Hello all, This is to remind you that the Rootsweb Lovelock mailing list, together with all other mailing lists hosted at Rootsweb, will be closing down on 2 March. In his message of 19 January, Graham explained that we have created a new group/list at groups.io <http://groups.io/>. If you haven’t already done so, you are encouraged to subscribe to the new list. Instructions on how to subscribe can be found at: http://lovelock.free.fr/mail-list.htm <http://lovelock.free.fr/mail-list.htm> We hope that many of you will subscribe to the new list, so that we can continue fruitful exchanges on Lovelock family history. Regards, James

Hello all, Following on from James' message of 14 January this is to let you all know that we are now discontinuing use of the Rootsweb Mailing List. Instead James and I have created a new group using the facilities at groups.io. To join the new group please follow these instructions: * If you wish to join our new group go to https://groups.io/g/lovelock and then click on the '+ Join This Group' link at the bottom left. You will then need to enter your e-Mail address and click 'Submit'. In response you will receive an e-Mail inviting you to confirm and activate your membership. You may find that you are asked more than once to confirm - I am afraid this is something to do with the groups.io setup and is not under the control of James or I. * Alternatively you can send an empty message to lovelock+subscribe@groups.io and await a response. Once you have joined you will be able to send your messages to lovelock@groups.io. In all cases the rules require that your first message will be moderated, so will not be sent to the rest of the group immediately. We look forward to welcoming everyone to the new messaging facility. The Mailing List page on the Lovelock Family History website has been amended in line with the above. In keeping with the announcement from Ancestry we have kept the link on the website to the Rootsweb Archives, although we can not guarantee for how long that link will remain valid. Regards, Graham

Thanks James Although I have not been a contributor I follow the conversations with great interest and hope you are able to find a suitable alternative messaging facility. Would be grateful if you do not do so via social media as I do not currently use these platforms. With best wishes Graham Lovelock (the ex New Zealand Graham) > On 14 January 2020 at 22:18 James Loveluck <james.loveluck@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello all and belated New Year greetings for 2020, > > I received the attached message from “Rootsweb Administration”, announcing that the Rootsweb mailing lists will be discontinued from 2 March 2020. > > Graham and I are investigating alternatives, and we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to continue sharing information about Lovelock family history, assuming there is still a desire for such a facility. > > Regards, > > James > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "RootsWeb Administration" <rwmailinglists@ancestry.com> > Subject: [ROOT-LO-ANNOUN] RootsWeb Mailing Lists > Date: 7 January 2020 at 18:35:06 GMT+1 > To: rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com > Reply-To: Updates and Announcements for RootsWeb Mailing List Owners <rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com> > > Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state. > > Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb. > > As an alternative to RootsWeb Mailing Lists, Ancestry message boards are a great option to network with others in the genealogy community. Message boards are available for free with an Ancestry registered account. > Thank you for being part of the RootsWeb family and contributing to this community. > > Sincerely, > The RootsWeb team > > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community > > > _______________________________________________ > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Thank you to all at the Lovelock coalface for these new upgrades & future-proofing all the records. Wishing all a great New Year. Col ------ Original Message ------ From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 Jan, 2020 At 2:57 AM Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

That's a shame James. Rootsweb has been a very useful partner for the past 20 years. I think it is important that this type of forum continues as it is useful for both existing Lovelock Family History researchers and for future generations. Good luck in your search for alternatives. Best wishes John On Tuesday, 14 January 2020, 09:41:56 GMT, James Loveluck <james.loveluck@gmail.com> wrote: Hello all and belated New Year greetings for 2020, I received the attached message from “Rootsweb Administration”, announcing that the Rootsweb mailing lists will be discontinued from 2 March 2020. Graham and I are investigating alternatives, and we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to continue sharing information about Lovelock family history, assuming there is still a desire for such a facility. Regards, James Begin forwarded message: From: "RootsWeb Administration" <rwmailinglists@ancestry.com> Subject: [ROOT-LO-ANNOUN] RootsWeb Mailing Lists Date: 7 January 2020 at 18:35:06 GMT+1 To: rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Updates and Announcements for RootsWeb Mailing List Owners <rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com> Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails.  Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state. Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb. As an alternative to RootsWeb Mailing Lists, Ancestry message boards are a great option to network with others in the genealogy community. Message boards are available for free with an Ancestry registered account. Thank you for being part of the RootsWeb family and contributing to this community. Sincerely, The RootsWeb team _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all and belated New Year greetings for 2020, I received the attached message from “Rootsweb Administration”, announcing that the Rootsweb mailing lists will be discontinued from 2 March 2020. Graham and I are investigating alternatives, and we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to continue sharing information about Lovelock family history, assuming there is still a desire for such a facility. Regards, James Begin forwarded message: From: "RootsWeb Administration" <rwmailinglists@ancestry.com> Subject: [ROOT-LO-ANNOUN] RootsWeb Mailing Lists Date: 7 January 2020 at 18:35:06 GMT+1 To: rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com Reply-To: Updates and Announcements for RootsWeb Mailing List Owners <rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com> Beginning March 2nd, 2020 the Mailing Lists functionality on RootsWeb will be discontinued. Users will no longer be able to send outgoing emails or accept incoming emails. Additionally, administration tools will no longer be available to list administrators and mailing lists will be put into an archival state. Administrators may save the emails in their list prior to March 2nd. After that, mailing list archives will remain available and searchable on RootsWeb. As an alternative to RootsWeb Mailing Lists, Ancestry message boards are a great option to network with others in the genealogy community. Message boards are available for free with an Ancestry registered account. Thank you for being part of the RootsWeb family and contributing to this community. Sincerely, The RootsWeb team _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/rootsweb-listowners-announcements@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

I would like also to thank, James Graham, Robert and Sue for all their efforts to keep this Lovelock webside accessible for all for future generations. ( I apologise if I have missed any one out.) Everybody's efforts are not always appreciated but I believe future generations will appreciate all efforts done over the many years by all concerned. Regards and Best Wishes. Malcolm Lovelock. -----Original Message----- From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: ‎08/‎01/‎2020 15:18 To: "Lovelock family history" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: The Lovelock Family History Website Thank you very much, John. Graham ________________________________ From: J LOVELOCK via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 08 January 2020 10:55 To: 'Lovelock family history' <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Cc: J LOVELOCK <jdlovelock@btinternet.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: The Lovelock Family History Website Just a quick note to second Robert's comments - the new look Web Site looks great and is easy to navigate. Well done to Graham and James. John On Wednesday, 8 January 2020, 08:03:44 GMT, <robert.sterry24@gmail.com> wrote: Congratulations!! Well done. A splendid effort. -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2020 2:58 AM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Thank you very much, John. Graham ________________________________ From: J LOVELOCK via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 08 January 2020 10:55 To: 'Lovelock family history' <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Cc: J LOVELOCK <jdlovelock@btinternet.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: The Lovelock Family History Website Just a quick note to second Robert's comments - the new look Web Site looks great and is easy to navigate. Well done to Graham and James. John On Wednesday, 8 January 2020, 08:03:44 GMT, <robert.sterry24@gmail.com> wrote: Congratulations!! Well done. A splendid effort. -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2020 2:58 AM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Thank you very much, Robert, and thanks again for kick-starting the whole exercise. Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: robert.sterry24@gmail.com <robert.sterry24@gmail.com> Sent: 07 January 2020 22:54 To: 'Lovelock family history' <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: The Lovelock Family History Website Congratulations!! Well done. A splendid effort. -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2020 2:58 AM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham

Just a quick note to second Robert's comments - the new look Web Site looks great and is easy to navigate. Well done to Graham and James.  John On Wednesday, 8 January 2020, 08:03:44 GMT, <robert.sterry24@gmail.com> wrote: Congratulations!! Well done. A splendid effort. -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2020 2:58 AM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration,  James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Congratulations!! Well done. A splendid effort. -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, 8 January 2020 2:58 AM To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] The Lovelock Family History Website Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all, The Lovelock Family History website is now over 21 years old, and it is a considerable time since the website received a major overhaul. As well as looking somewhat dated it has become apparent that the design which has served us well over a number of years is rather less than 'user-friendly' to those who use tablets or their mobile 'phones to browse websites. Messages that James and I have received from visitors to the website often come from such users, and James felt it was about time that we took their ways of working into account. In addition Robert