Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > england.genealogy.misc > #52

Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription"

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:04:03 +0000, Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca>
wrote:

>On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:49:01 +0200, Steve Hayes
><hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Nov 2017 19:15:28 +0000, Ian Goddard
>><goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> My question is:
>>>>
>>>> Which denomination, operating in Wingate in County Durham in 1869,
>>>> recorded the race of people being baptised, but not the name of the
>>>> mother?
>>>>
>>>> Or is this not actually a transcription at all, but just some clown
>>>> entering stuff that isn't there, and leaving out stuff that is there?
>>>>
>>>> An image of the register was not available when I looked, but I wonder
>>>> if anyone who has access to that particular record can confirm that it
>>>> mentioned the race, but not the name of the mother.
>>>>
>>>> I accept that transcroptions can be inaccurate, but transcribers
>>>> making stuff up is somwething else.
>>>
>>>I think what happens is that a transcriber has an input screen which 
>>>doesn't clear between entries; they just overtype the names & dates and, 
>>>supposedly the parish when they start on a new parish or church.  The 
>>>reason I think this happens is that I've seen transcriptions where they 
>>>appear to have switched from one church to another and end up with a 
>>>field like Residence Place displaying contents from another parish - 
>>>they've just not noticed that they've run onto a new batch of data.
>>>
>>>It looks as if, in this case, they've strayed onto Wingate from some 
>>>other place where race would be a field to capture.
>>
>>That's quite possible, I suppose. 
>>
>>Another question related to this is that they quite often put in a
>>"Residence" field, but After looking at a number of them I am quite
>>sceptical about this, because I don't think it is transcribed from the
>>"Abode" field of CofE registers, but rather taken from the location of
>>the parish church itself. 
>>
>>This can be misleading, as people sometimes lived some distance from
>>the parish church. Where FamilySearch make an image available (which
>>they sometimes do), I try to check the Abode and Occupation fields,
>>but this is not always possible. 
>>
>The current qualification for local residence in England WRT marriage
>is only seven days so that detail has to be taken with a pinch of
>salt. 
>[http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00644/SN00644.pdf]
>Lower mobility in the past might have 
>might ^H^H^H^H^H 
made

>that detail resemble the
>facts somewhat better but IME it still often has to be interpreted as
>e.g. "he/she would be resident here if he/she wasn't permanently(-ish)
>employed in <another place>".

Back to england.genealogy.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2017-11-21 20:48 +0200
  Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Ian Goddard <goddai01@hotmail.co.uk> - 2017-11-21 19:15 +0000
    Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> - 2017-11-22 03:06 +0000
      Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2017-11-28 07:52 +0200
    Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2017-11-28 07:49 +0200
      Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> - 2017-11-30 00:04 +0000
        Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" Charles Ellson <ce11son@yahoo.ca> - 2017-11-30 01:08 +0000
  Re: Weird LDS parish register "transcription" "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> - 2017-11-22 14:34 +0000

csiph-web