Genealogy Chat

I ask this because when they promised (twice now, and they still haven't done what they said they would do), I'm not sure where I should go to get my issue resolved.

My Father is incorrectly transcribed on the Genes Reunited records table.

GR staff told me this when I contacted them to say I could not find his birth record. They have him from details I provided but GR Transcribers have him listed as Edward instead of Edwin and promised me it would be corrected but could take up to 3 months. After 5 months I checked again and it is still incorrect so I contacted them again and once more I was promised it would be corrected. So, even now after several more months, does anyone know how I can get them to respond to their own promises. Perhaps it'sjust more important to me than to them. Has anyone else had the same difficulty

From a Platinum Member who expected more. :-(

What records are you referring to? BMD indexes, or something else? Can you be certain that it is the transcription that is wrong, not the original?

My own marriage entry is incorrect at the GRO and therefore does not appear in any search, although technically speaking it has been transcribed correctly.

Genes dont actually hold records so cant see how they do any corrections , have you found him on any other BMD site to see how he is recorded

The first person I spoke to at Genes Reunited told me their transcribers had made an error. (each of the ancestry organisations pay for their own transcriptions from official records) . My father is listed correctly in BMD at GRO and all other ancestry sites. GR just haven't done what they twice told me they would do.

The first person I spoke to at Genes Reunited told me their transcribers had made an error. (each of the ancestry organisations pay for their own transcriptions from official records) . My father is listed correctly in BMD at GRO and all other ancestry sites. GR just haven't done what they twice told me they would do.

Hi,

Just to let you know I have contacted the Support Team in regards to this and they are looking into it.

We are sorry for the delay, but you will be contacted soon.

Many thanks

Shirley,

GR DO host their own records, it is just that they have been sourced from third party suppliers.

They will also make corrections to the search indices (which in the case of FMP sourced records are also passed over to their database managers) provided the case for making the change can be proven.

However there is currently no 'formal' mechanism for reporting errors via the system, other than my email that is, so the process is completely manual.

Thank you, genes reunited, for responding :-)

TBH

I did not think that GR had done any of their own transcribing of any records carried on this site.

I thought that they had made arrangements with other sites to allow access to them ......... with FMP now being the main site for that as they are in the same stable of companies with BrightSolid.



sylvia

I think IPG is correct.

Can't find it at the moment but I am sure Phil confirmed that the databases are GR.s own copies.

Not sure how often they are updated though.

I do know of a sase on one other well known site where the database was actually 9 months out of date before it was updated, but that was a few years ago.

I did find a reference from Phil that they will be instigating an On site Corrections Notification System "soon" , but until then to send corrections to Customer Support

Jeremy
.

Very true, Sylvia, as had been stated by genes reunited and read elsewhere.

For instance:
http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards.page/board/genealogy_chat/thread/1281462
http://lostcousins.com/newsletters/latesep11news.htm
"Genes Reunited have replaced their census data since I last reviewed the site - they now have the same transcriptions as at findmypast (previously the censuses were provided to Genes Reunited by S&N, owners of The Genealogist)."

Jeremy, yes that is correct. The records that GR host are copies obtained under license from other suppliers, who also provided the transcribed search indexes.

For example, when you look at the census on GR you are accessing at the data held by GR, not that held by FMP.

Think of is in the same way as the 1837-1915 BMD records on Ancestry which were supplied by FreeBMD. When you search on Ancestry you do not access the FreeBMD record, but the copy held on Ancestry.

Well you live and learn .as they say .
I was under the impression that Genes didnt hold any records but accessed them through another site. This is why I didnt think Genes could do any alterations. They dont have the facility to report errors like FMP and Ancestry.

At least it cleared that up :-D

Did I misunderstand the lost cousins' newsletter then?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, fingers crossed that the original poster's issue will be resolved soon.

Shirley,

This is what GR had to say on the subject of where records are held when it was debated on here last August:-

....."Also, there is some reference to the idea that Genes Reunited don't hold our own records. I can assure you that all records you find on Genes Reunited are hosted by Genes Reunited. We pay commission to record providers in order to supply these records to our members, and at no time do we divert you to other sites to gain access to the records."

And the lost cousins' newsletter was after August, in fact 24 September.

-----------------

I still hope that the original poster's issue will be resolved soon. :-)

Thanks ISP i didnt see the August debate.

I do try to give accurate advice when replying to enquires but sometimes my knowledge may not have been up to date. :-(

I think we are playing with words here ...................

IGP posted:-

"This is what GR had to say on the subject of where records are held when it was debated on here last August:-

....."Also, there is some reference to the idea that Genes Reunited don't hold our own records. I can assure you that all records you find on Genes Reunited are hosted by Genes Reunited. We pay commission to record providers in order to supply these records to our members, and at no time do we divert you to other sites to gain access to the records.""



so let's parse this, shall we :-)


"We pay commission to record providers in order to supply these records to our members," ............................ in other words, GR have paid other sites (eg, fmp, GRO {but not freebmd}) to obtain access to records which GR then loads on to this site. Those records have been transcribed by those other sites


"at no time do we divert you to other sites to gain access to the records." ..................... true, as the records are now loaded on GR site.



BUT, and it is a BIG but ..................... nowhere does GR say that THEY have transcribed the records, just that they have paid commission to other record providers.




............... so, my reading of this is that GR has not done new transcriptions, and that they very probably cannot make changes in the records held on this site, because they do not have the authority or ability to do so.




How do I know that GR have paid GRO to access records, but not freebmd for bmd records (or ancestry for that matter)?

Because everyone talks about seeing the INDEX, or being unable to determine the other partner in a marriage........... if GR had paid a commission to either freebmd or ancestry, then one would be able to see the records as shown on those two sites.




sylvia

No play on words at all - just an attempt to get the facts straight....!

The fact that GR may or may not have done their own transcriptions is irrelevant.

However, we know that GR are in a position to correct any errors within their copy of the transcriptions - they have told us so on more than one occasion. What they don't have is an automated process for doing this, as I stated earlier.

No, IGP


Phil Moir said the other week that they HOPED to have that capability "soon", but they could not yet do it.




and all I was doing was trying to get the facts straight ....... GR carries records obtained from other sites, they have not done transcriptions themselves .............. at least, not as yet!



sylvia