Sterry, who has so often been a catalyst regarding Lovelock initiatives, had contacted James to tell him about the facelift he was applying to his own website at https://www.sterryworldwide.com/, and his use of the 'Bootstrap' package in making changes. I will admit that I was not a little dismayed at the daunting prospect of 're-vamping' all of the information on the website, especially when James informed me that there were something over 2000 pages to be taken into account. Furthermore, James advised me that a re-design would be best carried out using the Bootstrap software package that I had never heard of, and I considered myself to be a little too long in the tooth to be contemplating a significant learning exercise of such a nature. Fortunately James has plenty of computing experience, and was able to reassure me that he would not only be able to ease such elements of the burden that might fall to me, but would actually be able to significantly reduce the total amount of work required. And so it has proved. We effectively began work on 2nd December and, notwithstanding the inevitable pauses over Christmas and New Year, the 'new' website is ready to go. We have kept almost all of the information that previously existed, only dispensing with material that represented duplications or provided no meaningful information as it had been totally superseded by subsequent research. We have reduced the number of 'Menu' items in the header to each page from 6 to 5, with some rationalisation of menu sub-items, which we hope will make sense to everyone. We have aimed for a high degree of commonality in the formatting and presentation of the individual pages, and have been checking as we go for compatibility with those modern methods of browsing mentioned above. We have been very grateful for the fact that Sue Lovelock volunteered to 'road-test' the new version for us, and the results of her amazingly comprehensive review have been taken on board. It may be that despite Sue's exhaustive survey, and the attempts James and I have made whilst working to ensure that everything is properly 'joined-up', some links may not work as expected or some information may have been omitted or become garbled. The challenge for you all is to find and report those instances so that James and I can correct matters forthwith. James is making the necessary changes to the website as I write, and the good news is that you will need to do nothing to be able to access the new version: all of your links to the website will work just as before. We hope that you will like the changed presentation, but we will also be pleased to receive any comments or suggestions for future work. It just remains for me to thank Robert for the inspiration, James for his continuing dedication to the presentation of our fabulous collection of Lovelock material, and Sue for her splendid support to what has been our latest challenge. A Happy New Year to one and all. Kind regards, Graham

Gosh! How embarrassing ... I was the one who originally transcribed the "Soldiers' Effects" data and I had forgotten all about it. Me - the one who's often on about using all the resources the website has to offer. But many thanks, Hilary, for finding this last piece of the puzzle. I say the last piece as I do not suppose we will ever know why John Thomas went to Bradford. Gratefully, Graham ________________________________ From: Hilary Smith via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 24 November 2019 20:41 To: Lovelock family history <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Hi Graham On The register of soldiers’ effects Mary is down as ‘Ingleson’ (1919). She re-married in 1918 (Q4) to a Christopher Ingleson, Bradford. On the 1939 register she is down as Elizabeth M, living with her son James. Mary dies in 1982. Thanks Hilary > On 24 Nov 2019, at 11:53, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I think that helps quite a lot, Sue, although it still leaves some questions unanswered. The birthplace of the man born in the Holborn RD was recorded simply as 'London' in 1901 and not at all in 1911 when he was recorded as Jack T Lovelock living with his brother William. But the family had plenty of links with Islington, including the fact that our man's nephew, another John Thomas Lovelock, was born in the Islington RD in 1908. > > John, or Jack, had no occupation in 1911 so we can only speculate about what took him to Bradford. > > So he could well be the man who married Mary E Neil in 1915, and that would account for the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index card. There are certainly no Lovelock births with mother's maiden name Neil, and no Lovelock births at all in Bradford which might have suggested a different John was involved. > > But then what happened to her, and why does the CWGC entry make no reference to her, considering that the Army authorities must have known of her else how could she be mentioned on the Index card? I can find no obvious re-marriage of her, nor a death, and she doesn't seem to be in the 1939 Register. Very odd. > > As these things usually turn out to be! > > Regards, > > Graham > > ________________________________ > From: lovelocks6--- via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Sent: 23 November 2019 15:46 > To: Lovelock family history <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > > Hello Graham, > Findmypast has a record from the "Soldiers killed in the Great War" > database for John Thomas Lovelock (soldier number 26401, 17th Battalion > Lancashire Fusiliers, date of death as 26 May 1916). It also gives his > place of birth as Islington and his place of enlistment as Bradford, > Yorkshire. So I think that helps a bit. > Kind regards > Sue Lovelock > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> > To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, 