RootsChat.Com
Census Lookups General Lookups => Census and Resource Discussion => Topic started by: dawnsh on Tuesday 03 November 15 09:38 GMT (UK)
-
I have been asked to start a new topic as my original post is now lost in the middle of a very long topic
Using the TNA reference to Search
I don't have any credits but have managed to find out who was living with my great-grandparents
Do the search for the person you do know and make a note of the reference
eg RG101/0950E/009/*
you don't need the last digits represent by the *
then if you do a blank search (no names or places) just using the reference, you ignore the RG101, the piece number (in my eg) 0950E and the item number 009
If I do this search I get a long list of people but the family I want will have sequential numbers. You have to do a free preview of all the names but you can work out who is living with whom. Just hover over the free preview button and the full reference should be displayed at the bottom left of the screen in the URL the button leads to.
(this is all dependent on the type of device you are using and the platform, I'm using a tower and windows 7, tablets and androids may display differently)
The lady that was living with my great-grandparents was listed after them.
and this from davidft
I tried this and at first it did not work. The number I tried putting in was 27561, Arggg so for anyone who doesn't pick it up the fifth digit of the piece reference is alphabetical so I should have been entereing 2756I rather than 27561 and then it does work.
-
Brilliant tip, AND I've put it to some good use ;D ;D
-
Very useful tip, thanks and I've been putting it to good use. ;)
-
You can fiddle with the results by searching for a DOB previously unknown, due to not yet getting the cert. My 2xgreat uncle's birth was registered in the Sep quarter of 1877 so I searched surname then month of birth and borough, then found it was May, and then searched from the end of May backwards and he was born 30th May 1877.
Just to expand on "fiddle with the results", it exploits the fact that exact searches on FindMyPast give no results for a "miss".
So - having searched for a someone (e.g. Nigel Bloggs in Sunderland), and got a unique hit, you can add a likely birth year. You are then likely to get no results (a miss). This means your guess of birth year was wrong. Try different birth years, until your hit comes back.
Leave the birth year filled in, and repeat the process for the month (MM)
Finally, leave the month filled in, and repeat the process for DD, and you have an accurate-to-the-day DOB, or at least as far as the person filling in the form believed.
BugBear
-
Finding an address
copied over from
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=734302.new;topicseen#new
Use the person search to find the person of interest and narrow down to one hit using the other fields. Then I put *road, *street, *lane, *avenue etc to narrow down the list of streets in the particular borough.
Then I opened a second browser window with address search. Once I had a hit on whether it was *street,*road etc. I tried to narrow down first part starting with vowels e.g *a*street, *e*street etc.
Each time I got a hit, I would mirror it on address search and narrow down my potential street list. Then try the first letter e.g A*e*street, B*e*street. The mirror list of streets will tell you if some letters aren't worth trying. Although it sounds a long process, I have found two addresses so far quite quickly. Once I'm at street level, I used Dawn's tip to match up the reference number by hovering mouse over preview button and then I get house number.
(Laptop running Windows 10)
-
I have been asked to start a new topic as my original post is now lost in the middle of a very long topic
Using the TNA reference to Search
I don't have any credits but have managed to find out who was living with my great-grandparents
Do the search for the person you do know and make a note of the reference
eg RG101/0950E/009/*
you don't need the last digits represent by the *
then if you do a blank search (no names or places) just using the reference, you ignore the RG101, the piece number (in my eg) 0950E and the item number 009
If I do this search I get a long list of people but the family I want will have sequential numbers. You have to do a free preview of all the names but you can work out who is living with whom. Just hover over the free preview button and the full reference should be displayed at the bottom left of the screen in the URL the button leads to.
(this is all dependent on the type of device you are using and the platform, I'm using a tower and windows 7, tablets and androids may display differently)
The lady that was living with my great-grandparents was listed after them.
and this from davidft
I tried this and at first it did not work. The number I tried putting in was 27561, Arggg so for anyone who doesn't pick it up the fifth digit of the piece reference is alphabetical so I should have been entereing 2756I rather than 27561 and then it does work.
As well as this when you have loaded one up, to find another person in the same household just change the web address in your browser's bar, so if the address was www.123/345/56/67 change the 67 to 66 or 68.
-
Not sure if this will be useful to others but I couldn't find my husband's paternal grandmother or her father (her mother had already died). She was Ceinwen Williams, born 1921, died 1952, so she should have been included. Her dad was William Williams ;D, born around 1886 (the 1911 census and both his marriage certificates). Had tried searching for William, 1886 +/- 2 years but there were too many.
