)" Penny On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Nivard Ovington via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Fiona > > No not a Luddite, just sensible IMHO > > Facebook on the face of it (no pun intended) seems great but is > virtually hopeless as a means of research, partly as you say due to > posts being virtually hidden as soon as they are posted > > The main problems I see are the number of inexperienced researchers > giving advice which is often inaccurate or down right wrong > > The structure of facebook groups is haphazard at best unlike the > Rootsweb lists, anyone can start up a fb group and as easily just desert > them > > Facebook groups for genealogy are more often than not closed and > therefore only those in the group can see posts and only if they keep > track of them, a lot of groups have members in the hundreds or lower > thousands, very few appear to read all the posts and even fewer respond, > I see posts like "looking for Jones in London" which I have rarely seen > on the lists > > Facebook posts are not findable by google or search engines unlike all > rootsweb list posts to anyone anywhere in the world > > Facebook has its uses, you can post pictures and images, for discussion > of local history etc but for research its fairly hopeless > > I think more of an influence on the decline of use of the lists is due > to the plethora of data now available and the fact that a great many > questions once asked on the lists are now easily answered with a search > engine (answers often found on rootsweb lists) and that people are a lot > more computer savvy than they were say ten or twenty years ago > > For research I do not think you can beat the Rootsweb lists > > Long live the lists I say :-) > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 08/02/2016 12:41, Fiona Hall via wrote: > > All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. > > > > I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook > > – the ones I belong to are really lively. > > > > BUT, searching for that elusive ancestor is a NIGHTMARE on facebook > > as messages vanish into thin air after a day (or so it seems to me) > > > > Am I just being a luddite ? Lots of folks seem to go straight for > > Facebook and I don’t think it’s a very efficient way of doing FH > > > > Fiona > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Fiona No not a Luddite, just sensible IMHO Facebook on the face of it (no pun intended) seems great but is virtually hopeless as a means of research, partly as you say due to posts being virtually hidden as soon as they are posted The main problems I see are the number of inexperienced researchers giving advice which is often inaccurate or down right wrong The structure of facebook groups is haphazard at best unlike the Rootsweb lists, anyone can start up a fb group and as easily just desert them Facebook groups for genealogy are more often than not closed and therefore only those in the group can see posts and only if they keep track of them, a lot of groups have members in the hundreds or lower thousands, very few appear to read all the posts and even fewer respond, I see posts like "looking for Jones in London" which I have rarely seen on the lists Facebook posts are not findable by google or search engines unlike all rootsweb list posts to anyone anywhere in the world Facebook has its uses, you can post pictures and images, for discussion of local history etc but for research its fairly hopeless I think more of an influence on the decline of use of the lists is due to the plethora of data now available and the fact that a great many questions once asked on the lists are now easily answered with a search engine (answers often found on rootsweb lists) and that people are a lot more computer savvy than they were say ten or twenty years ago For research I do not think you can beat the Rootsweb lists Long live the lists I say :-) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 08/02/2016 12:41, Fiona Hall via wrote: > All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. > > I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook > – the ones I belong to are really lively. > > BUT, searching for that elusive ancestor is a NIGHTMARE on facebook > as messages vanish into thin air after a day (or so it seems to me) > > Am I just being a luddite ? Lots of folks seem to go straight for > Facebook and I don’t think it’s a very efficient way of doing FH > > Fiona --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Facebook is great in four situations: 1. When you need something quick and simple, i.e. "can someone read this?" or "is there anyone that knows where this is?" 2. When you're SO stuck you are trying everything. I hate the term brick wall, its just a matter of being stuck with your current research. 3. When you're trying to connect with cousins or people in a certain area. I wouldn't know how to pronounce Greenhalgh properly without the British Greenhalghs telling us on their group! 