23 Nov, 2019 At 14:45 > Subject: [LOVELOCK] [EXTERNAL] J T Lovelock > Hello all, > > The Commonwealth War Graves Commission's website tells us that Private J > T Lovelock of the 17th Battalion, Lancashire Fusiliers died on 25 May > 1916. > > At the start of that day the Battalion was occupying trenches in the > Aveluy Wood area, just to the north of Albert in France, although later > in the day they were withdrawn to the Reserve in a small commune named > Hédauville. There were German raids on the trenches on 23 and 24 May so > it seems possible that JT was wounded on one of those days and died of > the injuries sustained. For some reason he is apparently buried in a > cemetery at Richebourg-L'Avoué which is some distance away. > > The CWGC entry gives no details of JT's age or next of kin. However, > Ancestry.co.uk have a collection of World War 1 Pension Ledgers and > Index Cards which includes an entry for John Thomas Lovelock. We can be > sure this is the same man because both websites have the same Service > Number, and affiliation, although the Index Card apparently gives the > date of death as 26 May 1916. > > To view the Index Card itself requires a Fold3 subscription, which I do > not have. However, the details transcribed at Ancestry, apart from > giving us the full name, also include a reference to Mary Elizabeth > Lovelock, Widow. They do not state whether she was JT's wife or mother. > > Now we come to the difficult bit. If we assume that JT was no more than > 50 years old when he died then there are only 3 candidates in the GRO > Births at Free BMD: > > 1868 Jan-Mar, Stockbridge RD > 1872 Jul-Sep, Mile End RD > 1896 Jan-Mar, Holborn RD > > The first of those would seem to be the man who died in Jan-Mar 1934, > aged 66, and the second the man who died in Jan-Mar 1936, aged 63. Which > leaves us with the 1896 birth, a member of the Tangley Tree, the son of > William Lovelock and Mary Ann Thompson. > > If this is the man who died in 1916 the question is is the reference to > Mary Elizabeth on the Index Card a mistake, or was she JT's wife? If the > latter then there is no marriage entry in Free BMD for a John Thomas > Lovelock. There is, however, a marriage in the Bradford RD in Jul-Sep > 1915 of John Lovelock and Mary E Neil. Whilst Bradford is of course in > Yorkshire it does seem a more likely origin for a member of the > Lancashire Fusiliers than Holborn in London. That consideration may > naturally be a red herring. > > I have no idea who John Lovelock and Mary E Neil are. A Mary Ellen Neil > was born in the Bradford RD in Jan-Mar 1870 but as that would make her > 26 years older than the John Thomas born in Holborn I think we can > discount her on several scores. > > The conclusion seems to be that the reference on the Index Card to Mary > Elizabeth is a mistake and should have read Mary Ann. John Thomas' > father William died in 1909 so Mary Ann was indeed a widow at the time > the Card was produced. > > Does anyone have a Fold3 subscription who could check just how Mary > Elizabeth is referred to? > > Regards, > > Graham > > _______________________________________________ > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hi Graham On The register of soldiers’ effects Mary is down as ‘Ingleson’ (1919). She re-married in 1918 (Q4) to a Christopher Ingleson, Bradford. On the 1939 register she is down as Elizabeth M, living with her son James. Mary dies in 1982. Thanks Hilary > On 24 Nov 2019, at 11:53, Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> wrote: > > I think that helps quite a lot, Sue, although it still leaves some questions unanswered. The birthplace of the man born in the Holborn RD was recorded simply as 'London' in 1901 and not at all in 1911 when he was recorded as Jack T Lovelock living with his brother William. But the family had plenty of links with Islington, including the fact that our man's nephew, another John Thomas Lovelock, was born in the Islington RD in 1908. > > John, or Jack, had no occupation in 1911 so we can only speculate about what took him to Bradford. > > So he could well be the man who married Mary E Neil in 1915, and that would account for the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index card. There are certainly no Lovelock births with mother's maiden name Neil, and no Lovelock births at all in Bradford which might have suggested a different John was involved. > > But then what happened to her, and why does the CWGC entry make no reference to her, considering that the Army authorities must have known of her else how could she be mentioned on the Index card? I can find no obvious re-marriage of her, nor a death, and she doesn't seem to be in the 1939 Register. Very odd. > > As these things usually turn out to be! > > Regards, > > Graham > > ________________________________ > From: lovelocks6--- via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Sent: 23 November 2019 15:46 > To: Lovelock family history <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > > Hello Graham, > Findmypast has a record from the "Soldiers killed in the Great War" > database for John Thomas Lovelock (soldier number 26401, 17th Battalion > Lancashire Fusiliers, date of death as 26 May 1916). It also gives his > place of birth as Islington and his place of enlistment as Bradford, > Yorkshire. So I think that helps a bit. > Kind regards > Sue Lovelock > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> > To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Saturday, 23 Nov, 2019 At 14:45 > Subject: [LOVELOCK] [EXTERNAL] J T Lovelock > Hello all, > > The Commonwealth War Graves Commission's website tells us that Private J > T Lovelock of the 17th Battalion, Lancashire Fusiliers died on 25 May > 1916. > > At the start of that day the Battalion