ANSWER TO BELOW: Dianna, Not sure how much help the below will be but here's what I found. If you would like the image of the one let me know and I will be happy to send it to you in a download. Gretchen FROM ANCESTRY.COM UK, Soldiers Died in the Great War, 1914-1919 Name: Horace Charles Starr Birth Place: Foxton, Cambs Death Date: 3 Oct 1915 Death Location: France & Flanders Enlistment Location: Cambridge Rank: Private Regiment: Suffolk Regiment Battalion: 1st Battalion Number: 8764 Type of Casualty: Killed in action Theatre of War: Western European Theatre Source Information: Military-Genealogy.com, comp. UK, Soldiers Died in the Great War, 1914-1919 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2008. Original data: British and Irish Military Databases. The Naval and Military Press Ltd. -------------- iMAGE AVAILABLE ON THIS ONE............. British Army WWI Medal Rolls Index Cards, 1914-1920 Name: Horace C Starr Regiment or Corps: Suffolk Regiment Regimental Number: 8764 -------------------------- FROM FIND A GRAVE (Picture of Cemetery & Memorial Plaque) Private Horace Starr Birth: unknown Death: Oct. 3, 1915 Inscription: Suffolk Regiment Note: 8764 Burial: Loos Memorial Loos-en-Gohelle Nord-Pas-de-Calais Region, France Plot: Panel 37 and 38. Created by: International Wargraves ... Record added: Sep 15, 2006 Find A Grave Memorial# 15760451 ORIGINAL QUESTION: From: "dianna charles" <diamonddi57@optusnet.com.au> Subject: [ROOTS-L] WW1 Records England To: <roots@rootsweb.com> Hi Everyone Can someone please tell me where to find WW1 Records in England. I'm looking for a cousin who served in WW1 and was killed in the war. His name is Horace STARR from Cambrideshire England, the family were living in Foxton Cambridge. Horaces's Dad's name is John Starr and they are on the 1911 Census in Foxton. Any help very much appreciated hoping to find some relatives over there one day. Kind regards Dianna

Hi Everyone Can someone please tell me where to find WW1 Records in England. I'm looking for a cousin who served in WW1 and was killed in the war. His name is Horace STARR from Cambrideshire England, the family were living in Foxton Cambridge. Horaces's Dad's name is John Starr and they are on the 1911 Census in Foxton. Any help very much appreciated hoping to find some relatives over there one day. Kind regards Dianna

Ancestry.com IS in the process of indexing the 1940 Census Records by surname. Hope they get the job done soon. Sarge At 6/11/2012 11:40 AM Monday, Frty9rgal@aol.com wrote: *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* >Does anyone know if Family Search is going to index by surnames for the >1940 census? Right now it's just ED's, on the states they've done so far. >What about Ancestry? Will they be doing a name search index? Thanks, Judy **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** Germanna Database at Ancestry: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/28427876/family My Germanna Database at Rootsweb: http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=germanna My Germanna Website at Rootsweb: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~george/index.html

There are the Commonwealth graves which should give you unit name http://www.cwgc.org/ British Army WWI Medal Rolls Index Cards, 1914-1920 about Horace C Starr Name: Horace C Starr Regiment or Corps: Suffolk Regiment Regimental Number: 8764 He was killed 3/10/1915 appears he got to France in 3/12/1914 which if my English is still good is Dec 3 1914 He got the Victory and British and 15 medals Name: Horace Charles Starr Birth Place: Foxton, Cambs Death Date: 3 Oct 1915 Death Location: France & Flanders Enlistment Location: Cambridge Rank: Private Regiment: Suffolk Regiment Battalion: 1st Battalion Number: 8764 Type of Casualty: Killed in action Theatre of War: Western European Theatre Source Information: Military-Genealogy.com, comp. UK, Soldiers Died in the Great War, 1914-1919 [database on-line]. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations Inc, 2008. Original data: British and Irish Military Databases. The Naval and Military Press Ltd. Eliz On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:31 PM, dianna charles <diamonddi57@optusnet.com.au> wrote: > Hi Everyone >     Can someone please tell me where to find WW1 Records in England.  I'm > looking for a cousin who served in WW1 and was killed in the war.  His name > is Horace STARR from Cambrideshire England, the family were living in Foxton > Cambridge. > >      Horaces's Dad's name is John Starr and they are on the 1911 Census in > Foxton.  Any help very much appreciated hoping to find some relatives over > there one day.  Kind regards Dianna > > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

