Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere!



Go Back   Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere! > Research > Family History News and Information

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 10-01-22, 09:17
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

TBH, I didn't remember his first name or whether he was born in the 1870s or 1880s, just that he was someone Jones b Sheffield. So I just searched the boards for Jones Sheffield which brought up your thread, "New Edward Jones thread"
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 11-01-22, 09:25
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,616
Default

I note that cousin's great grandparents have successfully muddied the waters. I have just discovered that my uncle had either a cousin or half sister of whom nobody had ever heard. She never married, and is in an institution in 1939. Her grandparents say they have no idea where she was born, nor whether her parents were alive or dead!! These details are actually completed in another hand.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 02-02-22, 23:57
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

This is a bit weird - I searched for Frederick James Parsons born about 1891 with Eastbourne as the birthplace, and it came back with what must be the right record, in Weston under Penyard, Ross, Herefordshire, since that was where I was expecting him to be, but it says Essex, England, for the birthplace in the index. Presumably they have transcribed it as Eastbourne, Essex, but they aren't showing the Eastbourne bit in the free search results? I had noticed that a lot of records only show county for birthplace but I was assuming that meant the village / parish / town / city hadn't been transcribed, or wasn't on the image, not that they were just not showing it.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-02-22, 12:51
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

I wondered about that. I paid for a page where the place of birth showed up as just Ireland on the index. When I saw the page the place of birth said Ulster Ireland, so I then knew it was not the right person. I just assumed they hadn't transcribed that bit, in error.

However, if I search using the place of birth Ulser the entry still appears in the results, so it must be on the transcription, which I've not paid for. But there are plenty of records that do show a full place of birth, so is it just a random mix of people with full place of birth on the main index or something else?
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-02-22, 14:14
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

My guess is that if the transcribed birthplace doesn't match their list of standard placenames, they reduce it (for the free index) to a part which does match the list, so Eastbourne, Essex becomes just Essex and Ulster, Ireland becomes just Ireland. But Eastbourne, Sussex would be shown in full because it is on their list.

Just searching for birthplace Eastbourne, I see a lot of results with Eastbourne, Sussex, England, and a Suffolk, England, an Essex, England, and even one with just a -.

If you search the 1911 census, there is a search field called "Birthplace as transcribed" and it (presumably) shows that field as the Birth place on the list of results, for instance Sussex Eastbourne, Eastbourne Sussex, Mead Eastbourne, Eastbourne SX, Essex Eastbourne, etc. Shame we don't get to see that on the free search for the 1921!
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-02-22, 19:52
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Interesting. Yes, that all makes sense. A bit frustrating that they don't tell you any of this.
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-09-22, 23:22
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,270
Default

I've just seen this in the TNA User Advisory Group meeting minutes from March 2022: In addition, in time (by the end of the calendar year as confirmed by Findmypast), the
1921 census would be available via Findmypast’s subscription model
.

So it should be included in (some) FMP subscriptions by the end of this year, according to that.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 13-09-22, 07:26
Merry's Avatar
Merry Merry is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Near Christchurch, Dorset
Posts: 21,264
Default

Thanks for that useful info, Kate.
__________________
Merry

"Something has been filled in that I didn't know was blank" Matthew Broderick WDYTYA? March 2010
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:58.


Hosted by Photon IT

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 PL3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.