was occupying trenches in the > Aveluy Wood area, just to the north of Albert in France, although later > in the day they were withdrawn to the Reserve in a small commune named > Hédauville. There were German raids on the trenches on 23 and 24 May so > it seems possible that JT was wounded on one of those days and died of > the injuries sustained. For some reason he is apparently buried in a > cemetery at Richebourg-L'Avoué which is some distance away. > > The CWGC entry gives no details of JT's age or next of kin. However, > Ancestry.co.uk have a collection of World War 1 Pension Ledgers and > Index Cards which includes an entry for John Thomas Lovelock. We can be > sure this is the same man because both websites have the same Service > Number, and affiliation, although the Index Card apparently gives the > date of death as 26 May 1916. > > To view the Index Card itself requires a Fold3 subscription, which I do > not have. However, the details transcribed at Ancestry, apart from > giving us the full name, also include a reference to Mary Elizabeth > Lovelock, Widow. They do not state whether she was JT's wife or mother. > > Now we come to the difficult bit. If we assume that JT was no more than > 50 years old when he died then there are only 3 candidates in the GRO > Births at Free BMD: > > 1868 Jan-Mar, Stockbridge RD > 1872 Jul-Sep, Mile End RD > 1896 Jan-Mar, Holborn RD > > The first of those would seem to be the man who died in Jan-Mar 1934, > aged 66, and the second the man who died in Jan-Mar 1936, aged 63. Which > leaves us with the 1896 birth, a member of the Tangley Tree, the son of > William Lovelock and Mary Ann Thompson. > > If this is the man who died in 1916 the question is is the reference to > Mary Elizabeth on the Index Card a mistake, or was she JT's wife? If the > latter then there is no marriage entry in Free BMD for a John Thomas > Lovelock. There is, however, a marriage in the Bradford RD in Jul-Sep > 1915 of John Lovelock and Mary E Neil. Whilst Bradford is of course in > Yorkshire it does seem a more likely origin for a member of the > Lancashire Fusiliers than Holborn in London. That consideration may > naturally be a red herring. > > I have no idea who John Lovelock and Mary E Neil are. A Mary Ellen Neil > was born in the Bradford RD in Jan-Mar 1870 but as that would make her > 26 years older than the John Thomas born in Holborn I think we can > discount her on several scores. > > The conclusion seems to be that the reference on the Index Card to Mary > Elizabeth is a mistake and should have read Mary Ann. John Thomas' > father William died in 1909 so Mary Ann was indeed a widow at the time > the Card was produced. > > Does anyone have a Fold3 subscription who could check just how Mary > Elizabeth is referred to? > > Regards, > > Graham > > _______________________________________________ > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Lovelock family history Web pages: > http://lovelock.free.fr/ > Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: > http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ > _______________________________________________ > Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref > Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com > Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 > Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog > RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all, Mary Ann Lovelock married Charles Tero in Northampton on 9 Jun 1890. She claimed at the time to be 25 years old and the daughter of George Lovelock, a Carpenter. In the 1891, 1901 and 1911 Census Returns she claimed to have been born in Wandsworth, her recorded ages being 25, 32 (sic) and 48 respectively. There is no registered birth of a Mary Ann in the Wandsworth RD between 1850 and 1880, and I have not found a George Lovelock recorded as a Carpenter in 1871, 1881 or 1891 in Middlesex, Surrey or London. Has anyone come across this lady or her father elsewhere? She seems to have had 4 illegitimate children, at least two of them possibly with Charles Tero, and then she and Charles had 10 more children after they married. Regards, Graham

I think that helps quite a lot, Sue, although it still leaves some questions unanswered. The birthplace of the man born in the Holborn RD was recorded simply as 'London' in 1901 and not at all in 1911 when he was recorded as Jack T Lovelock living with his brother William. But the family had plenty of links with Islington, including the fact that our man's nephew, another John Thomas Lovelock, was born in the Islington RD in 1908. John, or Jack, had no occupation in 1911 so we can only speculate about what took him to Bradford. So he could well be the man who married Mary E Neil in 1915, and that would account for the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index card. There are certainly no Lovelock births with mother's maiden name Neil, and no Lovelock births at all in Bradford which might have suggested a different John was involved. But then what happened to her, and why does the CWGC entry make no reference to her, considering that the Army authorities must have known of her else how could she be mentioned on the Index card? I can find no obvious re-marriage of her, nor a death, and she doesn't seem to be in the 1939 Register. Very odd. As these things usually turn out to be! Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: lovelocks6--- via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 23 November 2019 15:46 To: Lovelock family history <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Hello Graham, Findmypast has a record from the "Soldiers killed in the Great War" database for John Thomas Lovelock (soldier number 26401, 17th Battalion Lancashire Fusiliers, date of death as 26 May 1916). It also gives his place of birth as Islington and his place of enlistment as Bradford, Yorkshire. So I think that helps a bit. Kind regards Sue Lovelock ------ Original Message ------ From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, 23 Nov, 2019 At 14:45 Subject: [LOVELOCK] [EXTERNAL] J T Lovelock Hello all, The Commonwealth War Graves Commission's website tells us that Private J T Lovelock of the 17th Battalion, Lancashire Fusiliers died on 25 May 1916. At the start of that day the Battalion was occupying trenches in the Aveluy Wood area, just to the north of Albert in France, although later in the day they were withdrawn to the Reserve in a small commune named Hédauville. There were German raids on the trenches on 23 and 24 May so it seems possible that JT was wounded on one of those days and died of the injuries sustained. For some reason he is apparently buried in a cemetery at Richebourg-L'Avoué which is some distance away. The CWGC entry gives no details of JT's age or next of kin. However, Ancestry.co.uk have a collection of World War 1 Pension Ledgers and Index Cards which includes an entry for John Thomas Lovelock. We can be sure this is the same man because both websites have the same Service Number, and affiliation, although the Index Card apparently gives the date of death as 26 May 1916. To view the Index Card itself requires a Fold3 subscription, which I do not have. However, the details transcribed at Ancestry, apart from giving us the full name, also include a reference to Mary Elizabeth Lovelock, Widow. They do not state whether she was JT's wife or mother. Now we come to the difficult bit. If we assume that JT was no more than 50 years old when he died then there are only 3 candidates in the GRO Births at Free BMD: 1868 Jan-Mar, Stockbridge RD 1872 Jul-Sep, Mile End RD 1896 Jan-Mar, Holborn RD The first of those would seem to be the man who died in Jan-Mar 1934, aged 66, and the second the man who died in Jan-Mar 1936, aged 63. Which leaves us with the 1896 birth, a member of the Tangley Tree, the son of William Lovelock and Mary Ann Thompson. If this is the man who died in 1916 the question is is the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index Card a mistake, or was she JT's wife? If the latter then there is no marriage entry in Free BMD for a John Thomas Lovelock. There is, however, a marriage in the Bradford RD in Jul-Sep 1915 of John Lovelock and Mary E Neil. Whilst Bradford is of course in Yorkshire it does seem a more likely origin for a member of the Lancashire Fusiliers than Holborn in London. That consideration may naturally be a red herring. I have no idea who John Lovelock and Mary E Neil are. A Mary Ellen Neil was born in the Bradford RD in Jan-Mar 1870 but as that would make her 26 years older than the John Thomas born in Holborn I think we can discount her on several scores. The conclusion seems to be that the reference on the Index Card to Mary Elizabeth is a mistake and should have read Mary Ann. John Thomas' father William died in 1909 so Mary Ann was indeed a widow at the time the Card was produced. Does anyone have a Fold3 subscription who could check just how Mary Elizabeth is referred to? Regards, Graham

Hello Graham, Findmypast has a record from the "Soldiers killed in the Great War" database for John Thomas Lovelock (soldier number 26401, 17th Battalion Lancashire Fusiliers, date of death as 26 May 1916). It also gives his place of birth as Islington and his place of enlistment as Bradford, Yorkshire. So I think that helps a bit. Kind regards Sue Lovelock ------ Original Message ------ From: "Graham Lovelock" <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: "Lovelock mailing list" <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, 23 Nov, 2019 At 14:45 Subject: [LOVELOCK] [EXTERNAL] J T Lovelock Hello all, The Commonwealth War Graves Commission's website tells us that Private J T Lovelock of the 17th Battalion, Lancashire Fusiliers died on 25 May 1916. At the start of that day the Battalion was occupying trenches in the Aveluy Wood area, just to the north of Albert in France, although later in the day they were withdrawn to the Reserve in a small commune named Hédauville. There were German raids on the trenches on 23 and 24 May so it seems possible that JT was wounded on one of those days and died of the injuries sustained. For some reason he is apparently buried in a cemetery at Richebourg-L'Avoué which is some distance away. The CWGC entry gives no details of JT's age or next of kin. However, Ancestry.co.uk have a collection of World War 1 Pension Ledgers and Index Cards which includes an entry for John Thomas Lovelock. We can be sure this is the same man because both websites have the same Service Number, and affiliation, although the Index Card apparently gives the date of death as 26 May 1916. To view the Index Card itself requires a Fold3 subscription, which I do not have. However, the details transcribed at Ancestry, apart from giving us the full name, also include a reference to Mary Elizabeth Lovelock, Widow. They do not state whether she was JT's wife or mother. Now we come to the difficult bit. If we assume that JT was no more than 50 years old when he died then there are only 3 candidates in the GRO Births at Free BMD: 1868 Jan-Mar, Stockbridge RD 1872 Jul-Sep, Mile End RD 1896 Jan-Mar, Holborn RD The first of those would seem to be the man who died in Jan-Mar 1934, aged 66, and the second the man who died in Jan-Mar 1936, aged 63. Which leaves us with the 1896 birth, a member of the Tangley Tree, the son of William Lovelock and Mary Ann Thompson. If this is the man who died in 1916 the question is is the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index Card a mistake, or was she JT's wife? If the latter then there is no marriage entry in Free BMD for a John Thomas Lovelock. There