1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. If you're looking for the LostCousins site please click the logo in the top left corner - these forums are for existing LostCousins members only.
  3. This is the LostCousins Forum. If you were looking for the LostCousins website simply click the logo at the top left.
  4. Coronavirus Corner - a place to share your hopes, dreams, and frustrations.
  5. Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!

Mangled transcription

Discussion in 'Gloucestershire' started by Pauline, Jul 31, 2018.

  1. Pauline

    Pauline LostCousins Megastar

    Having spent quite some time searching unsuccessfully for a burial in the Gloucestershire parish register data set at Ancestry, I started browsing the most likely register for the burial.

    Eventually I found it in 1805 - 'John Savage from the workhouse' buried.

    Although the surname was a bit faint it was quite readable, and on checking the BT, I found the burial was listed there too, with just his name. So why hadn't the Ancestry Search found him?

    I tried again specifying the exact date and parish, but with no names, and both entries were found. The BT entry had been transcribed without the surname, and although omitting the surname from the search had been something I'd tried, I'd ended up with far too many results .

    However it was the PR transcription that really took the biscuit - it had been transcribed as a baptism rather than a burial, and as 'John Workhour son of Savage Cookhorn'.

    No wonder I hadn't found it using the Search!
  2. jorghes

    jorghes LostCousins Superstar

    Wow. That is quite a terrible transcription. Did you update it?
  3. Pauline

    Pauline LostCousins Megastar

    Yes, though it wasn't easy to know how to correct some bits. I submitted a correction to his surname, then I submitted another correction listing the burial date as omitted information, with an explanatory note. Then I went to the father's name and submitted a correction removing his name and leaving all the fields blank. With the BT entry it was easier and I just submitted a correction adding his surname as omitted information.

    I seem to have spent a fair bit of time over the last few days submitting corrections to the Gloucestershire PRs, though at least with most of the rest I did manage to find the person by searching imaginatively. But I found a fair few entries listed as the wrong events - baptisms rather than burials or marriages etc.
  4. Pauline

    Pauline LostCousins Megastar

    I found another good one today, this time a baptism in 1764.

    The register has:
    Ann Daughter of Richd Cockle Born
    June 8th and Baptised July 11​

    The transcription has her as: Ann Born, with parents Richd & Cockle Born

    This time I can at least sort of see how the error occurred.

    (I have submitted a correction - one of seemingly hundreds I've submitted recently!)
  5. jorghes

    jorghes LostCousins Superstar

    I am sure there are plenty of people on Ancestry who are praising your work for the corrections, Pauline!

    I think each correction can aid in bringing that “shaky leaf” onto someone who may not have found that hint in usual circumstances!

Share This Page