4. When you're working with very mobile or younger researchers, they often send more information to FB than they do their own families. I've seen birth and death announcements that were never in the paper thanks to being a member. The value of a FB feature in terms of family history depends on whether or not its a page or a group. Pages are harder to search and are more ethereal in that content ebbs and flows (although FB recently added the "save post/save link" feature which helps with that). Groups are just like the RW message boards displayed in another way. You can search them, post to them, and find people who comment with helpful resources. Yes, groups can be closed off (more often than not due to spam), but most moderators are fairly quick on the response time to join and search (especially if you message them with why you want to join), and its easy to unjoin a group if you don't find it useful. personally I find this list extremely valuable - whenever I have a tough, detailed question y'all are here to help out - but I also find FB valuable for weeding out the annoying queries like "give me my family history. My dad was Smith and we lived in the UK." where its clear they need basic family history education and the instant nature of FB means people can get them resources quickly. And yes, there used to be a LOT of them on these RW lists - we've just blocked out the memory over the years :-D Lastly, I want to remind people - you don't have to do EVERYTHING on FB. I've signed my parents up and aunts and uncles, and they only go on there to our family group and check out the new pictures and chatter from people. They don't have any "friends" or do the newsfeed or games or anything else on there. They can explore the features at their leisure and try some only if they want to. I also have their security locked down pretty tight so if they don't want to be found on there, they don't have to be. Concetta On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Nivard Ovington via <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Fiona > > No not a Luddite, just sensible IMHO > > Facebook on the face of it (no pun intended) seems great but is > virtually hopeless as a means of research, partly as you say due to > posts being virtually hidden as soon as they are posted > > The main problems I see are the number of inexperienced researchers > giving advice which is often inaccurate or down right wrong > > The structure of facebook groups is haphazard at best unlike the > Rootsweb lists, anyone can start up a fb group and as easily just desert > them > > Facebook groups for genealogy are more often than not closed and > therefore only those in the group can see posts and only if they keep > track of them, a lot of groups have members in the hundreds or lower > thousands, very few appear to read all the posts and even fewer respond, > I see posts like "looking for Jones in London" which I have rarely seen > on the lists > > Facebook posts are not findable by google or search engines unlike all > rootsweb list posts to anyone anywhere in the world > > Facebook has its uses, you can post pictures and images, for discussion > of local history etc but for research its fairly hopeless > > I think more of an influence on the decline of use of the lists is due > to the plethora of data now available and the fact that a great many > questions once asked on the lists are now easily answered with a search > engine (answers often found on rootsweb lists) and that people are a lot > more computer savvy than they were say ten or twenty years ago > > For research I do not think you can beat the Rootsweb lists > > Long live the lists I say :-) > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 08/02/2016 12:41, Fiona Hall via wrote: > > All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. > > > > I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook > > – the ones I belong to are really lively. > > > > BUT, searching for that elusive ancestor is a NIGHTMARE on facebook > > as messages vanish into thin air after a day (or so it seems to me) > > > > Am I just being a luddite ? Lots of folks seem to go straight for > > Facebook and I don’t think it’s a very efficient way of doing FH > > > > Fiona > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No > fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

All the lists and boards I belong to are quiet. I fear that the next generation of researchers will do it on facebook – the ones I belong to are really lively. BUT, searching for that elusive ancestor is a NIGHTMARE on facebook as messages vanish into thin air after a day (or so it seems to me) Am I just being a luddite ? Lots of folks seem to go straight for Facebook and I don’t think it’s a very efficient way of doing FH Fiona

Hi Pam A list of the Canada mailing lists can be found at http://lists.rootsweb.ancestry.com/index/intl/CAN/. I don't see a list specific to Toronto, but perhaps you could post to the York County list. There's a CAN-ONT-OBITS list, but it's not clear from the description if lookup requests can be posted to the list. You could ask the the list's administrator at [email protected] You could also try asking for a lookup on the Toronto message board at http://boards.rootsweb.com/localities.northam.canada.ontario.toronto/mb.ashx Kind regards, Lynne Pamela Treme wrote: > >So Mike—I just found out I need two obituaries from Toronto. Since this is my first voyage into Canada, can you tell me if there’s an easy way to find and request these obits? > >Pam Treme >[email protected]