We welcome any query on Who When Where. If you have previously posted it on another forum (including the old WDYTYA forum), please state this in your opening post - this will save people redoing the research which has been done before: they can look at it and possibly go further with it.

Find my Past subscriptions

A space for genealogy-related conversations.
Mick Loney
Posts: 371
Joined: 15 Jun 2020, 07:27

Re: Find my Past subscriptions

Post by Mick Loney »

meekhcs wrote: 19 Apr 2021, 16:48 Guy Wrote
No it is really very simple, most people who complain about inaccurate records are the people who copy trees
I disagree.
Me too! I treat on-line trees with a great deal of caution, and only use them as a guide with my research, as they are a great source. I’ve seen too many dodgy trees to take them at face vale without checking for myself.

Even transcriptions are treated with caution, and I am only happy when I can confirm for myself in the actual image.

What I do find annoying, is that companies don’t reward us for finding and reporting wrong transcriptions. They’re happy to spend money on getting the transcriptions, but not prepared to spend a little more to improve them. A few pence ( deducted from next subscription) per confirmed error reported would encourage more people to report them, and maintain customer loyalty! It wouldn’t take long to vastly improve the quality of the transcriptions.
User avatar
Guy
Posts: 135
Joined: 01 Jun 2020, 19:14
Location: Wakefield
Contact:

Re: Find my Past subscriptions

Post by Guy »

meekhcs wrote: 19 Apr 2021, 16:48 Guy Wrote
No it is really very simple, most people who complain about inaccurate records are the people who copy trees
I disagree. Nothing annoys me more than to find inaccuracies. If I spend a period of time searching on one of the main fee paying sites, a goodly part of that time is spent in sending corrections. I appreciate there will always be inaccuracies, nothing is 100% correct, but when I return to a record several months later and it still hasn't been corrected, then I question the sites priority.
It is very easy to talk in generalities but to have any meaning you must give specifics. Are you saying the images are wrong, the book images are wrong, the Family History Society Transcripts are wrong or the Companies transcripts are wrong?

snip
meekhcs wrote: 19 Apr 2021, 16:48Again I agree, but I also think as part of the quest to make money they are following trends. The big main sites have always been in competition and will continue to be so. Everybody benefits from the vast number of records they each hold, and I have found them useful . In order to try and gain the upper hand and add more and more to their site, they each turned to Index only Transcriptions. Many of these, prepared in haste, contain many inaccuracies. How are people supposed to find parish register entries by using them, and how are we supoosed to submit corrections? Now the emphasis is turning to DNA..............

And finally yes the onus is on us to to use common sense and our own judgement in compiling our Trees, but I also feel there should be some onus on the Sites to maintain themselve to the best of their ability regarding the records they hold and the services they offer, and I don't think that necessarily happens these days.
I believe most if not all of what you refer to as Index only Transcriptions have been licenced from Family History Societies and are accurate copies of what have been supplied, though not necessarily the original record. I must admit I have previously found many errors in FHS transcripts but took the view at least they have tried to help their members.
Mick Loney wrote: 19 Apr 2021, 18:58
...What I do find annoying, is that companies don’t reward us for finding and reporting wrong transcriptions. They’re happy to spend money on getting the transcriptions, but not prepared to spend a little more to improve them. A few pence ( deducted from next subscription) per confirmed error reported would encourage more people to report them, and maintain customer loyalty! It wouldn’t take long to vastly improve the quality of the transcriptions.
Call me old fashioned but isn't helping the family history community reward enough for correcting errors?

In addition I would say if the companies put such a system in place they would have to increase subscription charges to pay more staff to evaluate the corrections sent in. Just look at the suggestions on mailing lists when a person asks what does this image say, there is often a range of replies from correct to ludicrous.
Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
meekhcs
Posts: 468
Joined: 02 Jun 2020, 18:19
Location: Lincolnshire, but Hampshire born and bred!

Re: Find my Past subscriptions

Post by meekhcs »

If I look at a census on Ancestry and find it has been incorrectly transcribed I flag it up to Ancestry. I then become annoyed when months later that correction hasn't been applied.

As I said in my previous post it is not possible to correct an Index only transcription because there is nothing to compare it to, and I agree with you it is not the fault of the end supplier.

In the case of the census transcription the image is on their website so they only have to look at it. Years ago Ancestry were very good at this. They acknowledged your correction and it would be applied. Now they don't seem to bother. So why have the correction button at all?

I appreciate the records these websites hve to offer. We cannot always, for various resons , visit a Record Office etc. Surely, therefore, one of their objectives must be to be as accurate as possible with their records, and they should welcome corrections and apply them to aid future researchers?
Sally
User avatar
AdrianBruce
Posts: 358
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 18:57
Location: South Cheshire

Re: Find my Past subscriptions

Post by AdrianBruce »

Just to add my figures at renewal - I had started out with a 12 Month World Subscription of £146 (roughly).

The next two years were the same subs but at a reduced cost of £132, and then it changed to ...

...a 12 Month Pro Subscription (no idea quite what the difference was back then) for the same price.

I just had one year of the 12 Month Pro Subscription and according to the email that I've just received, I've been moved onto an Access-All-Areas Pro subscription for the last month, which will renew at £136 p.a. inclusive of a decent loyalty discount.

Yes, I appreciate that others will not be able to afford those numbers.
Adrian Bruce
Thunder
Posts: 436
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 01:43

Re: Find my Past subscriptions

Post by Thunder »

meekhcs wrote: 20 Apr 2021, 10:43 If I look at a census on Ancestry and find it has been incorrectly transcribed I flag it up to Ancestry. I then become annoyed when months later that correction hasn't been applied.

As I said in my previous post it is not possible to correct an Index only transcription because there is nothing to compare it to, and I agree with you it is not the fault of the end supplier.

In the case of the census transcription the image is on their website so they only have to look at it. Years ago Ancestry were very good at this. They acknowledged your correction and it would be applied. Now they don't seem to bother. So why have the correction button at all?

I appreciate the records these websites hve to offer. We cannot always, for various resons , visit a Record Office etc. Surely, therefore, one of their objectives must be to be as accurate as possible with their records, and they should welcome corrections and apply them to aid future researchers?
I agree on having correct transcriptions but alas too often institutions, particularly TNA but not solely, are happy to get money from ancestry for example for copies of their records and deny any responsibility for errors the transcribing companies make. You only have to look at TNA's Discovery catalogue to see the errors of departments, including TNA (it is the town of Stirling not Sterling in Scotland!), who make such obvious errors. If I could make amendments on ancestry to the "UK" (ancestry's description, it is actually England and Wales) lunacy registers I would but the institutions' locations cannot be changed as there is not drop-down menu for that. I am expecting many errors by FMP when the 1921 Census for England, Wales, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands is released next year and I am sure that when ancestry are able to be given a copy then similar errors can be made. Most of us remember what happened in 2002 when the 1901 Census was released when the MOD agency transcribed people born in Sunderland being listed as being born in Sutherland, which hadn't had so many people since the 'Highland Clearances'.
Post Reply