VA-ROOTS Archives

July 2002

VA-ROOTS@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Janet Hunter <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Mon, 29 Jul 2002 13:55:16 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (48 lines)
I am having trouble understanding the total panning of the census records on
Ancestry.com. and the connection with errors and the census images.  I am not
a subscriber, and I have only viewed the images at a FHC, and only for
counties in Missouri where I'm pretty sure that almost everyone there is a
cousin or in-law :-), so I've just started at the beginning and gone from one
image to the next (they also aren't indexed, but I'd have done this anyway).

My impression is that the errors on the census records are in the INDEXING
and ARRANGEMENT of the images (ie, mixing Richmond City and Richmond Co) of
the census, but not the census images themselves, which are an invaluable
resource, have not been altered (though perhaps in the wrong location).

Am I incorrect?  Has Ancestry.com botched up the images as well?  My
experiences with ALL census indexes is no better nor worse than that
described for Ancesry .com.  For a major example, on the priceless 1880 LDS
census CDs for that matter...my Letsy is Betsy, my Jas (James) is Jos
(Joseph),  Elsewhere, I have a James turned into Jarvis, a Bird a Beral,
etc., and in a county transcription AND state index a Benjamin Marsh is
Baryman Mensch, etc..etc., etc. the list is endless).

While I am truly appalled at the melding of Richmond County and Richmond
City...for anyone who has gone looking for folks that they couldn't find in
indexes that are out there...are the Ancestry.com ones really any worse that
the other indexes done for states/counties, etc.?     If not, then we'll just
have to grin and bear it just like we do/did when going through regular old
microfilm rolls and dealing with the popular index/indexes for that state.

Janet Hunter


In a message dated 7/29/2002 1:31:08 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:


>
> there are so many errors on ancestry.com that I no longer consider them much
> more
> than a "clue."  Likewise most of the LDS info.  Too bad.   The internet has
> spawned
> the "armchair genealogist."   Not much we can do other than suffer from a
> sour
> gizzard.



To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2