To those who we told the search will be fine after you go to "Old Search" and click "exact" Mea Culpa! the 1930 has gone nuts, not narrowing by birth state at all, I can only hope it is a bug which will be corrected ASAP! Eliz

OK, that's weird. You "can" search on birthplace, but it has "head of household only" in grayed out letters. Hmm. Put in my paternal name, got it up, put "Oregon" under birthplace (again, the "head of household only" was there, but grayed out). It came up with my grandmother and father (grampa was born in Nebraska), so it did search other than "HoH" Did you try it, even though it said "can't do it?" Pat -----Original Message----- From: roots-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Eliz Hanebury Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:49 AM To: ROOTS@rootsweb.com Subject: [ROOTS-L] Ancestry search To those who we told the search will be fine after you go to "Old Search" and click "exact" Mea Culpa! the 1930 has gone nuts, not narrowing by birth state at all, I can only hope it is a bug which will be corrected ASAP! Eliz ===== If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

If you are sure they are in the cemetery, make a memorial at findagrave and request a photo <G> double your chance of getting a picture! Eliz On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Lois Kogut <lois.mymail@yahoo.com> wrote: > Is there a researcher in Fulton Co who would locate graves in Section A of Old Prospect Hill Cemetery for me and take photos of several gravestones?  OR if someone would locate those graves, and tell me how to find them so I can take photos, I'll gladly pay for same. > I can make the day trip if I don't have to spend hours searching for gravestones. All I know is they are in Section A. > >  William Trumbull     1821-1886 >  Mary Trumbull       1821-1894 >  Ida M. Trumbull     1857-1899 >  Orilla A. Trumbull    1853-1924 > > Possibly: >  Jennett Burchard    1828-1894 > > Many, many thanks for your help. > > Lois > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

