General Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Accuracy of FmyP
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
ShelleyRose | Report | 25 Jan 2011 23:02 |
|
Anyone know how accurate FmyP is? it's just that I've given someone info that I found on the above site (and believe it to be right) and they're querying it? |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 25 Jan 2011 23:22 |
|
It depends what you mean by "how accurate". As with any site there will be mistakes made when the records were compiled and even more mistakes when they were transcribed. The people who do the work are only human so there are bound to be some inaccuracies but hopefully not too many. |
|||
|
Elizabeth2469049 | Report | 25 Jan 2011 23:23 |
|
I haven't used it much - but any of of the various indexed sources can have mistakes in transcribing handwriting! I would have thought it much less likely - but not impossible - in transcribing printed records as well |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
ShelleyRose | Report | 25 Jan 2011 23:41 |
|
Kath and Elizabeth, |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 25 Jan 2011 23:50 |
|
The marriage records do not give ages of the couple marrying so I'm not sure exactly what you mean. |
|||
|
ShelleyRose | Report | 26 Jan 2011 00:03 |
|
Hi Kath, |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 26 Jan 2011 00:24 |
|
If you are looking at English marriages then a marriage in the 1960's would not be possible at age 15. Perhaps the marriage was of someone else with the same name. |
|||
|
YvetteDD | Report | 26 Jan 2011 02:22 |
|
I think with any records, to be sure you need to look at the original as well as the transcription. On FMP there is facility to report errors. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
jax | Report | 26 Jan 2011 03:08 |
|
Its all well and good reporting errors to FMP, but when they reply thanking you but still do nothing about it....I wonder why I bothered. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
YvetteDD | Report | 26 Jan 2011 06:15 |
|
lol, yes still lots of errors |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Wend | Report | 26 Jan 2011 09:00 |
|
I agree Jax, I've reported several errors to FMP over the past few weeks. They've replied agreeing and thanking me, saying they will be corrected within 20 days, but they haven't been. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Elizabeth2469049 | Report | 26 Jan 2011 11:31 |
|
Ancestry - you add a comment on the profile page of any individual, and I think the owner of that tree will be notified. Only yesterday I did this for someone whose children had somehow been credited twice to each of two wives - I had an email back by return from the tree owner that he had amended this , I had a reply and he then replied again to me. Mind sometimes you do this and there is no reaction at all, just like some of the GR messages! |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
+++DetEcTive+++ | Report | 26 Jan 2011 11:36 |
|
Depending on the type of record on Ancestry, you can either report an incorrect name transcription which is eventually added but in italics. Don't think the correct name is searchable but does show when you get the list of possibles up. |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
InspectorGreenPen | Report | 26 Jan 2011 11:53 |
|
The original entries are just that - the original entries....! Whether it be a census or BMD it is as good as the information provided at the time it was recorded. |
|||
|
lollybasher | Report | 26 Jan 2011 12:17 |
|
Wendy, I was distracted and sent you a message back by p.m. forgetting I was looking at a thread. |
|||
|
ShelleyRose | Report | 26 Jan 2011 12:42 |
|
Thank you all so much for your replies, it looks quite possible that FmyP have an made an error in their info, but I'm going to take up Kath's kind offer and see what info she comes up with. |
|||
|
Wend | Report | 26 Jan 2011 14:05 |
|
Thanks Sylvia for your message. I do think Ancestry is confusing in this respect - it's so simple to do on FMP. Most of my reports of mistranscriptions have been my own ancestors and I have known them to be wrong, but I always check the original first, as IGP suggests. In one case, the unusual first name of Ovid was understandably mistranscribed as David, but I knew it was Ovid. laac for Jane was a strange one though, Sylvia! |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
InspectorGreenPen | Report | 26 Jan 2011 15:48 |
|
Let us know what turns up, but I am a bit sceptical as to how FMP might have made a 'mistake'. |
|||
|
ShelleyRose | Report | 27 Jan 2011 00:01 |
|
Thanks to everyone who responded to my query. |
|||
|
Huia | Report | 27 Jan 2011 06:03 |
|
I have recently taken a 6 month sub to FMP and am currently going through all the censuses. Some errors in transcriptions are due to poor quality of the original image. The 1841 census on which I found my gt gt grandparents with my gt grandmother and her sister was difficult to read on the film, but I managed to work out that it was 'my' Backhouse family. However, the transcription has them called Burkhouse. I sent in a correction, havent checked if it has been fixed yet. Another was a transcription for the 1851 census in Salford. The originals were, I understand, severely damaged but a fam. hist. soc. transcribed many of the pages by using ultra violet light and who knows what else. They transcribed the youngest daughter of my Slater family as 'Mart' when I know she was Maria. I was also able to add to the info on the mothers p.o.b. which is given merely as ?on? when it was Dilhorne. |
|||
Researching: |
|||