NSW BDM online UPGRADE June 2014

[cando]

Hate to say it BUT may have to resort to using that subscription based website's bdm's...errors and all

Not very cheerful
Cando.

[majm]

 

My retired rellie, former BDM officer, retired in the 1980s after the initial EDP installation, and the consolidation of all the local registers to HQ .....

He is up in arms .... I think he will may well get one of those electronic petitions going.   I might add he was born 1917, so as he is reading this, GET SOMEONE ELSE to do it for you, I am not going to do that ......

Cando Re The Asterisk....  Yes, it will work, but you need to already know some of the "right" info in the other required boxes too ..... eg family name can be * but you also need to then enter given name .... 

Joy, Re the website ..... Try this link http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/bdm_fh.html  then EVEN THOUGH "they" don't mention it, you need to click on the words "Start searching the Family History records" which then brings up the search engine (ummm..... of course, only if all my rellies have STOPPED fiddling with their puters and that search engine option themselves, cause in my opinion they are overloading the NSW BDM system !) 

Agree Muss,  WHY WHY WHY ....    Their website currently STILL displays the "interesting certificates" .... so for example, Mary REIBY and her 1855 burial was formerly referenced as V18551632 43A 1855    Now it is simply 1632/1855.    So, how does anyone NEW to family history know that that "certificate" does NOT have ANY value to family history buffs, as it is for a BURIAL and is an Early Church Record.  ..... The newbie orders the dollar dollar dollar certificate rather than the cheaper (but still dollar dollar) official transcription, and in both instances learns NOTHING to advance their family history tree.   

Here's two pdfs that will give some info.   (Mary REIBY's interesting cert marked SAMPLE, and some info that used to be on the NSW BDM website, released 2006)    Notice the BURIAL, like all Early Church Records is NOT in their WATERMARK document form.    The History pdf is 18 pages long. EDIT to note, TOO BIG A FILE.  that one will not load.  I hear you all say PHEW  (3.8 Megs)

[majm]

Yes,  the Ancestry's option is better than the NSW BDM index now, particularly for 19thC ... I do so wish I still had my 16 bit floppy discs and errr .... a machine to use them with.   

[majm]

http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/bdm_hst.html   

History of the Registry     



Interesting Certificates

http://www.bdm.nsw.gov.au/bdm_fh/bdm_int.html

[majm]

Oh, phone calls can matter and get things done promptly …..

I am reliably informed ... a phone call sorted and there has been a change made and ABORIGINAL is again displaying as though a family name on some ECR's ... so for example  It is now listed between ABBOTT and AIKEN if the given name is John and the enquiry is BIRTHS  between 1 Jan 1827 and 31 Dec 1840….

Well, someone must know the Big Cheese

Cheers,  JM   (Shhhhhhhhhh I posted this on the 'wrong' thread .....  )

[SherlockBones]

Just searched on a death for a rellie in 1962. Nothing came up.
I then put in the range 01/01/1960 to 31/12/1965 and guess what came up? The actual entry.

Jon

[sparrett]

Yes,  the Ancestry's option is better than the NSW BDM index now, particularly for 19thC ... I do so wish I still had my 16 bit floppy discs and errr .... a machine to use them with.   

These are very cumbersome to use.  I can say that firsthand.
However, it is beginning to look a preferable solution.

Sue

[majm]

WARNING WARNING WARNING

Two reference numbers exactly the same as each other, but for two different people,  YES, it is possible at the NSW BDM’s new online index.  LIKELY to be stacks more of TWO reference numbers exactly the same as each other, but for two different people …. Likely to be loads and loads of stacks more actually…  (Early Church Records  )


For example 1/1840 births
TERNOUTH, Clara J, with father as Thomas and Mother as Susan 
And
JONES, Louisa, with father as Thomas and Mother as Elizabeth.

See the attached

I selected Births (but could just as well have selected deaths or marriages)
I used Registration Number 1 /1840 (but it could be valid for any low number or likely year)
I used the asterisk for the Family Name, and so on, each Name option I entered an Asterisk (as though I was looking for the FIRST entry recorded by NSW BDM  in a particular year)
I selected YES for the Date of Event Range
And then entered 1840 for both the FROM and TO option.

And, I left the “District” option blank…. 

So, those of us RChatters who use the NSW BDM online index to help others …. They have messed up their own search engine and it is now worse than it was yesterday, and worse than it was in 2011 and even worse than it was in 2008.   If you are NSW based, then perhaps an email to your State Member…. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/LA     member for  Wakehurst is listed there as the Minister for Justice, and the member for  Penrith is the Minister for Police   (NSW BDM is part of Police and Justice …. according to their website)
 

Cheers, JM

[majm]

Yes,  the Ancestry's option is better than the NSW BDM index now, particularly for 19thC ... I do so wish I still had my 16 bit floppy discs and errr .... a machine to use them with.   

These are very cumbersome to use.  I can say that firsthand.
However, it is beginning to look a preferable solution.

Sue

Yes, and I damaged some of my floppies and OH upgraded to 32bit and then 64 bit and there's no SLOT to pop them in .....