No it isn't <G> there are 17 states indexed and searchable by name Eliz On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:40 AM, <Frty9rgal@aol.com> wrote: > Does anyone know if Family Search is going to index by surnames for the > 1940 census?  Right now it's just ED's, on the states they've done so  far. > What about Ancestry?  Will they be doing a name search  index?  Thanks, Judy > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Familysearch.org has 17 searchable states <G> just awaiting arbitration are a lot of others. You can check http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~thecohens/resources.html for updates. As a note they are updating the 1930 as well. Eliz On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:07 AM, George W. Durman <GeorgeWDurman@comcast.net> wrote: > David, I don't quite understand what you have said.  Ancestry has > ALL images of all States, Counties, Districts, etc.  Ancestry just does > not yet have the residents' names indexed yet.  Even at FamilySearch > you still cannot search for a resident's name.  If you go to FamilySearch > there's no place to search by name. > > Sarge > > At  6/9/2012  01:58 PM  Saturday, W David Samuelsen wrote: > *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* >>Ancestry's name spellings leave a lot to be desired. >> >>FamilySearch is way way ahead of Ancestry as to how many states had been >>100 percent done and online now. already passed 58 percent completed, >>with 18 states online with indexes, 9 states with pending indexes to go >>online. >> >>https://familysearch.org/1940census/?cid=fsHomeT1940Text_v2 >> >>Not only that, based on FamilySearch's schedule, the indexing is way >>aheady of the schedule for completion. >> >>BTW, how many of you know Ancestry.com is up for sale? >> >>David Samuelsen >> >>On 6/9/2012 10:10 AM, Alta Flynt wrote: >>> Thank you!!! Thank you!!!  Thank you!!! >>> >>> I have been tearing my hair out over the 1940 U.S. census, and when I >>> looked at the options, I found a place to go back to the old style >>> census image - no messages popping up where I don't want them and old >>> fashioned scroll bars. >>> >>> I am so grateful to you. >>> >>> Alta >>> >>> >>> On 6/9/2012 9:35 AM, Nivard Ovington wrote: >>>> Dear all >>>> >>>> Has anyone else had the same problem as I have with Ancestrys fairly >>>> recent introduction of their "interactive images" >>>> >>>> Basically they are for two year olds that can't read what is on the >>>> page, you get a pop up box that comes out with the transcript on and >>>> obscures the writing on the image, which of course is what we want to see >>>> >>>> They are being beta'd on the 1911 and frankly they drive me up the wall >>>> >>>> I have sent feedback a few times to ask how I get rid of the interactive >>>> parts but had no reply >>>> >>>> So I looked further and found that there is a user definable part under >>>> options when viewing the interactive images >>>> >>>> You can turn off all or part of the new *aids* >>>> >>>> May be I am the only one who is aggravated by it<g> >>>> >>> >>> ===== >>> If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >>===== >>If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... >> >>------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** > > Germanna Database at Ancestry: > http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/28427876/family > > My Germanna Database at Rootsweb: > http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=germanna > > My Germanna Website at Rootsweb: > http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~george/index.html > > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Does anyone know if Family Search is going to index by surnames for the 1940 census? Right now it's just ED's, on the states they've done so far. What about Ancestry? Will they be doing a name search index? Thanks, Judy

ANSWER TO BELOW: Toby, Here's the information. If you would like the Original page I can send it to you in a download. It really doesn't give any further information however. I don't find anything that shows he ended up entering the conflict unless he enlisted in Ohio where he was born. There is one there by that name. Gretchen U.S., Civil War Draft Registrations Records, 1863-1865 Name: Lewis Lemmon Residence: Lincoln, Union, Iowa Class: 1 Congressional District: 5th Age on 1 July 1863: 34 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1829 Race: White Marital Status: Married Place of Birth: Ohio Source Citation: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA); Washington, D.C.; Consolidated Lists of Civil War Draft Registration Records (Provost Marshal General's Bureau; Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865); Record Group: 110, Records of the Provost Marshal General's Bureau (Civil War); Collection Name: Consolidated Enrollment Lists, 1863-1865 (Civil War Union Draft Records); ARC Identifier: 4213514; Archive Volume Number: 1 of 2. ORIGINAL QUESTION: From: "Toby Kendrick" <tk53423@windstream.net> Subject: [ROOTS-L] US Civil War Draft Registration Records 1863-1865 To: <roots@rootsweb.com>, <ROOTS-L@rootsweb.com> I did not even know there was a draft registration for the Civil War. Does anyone have access to the US Civil War Draft Registration Records 1863-1865 on Ancestry.com as I am looking for information on my gr.gr. granddad Lewis Lemmon who may have registered in Union, IA.