is, however, a marriage in the Bradford RD in Jul-Sep 1915 of John Lovelock and Mary E Neil. Whilst Bradford is of course in Yorkshire it does seem a more likely origin for a member of the Lancashire Fusiliers than Holborn in London. That consideration may naturally be a red herring. I have no idea who John Lovelock and Mary E Neil are. A Mary Ellen Neil was born in the Bradford RD in Jan-Mar 1870 but as that would make her 26 years older than the John Thomas born in Holborn I think we can discount her on several scores. The conclusion seems to be that the reference on the Index Card to Mary Elizabeth is a mistake and should have read Mary Ann. John Thomas' father William died in 1909 so Mary Ann was indeed a widow at the time the Card was produced. Does anyone have a Fold3 subscription who could check just how Mary Elizabeth is referred to? Regards, Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ <http://lovelock.free.fr/> Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ <http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/> _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref <http://bit.ly/rootswebpref> Unsubscribe lovelock@rootsweb.com">https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com <https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/<span class=> Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY <https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY> Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 <https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9> Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog <http://rootsweb.blog> RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Hello all, The Commonwealth War Graves Commission's website tells us that Private J T Lovelock of the 17th Battalion, Lancashire Fusiliers died on 25 May 1916. At the start of that day the Battalion was occupying trenches in the Aveluy Wood area, just to the north of Albert in France, although later in the day they were withdrawn to the Reserve in a small commune named Hédauville. There were German raids on the trenches on 23 and 24 May so it seems possible that JT was wounded on one of those days and died of the injuries sustained. For some reason he is apparently buried in a cemetery at Richebourg-L'Avoué which is some distance away. The CWGC entry gives no details of JT's age or next of kin. However, Ancestry.co.uk have a collection of World War 1 Pension Ledgers and Index Cards which includes an entry for John Thomas Lovelock. We can be sure this is the same man because both websites have the same Service Number, and affiliation, although the Index Card apparently gives the date of death as 26 May 1916. To view the Index Card itself requires a Fold3 subscription, which I do not have. However, the details transcribed at Ancestry, apart from giving us the full name, also include a reference to Mary Elizabeth Lovelock, Widow. They do not state whether she was JT's wife or mother. Now we come to the difficult bit. If we assume that JT was no more than 50 years old when he died then there are only 3 candidates in the GRO Births at Free BMD: 1868 Jan-Mar, Stockbridge RD 1872 Jul-Sep, Mile End RD 1896 Jan-Mar, Holborn RD The first of those would seem to be the man who died in Jan-Mar 1934, aged 66, and the second the man who died in Jan-Mar 1936, aged 63. Which leaves us with the 1896 birth, a member of the Tangley Tree, the son of William Lovelock and Mary Ann Thompson. If this is the man who died in 1916 the question is is the reference to Mary Elizabeth on the Index Card a mistake, or was she JT's wife? If the latter then there is no marriage entry in Free BMD for a John Thomas Lovelock. There is, however, a marriage in the Bradford RD in Jul-Sep 1915 of John Lovelock and Mary E Neil. Whilst Bradford is of course in Yorkshire it does seem a more likely origin for a member of the Lancashire Fusiliers than Holborn in London. That consideration may naturally be a red herring. I have no idea who John Lovelock and Mary E Neil are. A Mary Ellen Neil was born in the Bradford RD in Jan-Mar 1870 but as that would make her 26 years older than the John Thomas born in Holborn I think we can discount her on several scores. The conclusion seems to be that the reference on the Index Card to Mary Elizabeth is a mistake and should have read Mary Ann. John Thomas' father William died in 1909 so Mary Ann was indeed a widow at the time the Card was produced. Does anyone have a Fold3 subscription who could check just how Mary Elizabeth is referred to? Regards, Graham

We can certainly have some fun with the numbers, Steve. For instance: from 1983 to 2000 there were 515 deaths and from 2001 to 2018 there were 485 - a drop of just under 6%. And then taking the Findmypast figure of 2137 Lovelocks in 1911 (as the lower of the two) and adding the Birth-Death differences for 1911 to 1980, which comes to an additional 990, we get an estimated Lovelock population of, let us say, 3000. Next let us assume that the population has remained static since 1980 then a total of 1000 deaths in 36 years is equivalent to about 9 deaths per 1000 per annum if my maths is right. So Lovelocks seem to be an average group in this respect. In fact of course if the Lovelock population has grown since 1980, which in all probability it has, then the deaths per 1000 figure is a bit better. Aren't statistics fun! Regards, Graham ________________________________ From: Aol via LOVELOCK <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: 20 November 2019 08:12:40 To: lovelock@rootsweb.com <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Cc: Aol <tns750@aol.com> Subject: [LOVELOCK] Re: The GRO Online Index Hi Graham The new GRO facility is certainly a boon to anyone wantingto take a snapshot of the “health”of a surname in 2019 – it will be