Suggestions

Would it be possible to request ( strongly) that when you enter a person on GR you include ( where possible naturally) detals of their place of birth. It would save a lot of time searching

I think its pointless to suggest that people put birth places on GR where possible? are you forgetting that family tree's are work in progress,

Roy

I agree Roy but I do know that there are number of my "cousins" who have said they just wanted to get the dob and that would be enough.
I thought it would make life a bit more logical if they COULD put birth place on GR

Are you talking about on the trees on here?
If so then it is entirely up to the tree owner how much or how little they put on. It is not for GR or members to dictate how this is done.

If you are talking about records on here then that is completely different. But as I don't use the records on here so wouldn't know if it is included or not.

As i said, work in progress, I don't have my tree on GR i removed it

But when people search for relatives it is not always the case that the actual place of birth is on that record, I have seen where members have just entered eg, Doncaster as place of birth because that is where the birth was registered, but this IMHO is wrong because it is the registration district where the birth was registered and not the place of birth, many people don't buy birth certs for every single relative because of cost so tend to only buy the certs that confirm a family rather than all individuals in the family,

I have also seen the result of people recording a birth place based on where that person was living at the time the event was recorded,
this leads to them then following the wrong line because they then go on to find a birth in that area and follow that record as a fact,



As time goes by people may at some point get further info that does give the place of birth which would then normally be added/amended

some people prefer to leave the place of birth off as a reminder that that birth place still has to be found

and as Patricia said above it is their tree just as your tree is your tree and up to the tree owner to record what, how and where these things are recorded

Roy

Putting a place of birth on a record is great if we all had the same idea of where an area is ie:

Many of my family come from Battersea, and this can be recorded as being in

London
Lambeth
Wandsworth
Surrey

So a person recording Battersea, Surrey would find no matches to those who put in Battersea, London.

And this problem will arise for most areas in London, because of many places which are now in London were in either Kent, Surrey, Middlesex and Essex.

Then you have the case of in 1841 John Smith was born in a little hamlet of a couple of houses called Smithtown
By 1851, this hamlet had grown and was now part of the local village Brownton.
By 1881 the village has now grown and is part of the local Market town of Whitetown.
By 1901 this is now part of the local big town Greycity.

And he has recorded his place of birth as the name of the area in each census as the name in use at the time, even though he and his family are living in the same house on every census.

I have an ancestor who was born in Warrington, Lancs and Cork, Ireland. He used both on different census returns. And I have never found a birth for him under either name he was known as (he was an actor) in either town. So his birthplace is recorded as Unknown, which is correct.

I am only on one tree as I took myself off my own....saying I was born Romford...I was born in Walthamstow...so I suppose thats ok as it is in the same county

Like so many other things on a site where so much is member generated, AND where the vast majority of members are probably in the FREE category ............

................. no-one can dictate what should be put on to the personal trees and profiles.


It WOULD be nice if everyone who had, say the Hayhurst family, showed exactly where they were born ..................... but that is impossible to dictate.

PP's example from London can be extrapolated to other big cities ........... eg Manchester, Leeds, etc.

Salford can be entered as Salford, Manchester, or Salford, Lancashire ..... or can just be lumped under Manchester.



and so it goes.


You just have to learn all the possible alternative options for birthplaces, and keep them in mind when searching trees.





sylvia

Like Jax I too was born in Walthamstow, which was in Essex then but West Ham reg district, when I married, Walthamstow was in London but it was in Waltham Forest reg district!

Another problen I have is Dad, he was born according to his birth cert in Waterhouses, also known as Daisy Nook, which is in Ashton Under Lyne.

FTM has an fact option for birth so I use the town but it also has an option for birthplace so I record the actual birthplace, in my case the hospital, on that.

So the other question is do you use the area he/she/you were born or the actual birthplace?

Sorry if I have stirred up a hornet's nest - that was not my intention

I have the same problems with my Cornish lot - registered n Redruth but actualy born in Stithians, registered in St Ausell but born in Roche... so I do understand

However, if you have proved relationship by virtue of Certs/Census it is very easy to identify a birth place.

When you are trying to communicate with possble rellies it s very frustrating sending a message to somene who has the right name and dob to discover they lived at the opposite end of UK or anynwhere else There area lso timeswhen if members feel that they do not have a match they don't even bother replying to advise me of wrong person

Regards from Christchurch ( the Shaky City)

:-P :-) :-) :-)

Pam, I have stirred up a hornet's nest ? I don't think so,

This subject come up every now and then but as been explained the problem is the we each record data from available sources in the way that suits us the tree owner

GR is a genealogy web site that offers a free tree facility and although the site has the ability for others to search for possible connections it does not guarantee the accuracy of any content on the boards or of a members tree,

As far as messages not getting a reply that also comes up on a regular basis for info as to possible reasons why search the boards and their are many

http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards.page/board/genealogy_chat/thread/1297598


Roy

Patricia ...........