George, Yes, there are places to search by name for 1940 Census in FamilySearch. 1. https://www.familysearch.org/#form=historical_records 2. https://familysearch.org/1940census/ click on orange colored states, the indexes are already online. FamilySearch also has ALL images online, even for the states not being done. Obvious you are not reading the announcements in past. David Samuelsen On 6/10/2012 10:07 PM, George W. Durman wrote: > David, I don't quite understand what you have said. Ancestry has > ALL images of all States, Counties, Districts, etc. Ancestry just does > not yet have the residents' names indexed yet. Even at FamilySearch > you still cannot search for a resident's name. If you go to FamilySearch > there's no place to search by name. > > Sarge > > At 6/9/2012 01:58 PM Saturday, W David Samuelsen wrote: > *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* >> Ancestry's name spellings leave a lot to be desired. >> >> FamilySearch is way way ahead of Ancestry as to how many states had been >> 100 percent done and online now. already passed 58 percent completed, >> with 18 states online with indexes, 9 states with pending indexes to go >> online. >> >> https://familysearch.org/1940census/?cid=fsHomeT1940Text_v2 >> >> Not only that, based on FamilySearch's schedule, the indexing is way >> aheady of the schedule for completion. >> >> BTW, how many of you know Ancestry.com is up for sale? >> >> David Samuelsen >> >> On 6/9/2012 10:10 AM, Alta Flynt wrote: >>> Thank you!!! Thank you!!! Thank you!!! >>> >>> I have been tearing my hair out over the 1940 U.S. census, and when I >>> looked at the options, I found a place to go back to the old style >>> census image - no messages popping up where I don't want them and old >>> fashioned scroll bars. >>> >>> I am so grateful to you. >>> >>> Alta >>> >>> >>> On 6/9/2012 9:35 AM, Nivard Ovington wrote: >>>> Dear all >>>> >>>> Has anyone else had the same problem as I have with Ancestrys fairly >>>> recent introduction of their "interactive images" >>>> >>>> Basically they are for two year olds that can't read what is on the >>>> page, you get a pop up box that comes out with the transcript on and >>>> obscures the writing on the image, which of course is what we want to see >>>> >>>> They are being beta'd on the 1911 and frankly they drive me up the wall >>>> >>>> I have sent feedback a few times to ask how I get rid of the interactive >>>> parts but had no reply >>>> >>>> So I looked further and found that there is a user definable part under >>>> options when viewing the interactive images >>>> >>>> You can turn off all or part of the new *aids* >>>> >>>> May be I am the only one who is aggravated by it<g> >>>> >>> >>> ===== >>> If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... >>> >>> ------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >>> >> ===== >> If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** > > Germanna Database at Ancestry: > http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/28427876/family > > My Germanna Database at Rootsweb: > http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=germanna > > My Germanna Website at Rootsweb: > http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~george/index.html > > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

FamilySearch is already doing it - 18 states at the moment with 9 more states pending, having reached 100 percent Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Kanas, New Hampshire, Vermont, Delaware, Louisiana, Mississippi, Florida, Virginia online with indexes Pending, Maine, Iowa, Rhode Island, Alabama, California, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Indiana, Washington The rest are still being indexed. On 6/11/2012 9:40 AM, Frty9rgal@aol.com wrote: > Does anyone know if Family Search is going to index by surnames for the > 1940 census? Right now it's just ED's, on the states they've done so far. > What about Ancestry? Will they be doing a name search index? Thanks, Judy