evenmore so if they add births before too long . Are the LOVELOCKS holding theirown demographically, or are they declining, numerically? Taking a look at the last ten years, I note that there were120 LOVELOCK deaths in 2009-13, and 149 deaths in 2014-18 – an increase of 24%.Not sure if the sample is large enough to be significant, but could it men thatthe death rate is higher mong Lovelocks –owing to an ageing population structure – or is it simply that the present increaseis due to higher birth rate and lower death rate among immigrants. Given that there are – what? – about 2500Lovelocks in England and Wales – then thedeath rate over the past 5 years has been about 12 per 1000, compared with the nationalrate of just over 9.. Steve Tanner -----Original Message----- From: Graham Lovelock <lovelockgraham@hotmail.com> To: Lovelock mailing list <lovelock@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 9:31 Subject: [LOVELOCK] The GRO Online Index Hello all, You may have heard that those terribly helpful people at the UK's General Record Office have added information on Deaths from 1984 to 2019 to their Online Index. The Lovelock and Loveluck data for the years 2007 to 2019 has been transcribed and can now be accessed through our 'Sources - General' page. Select the 'General Record Office Records' link, and then the link below the table containing links to the 1984 to 2007 data: http://lovelock.free.fr/gen-records.htm A quick link from here to the new data is: http://lovelock.free.fr/documents/GRO_Online_Deaths_data_for_2007-2019.html If you spot any errors in the transcription please let us know. Please note that as the data is presented on the GRO website in a different fashion to the presentations on Ancestry and Findmypast for the same years (which we had already transcribed) the entries are duplicated. However, whereas the Ancestry and Findmypast data is only partial for each year the new data should fill a lot of the gaps. You will find that a small number of the entries in the previous data do not appear in the GRO listing. I have no explanation for this, except that we know that the GRO Indices of both Births and Deaths do generally have a few missing entries, and I suppose the odd entry has been missed in the exercise to capture the new records digitally. The Loveluck entries are included at the end of the relevant quarter and highlighted in bold to make them easier to find. As with the earlier data where the deceased left a Will a link has been provided to our page with further details. Hope you find this helpful. Regards. Graham _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community _______________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lovelock family history Web pages: http://lovelock.free.fr/ Browse Lovelock trees on the Webtrees portal: http://loveluck.net/LovelockTrees/ _______________________________________________ Email preferences: http://bit.ly/rootswebpref Unsubscribe https://lists.rootsweb.com/postorius/lists/lovelock@rootsweb.com Privacy Statement: https://ancstry.me/2JWBOdY Terms and Conditions: https://ancstry.me/2HDBym9 Rootsweb Blog: http://rootsweb.blog RootsWeb is funded and supported by Ancestry.com and our loyal RootsWeb community

Here's some figures to mull over which demonstrate why this is a tricky can of worms to open. Ancestry shows the following number of Lovelocks in each UK Census from 1841 to 1911: 794 912 1035 1193 1430 1595 1849 2506 Findmypast however gives: 702 809 823 1130 1327 1464 1914 2137 So first of all we have to wonder about those differences. It may be that non-Lovelocks are included or that there are duplicates, but it's a long job at the start to discover the truth. Moving to births and deaths Free BMD has a useful Count function so we can fairly quickly discover for instance how many Lovelocks were born and died in say the 10 years from 1841-1850 which should give us an idea of how the population of Lovelocks should have grown by the time of the 1851 Census. Using this approach the net increases for each 10 year period are: 104 106 172 210 222 279 258 Now if we add those figures to Ancestry's census numbers and look at the differences between what we get and what Ancestry tells us the answer is the results for the 1851 to 1911 censuses respectively are: -14 -31 -17 -44 +13 +38 -361 The same exercise for Findmypast gives: -3 +89 -46 -33 +52 -119 -84 Considering the overall numbers and the uncertainty about who exactly is included in the census totals that doesn't seem too bad, although there is certainly one worryingly large figure in each group. So the next question is can we draw any specific conclusions from the data as is? Well, we need to bear in mind that there were a number of Lovelock emigrants at various times some of whom will have appeared in one or more census returns and some who will have appeared in none, but will be included in the numbers of births. Also a proportion, and it might be a significant one, of the deaths will only be Lovelocks by marriage - another big job eliminating them. And of course Lovelock ladies who married and took their husbands' surnames are not included in the death figures, but whether they balance in numbers with the ladies marrying in would be another major task to determine. What we can probably be fairly sure of is that there has been a steady increase in the number of UK Lovelocks since the start of birth and death registrations. Between 1841 and 1980 the average net increase, based on the Free BMD entries, was just over 16 per year. Between 1841 and 1910 it was just over 19 per year, and between 1911 and 1980 it was just over 14 per year. There were of course individual years that departed significantly from the average and we could speculate at length on the factors contributing to that. Any thoughts anyone? Regards, Graham