I used to collect bluebells in the woods at Daisy Nook when I was a child :-D. We'd go home with huge armfuls.


Pam .................

Another problem with birth place information is that very many of the people having trees do not in fact buy certificates and thus do not get the correct birth place. I cannot count the number of times I, and other helpers, are told "certificates are too expensive and I'm not going to bother"

They depend on censuses and what other people tell them.

........... and neither can be relied on 100% to have the correct birth place listed

For example, in censuses, any or all of the following may have happened ...........

........... person born in place A, family moved to place B while child still very young. Child very often then believed s/he was born in place B. It is often only when WE buy the birth certificate that we find out the truth. Then all the other tree holders will tell us that we are wrong!

........... other family member (or even next door neighbour) gave the enumerator the information, but had it wrong.

.......... person told enumerator where s/he was born, and the following conversation took place ..........

"I was born at Smith's Corner"
"Smith's Corner?? Never heard of it"
"It's near Smithville"
"Never of that neither"
"Close to Oldham"
"Ah. I'll put Oldham then"

........... householder has moved to deepest Lancashire from deepest Devon ................ neither enumerator nor householder can understand each other's dialect.

........... enumerator asked the question "Where are you from?", instead of "where were you born?". Householder takes the question to mean where had they moved from, and gives the name of the last place where they lived (and that may lead to a similar conversation to the one above).



It WOULD be nice ........ but I fear it is an impossible wish.


It's just one more reason not to trust other people's trees or information, on here and most especially on ancestry! Take the information, but double and even triple check it before adding to your own tree.


I now trust no-one else on either my direct maternal and paternal lines, which I have taken all the way back to the mid-1650s in Dad's case. Nor in husband's paternal line. I contact no-one with names in those direct lines.

I have not done as good a job in siblings of each generation.


I guess what really convinced me not to believe anyone was discovering that there was a One Name Study of my surname. It was done by the grandson of my father's eldest brother. True, grandson's father had moved his family to the other end of England, and the grandson had trusted his Dad's memory for information on his aunts and uncles.

I had one sibling, a brother a little more than 10 years older than me. Imagine my horror when I looked at that One Name Study, and discovered my Dad was nowhere to be found. Instead, my brother (names and birth year correct) was married to my mother (name and birth year correct) and I was their child (name and birth year correct).

One look at the birth dates and ages would have told anyone that it was all wrong!




BUT telling people to check, and check, and double check, and buy ALL the certificates you can afford, just goes in one ear and out the other.

Too many people consider that this is a hobby that can be done for no, or very little, cost.




sylvia

Pam, please don't be sorry, you haven't stirred up a hornets nest at all. I find it interesting how others record information, as you can see we seem to do it differently.

When I began I used to record people with the name that appeared on thier birth cert, regardless of how they were known, now I record both as I found they often used other names throughtout their lives.......... for example born Joe, but used Joseph [heaven help anyone that called him Joe!!] and another that was born Helen, but baptised and used Ellen.
Took us many years to find her birth, my husband stumbled on it at Middleton House while we went through every female birth with her surname, it was one of those 'YES!' moments we all have.........

Sylvia.......... Dad was brought up along with his 13 siblings in part of Owd Abs Cottage, after the monkeys had gone of course, although Dad said it wasn't that much different ;-) he took me there once as a small child when it was little more than a ruin

Thank for all the "positives" !!!!!!!!

I do not keep my full tree on GR but use my own software

I do check the Surname Summary EVERY night just in case something grabs me

I have "found" numerous Cousins in the 8 years I have been a GR Member and gain a geat deal of satfaction when I make a "hit"

I have been very fortunate to have travelled to UK a couple of times whch has given me the opportunity to see the Original documents without having to buy Certs...

thanks for all the advice everyone..... wil just get on sorting out my very large family from Cornwall, London, Norfolk, Ireland etc.

BTW - had another biggish quake today - am over these darn things

Pam

Patricia

I have to honestly say that I'd never heard of Owd Ab's before!

We used to walk from Oldham in the springtime in the late 1940s and early 1950s just to see and pick the bluebells, and would stay up in the wooded area, we never went down into the valley.


Interestingly enough, OH's godfather and his wife used to live just across the road from Daisy Nook.



sylvia

One of OH's great Uncles could have been born in anyone of 3 counties. The one where the family were living, his mother's home county or the county he was registered in to which the father wasn't posted to until just after the birth.
Would the birth certificate tell me the truth? probably not as they would have to explain why he wasn't registered elsewhere.
Just one of life's little puzzles.