Phil Well, first of all, if I found something like that, I'd question the integrity of ALL the information, not just the place. . . Is this an example of sloppy research? Or "family tradition" or a "scribner error." BUT, what I'd do in my file (because I put everything in, at least by notation), is to put the information in with caveats, and an explanation. Born: 1717 Place: STB Altlussheim, Baden Wurttemburg, Hessen STB means "said to be" In the source citation I'd have a "surety" of -3 (as in "really? What was it really?") I would put a note in the citation stating that Altlussheim wasn't in Baden, but in Mannheim. . . . So, you don't know if the person was born in Altlussheim, or born somewhere else in Baden. . . OR, if you have other evidence that the event took place in Altlussheim, Mannheim, then you can use THAT source for your information. You can, in most databases have more than one version of an event. In The Master Genealogist, which I use, you pick which one is "primary." Pat In Tucson -----Original Message----- From: roots-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Phil Stevens Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 7:01 PM To: roots@rootsweb.com Subject: [ROOTS-L] Oh what to do what to do hi Rooters , got another question for you , I hope it does not start a fire storm What do you do when you find an obvious mistake in data while adding family data / people to your file ?? Like this ,in the year 1717 " Altlussheim ,Baden-Württemberg, Hessen " Altlussheim Never was in them places !! Baden-Württemberg was not formed untill 1945 , an what is Hessen doing there ? it is on other side of area Altlussheimis was in Mannheim , still is , Phil ===== If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi All   To be honest I have just given up. The amount of my ancestors that were born in Glous FRANCE not Gloucester, UK is beyond comprehension. You would have thought people would have spotted the mistake but I guess they just select from the drop down list in ancestry and Bob's your uncle, living in France! And no I still can't speak French despite this 'illustrious' past....   Janine   ________________________________ From: Phil Stevens <bstevens27@frontier.com> To: roots@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, 11 June 2012, 3:01 Subject: [ROOTS-L] Oh what to do what to do   hi Rooters , got another question for you , I hope it does not start a fire storm   What do you do when you find an obvious mistake in data  while adding family data / people to your file ??  Like this ,in the year 1717 " Altlussheim ,Baden-Württemberg, Hessen " Altlussheim Never was in them places !! Baden-Württemberg was not formed untill 1945 , an what is Hessen doing there ?  it is on other side of area   Altlussheimis was in Mannheim  , still is  ,  Phil ===== If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Is there a researcher in Fulton Co who would locate graves in Section A of Old Prospect Hill Cemetery for me and take photos of several gravestones?  OR if someone would locate those graves, and tell me how to find them so I can take photos, I'll gladly pay for same. I can make the day trip if I don't have to spend hours searching for gravestones. All I know is they are in Section A.        William Trumbull     1821-1886  Mary Trumbull       1821-1894  Ida M. Trumbull     1857-1899  Orilla A. Trumbull    1853-1924   Possibly:  Jennett Burchard    1828-1894   Many, many thanks for your help.   Lois

Lynn, you're not setting the parameters of the search correctly. If you put in a specific location AND make sure the parameter is set to "Restrict to Exact", then you'll only get results for the specific location. Sarge At 6/9/2012 04:40 PM Saturday, Lynn Prettyman wrote: *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* >I, also, am finding it more difficult. I'm finding the birth states are no >longer isolated. I don't care how many times I put in for someone born in a >specific location, when the results come up, every person with that name >comes up, no matter what state he/she was born in. I don't like it. > >Lynn in Baltimore > >-----Original Message----- >From: Diana Clevenger >Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 4:22 PM >To: 'Nivard Ovington' ; roots@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Ancestry new interactive viewer --- ARGHH! > >I have found that searching the 1940 census was a lot easier in >FamilySearch. It may just be me, but I find Ancestry harder and harder to >get around in. I didn't know you could go back to the "old Search". Going >to give it a try. > > >Diana Clevenger >Olympia, WA > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: roots-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:roots-bounces@rootsweb.com] On >Behalf Of Nivard Ovington >Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 11:51 AM >To: roots@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Ancestry new interactive viewer --- ARGHH! > >Hi David > >Agreed that Ancestrys transcription can be a tad woeful at times but their >search engine makes up for it as far as my searching is concerned (I do not >as I have said use the 1940 or any US census) > >Ancestry has always had the stance of transcribe quickly and get it out to >people, I have to say thats a stance I like, I would rather have it now than >wait ages for the impossible to achieve perfect transcript > >Thankfully we have some choice > >As to Ancestry up for sale, old news > >Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > >On 09/06/2012 18:58, W David Samuelsen wrote: >> Ancestry's name spellings leave a lot to be desired. >> >> FamilySearch is way way ahead of Ancestry as to how many states had >> been >> 100 percent done and online now. already passed 58 percent completed, >> with 18 states online with indexes, 9 states with pending indexes to >> go online. >> >> https://familysearch.org/1940census/?cid=fsHomeT1940Text_v2 >> >> Not only that, based on FamilySearch's schedule, the indexing is way >> aheady of the schedule for completion. >> >> BTW, how many of you know Ancestry.com is up for sale? >> >> David Samuelsen >===== >If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to >roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >the subject and the body of the message > >===== >If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to >roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in >the subject and the body of the message > > >===== >If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** Germanna Database at Ancestry: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/28427876/family My Germanna Database at Rootsweb: http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=germanna My Germanna Website at Rootsweb: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~george/index.html

