At 07:05 AM 7/13/2004 -0700, Mike Peterson wrote: >Thank you Holly ! >It appears that one was a problem for the transcriber also as it had a >couple ?? marks. The other I think perhaps it was the census taker. My plans >now are to set up a supplemental page. >Thanks again. anytime Mike, Many researchers don't understand that transcripts need to be true to the original, not to what may actually be correct. I deal with this frequently as the online part of the project to transcribe the 1930 Cuyahoga Ohio census. When I get a "correction" from someone I check it with the census image at Ancestry and correct our files only if I agree with it. I don't have a supplemental page set up yet but am saving up the 'corrections' that were census taker error not transcriber error. http://www.rootsweb.com/~ohcuyah2/census/ If you don't have access to census images, I'd be happy to take a look for you. Holly