David, I don't quite understand what you have said. Ancestry has ALL images of all States, Counties, Districts, etc. Ancestry just does not yet have the residents' names indexed yet. Even at FamilySearch you still cannot search for a resident's name. If you go to FamilySearch there's no place to search by name. Sarge At 6/9/2012 01:58 PM Saturday, W David Samuelsen wrote: *********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT********* >Ancestry's name spellings leave a lot to be desired. > >FamilySearch is way way ahead of Ancestry as to how many states had been >100 percent done and online now. already passed 58 percent completed, >with 18 states online with indexes, 9 states with pending indexes to go >online. > >https://familysearch.org/1940census/?cid=fsHomeT1940Text_v2 > >Not only that, based on FamilySearch's schedule, the indexing is way >aheady of the schedule for completion. > >BTW, how many of you know Ancestry.com is up for sale? > >David Samuelsen > >On 6/9/2012 10:10 AM, Alta Flynt wrote: >> Thank you!!! Thank you!!! Thank you!!! >> >> I have been tearing my hair out over the 1940 U.S. census, and when I >> looked at the options, I found a place to go back to the old style >> census image - no messages popping up where I don't want them and old >> fashioned scroll bars. >> >> I am so grateful to you. >> >> Alta >> >> >> On 6/9/2012 9:35 AM, Nivard Ovington wrote: >>> Dear all >>> >>> Has anyone else had the same problem as I have with Ancestrys fairly >>> recent introduction of their "interactive images" >>> >>> Basically they are for two year olds that can't read what is on the >>> page, you get a pop up box that comes out with the transcript on and >>> obscures the writing on the image, which of course is what we want to see >>> >>> They are being beta'd on the 1911 and frankly they drive me up the wall >>> >>> I have sent feedback a few times to ask how I get rid of the interactive >>> parts but had no reply >>> >>> So I looked further and found that there is a user definable part under >>> options when viewing the interactive images >>> >>> You can turn off all or part of the new *aids* >>> >>> May be I am the only one who is aggravated by it<g> >>> >> >> ===== >> If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> >===== >If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message **********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********** Germanna Database at Ancestry: http://trees.ancestry.com/tree/28427876/family My Germanna Database at Rootsweb: http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=germanna My Germanna Website at Rootsweb: http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~george/index.html

Make it in your database, Altlussheim, A. Schwetzingen, Baden and end of the story. Wuerttemberg use "Kreis" while Baden use "Amt" as in "A." You can omit "A." if you want to. I will never be able to stand mis-placed localities. Even "Saarland bezkirk" never existed and still some do that. Bezkirk is used by Bavaria while Rheinland uses "kreis". David S. On 6/10/2012 8:01 PM, Phil Stevens wrote: > hi Rooters , got another question for you , I hope it does not start a > fire storm > What do you do when you find an obvious mistake in data while adding > family data / people to your file ?? Like this ,in the year 1717 " > Altlussheim ,Baden-Württemberg, Hessen " > Altlussheim Never was in them places !! Baden-Württemberg was not formed > untill 1945 , an what is Hessen doing there ? it is on other side of area > Altlussheimis was in Mannheim , still is , Phil > > ===== > If you would prefer digest mode to mail mode, drop a note to roots-admin@rootsweb.com and ask for the digest... > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ROOTS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

hi Rooters , got another question for you , I hope it does not start a fire storm What do you do when you find an obvious mistake in data while adding family data / people to your file ?? Like this ,in the year 1717 " Altlussheim ,Baden-Württemberg, Hessen " Altlussheim Never was in them places !! Baden-Württemberg was not formed untill 1945 , an what is Hessen doing there ? it is on other side of area Altlussheimis was in Mannheim , still is , Phil