Then did a search on all with surname Leigh in Pontypridd and up popped Beinwen ::) Leigh (Williams), and several others who'd married into the family. Opened up Beinwen's (it does look like a funny C) and the next record was for William, born 1889. Not yet tried to find his actual birth record - and it may be wrong anyway - but this was my best success yesterday. Hope this helps.
Useful topic given the popularity of the register and the difficulties and disappointments so far encountered.
-
Although this isn't a search tip, others may find it useful.
I have just found this out.
If you don't know the address of a redacted person you can't find because they are not where you thought they would be, the information is closed, and without knowing the address they were at when the register was taken, FindMyPast & TNA wouldn't be able to open the record even on production of a death cert.
-
This is a very helpful thread! I do have a sub and have used my 5 so this will be useful for further investigations :)
However I will have to print it all because my non tech mind can't remember all the hints and how to do it!
Kooky
-
Finding an address
copied over from
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=734302.new;topicseen#new
Use the person search to find the person of interest and narrow down to one hit using the other fields. Then I put *road, *street, *lane, *avenue etc to narrow down the list of streets in the particular borough.
Then I opened a second browser window with address search. Once I had a hit on whether it was *street,*road etc. I tried to narrow down first part starting with vowels e.g *a*street, *e*street etc.
Each time I got a hit, I would mirror it on address search and narrow down my potential street list. Then try the first letter e.g A*e*street, B*e*street. The mirror list of streets will tell you if some letters aren't worth trying. Although it sounds a long process, I have found two addresses so far quite quickly. Once I'm at street level, I used Dawn's tip to match up the reference number by hovering mouse over preview button and then I get house number.
(Laptop running Windows 10)
You can make the search a little faster by using "?" wildcard (a single character) as well as "*" (zero or more characters).
Example:
Having found that your target is a street, your pattern is:
*street
Working through the vowels, you find that there is at least 1 "e"
*e*street
Here's the new trick; finding the position of the first "e".
e*street (no characters before the e)
?e*street (1 characters before the e)
??e*street (2 characters before the e)
???e*street (3 characters before the e)
????e*street (4 characters before the e)
(and so on)
This is easy and quick to do, and tells you WHERE the "e" is, which should greatly reduce your list of streets.
Then look for the first letter, as per LizzieL's original method, by replacing the first "?" in the pattern you've found so far.
BugBear
-
That's great, dawnsh, I'm starting to sot out my mysterious Eileen M - she's been bugging me for a couple of years!
-
When doing a street search remember the house numaers are listed odd numers first followed by additional odd numbers, then even numbers followed by additional even numbers.
Some numbers appear more than once that is because the entry spans more that one page, for instance a nursing home which might cover two or three pages
Cheers
Guy
-
When doing a street search remember the house numaers are listed odd numers first followed by additional odd numbers, then even numbers followed by additional even numbers.
Some numbers appear more than once that is because the entry spans more that one page, for instance a nursing home which might cover two or three pages
Cheers
Guy
But if I do a street search the list is in alphabetical order of surnames, with no indication of house numbers, is this because I don't have a subscription?
Mike
-
When doing a street search remember the house numaers are listed odd numers first followed by additional odd numbers, then even numbers followed by additional even numbers.
Some numbers appear more than once that is because the entry spans more that one page, for instance a nursing home which might cover two or three pages
Cheers
Guy
But if I do a street search the list is in alphabetical order of surnames, with no indication of house numbers, is this because I don't have a subscription?
Mike
Are you sure you are doing a street search it should appear as
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01geu/
It sounds as if you are doing a name search.
Have you tried "advanced search" fill name of town such as "Leamington Spa" street as "Holly Walk" click search and you get 7 results, choose Leamington Spa, click the addresses icon and you get the street numbers
Cheers#Guy
-
Got it now, cheers, I was doing a name search without a name, which actually suited me better.
Mike
-
Thank you dawnsh for the tips on using the reference numbers.
I found Granddad but couldn't find Grandmother. My Mother married in 1940, they had given Grandmother my Mother's married name and also she was using her middle name as I know she didn't like her Christian name!!
I still can't find several who ought to be there but at this rate it's not surprising!
I should not really complain as my sub. has lapsed and I'm "freesearching".
rayard.
-
Is anyone having problems searching on the address section? I've been trying & if you want to add borough/district, it's dead. Tried searching for an obvious street, 'Oxford Street' & got zero results...can't be right :-\
Jane
-
Hi Jane
No solution but you are not alone!
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=734409.0
Seems to be an intermittent occurance, some do, some don't.
Have you tried doing a 'live chat', see the bottom of their website, under 'contact us'
-
Is anyone having problems searching on the address section? I've been trying & if you want to add borough/district, it's dead. Tried searching for an obvious street, 'Oxford Street' & got zero results...can't be right :-\
Jane
Hi Jane,
I have had it on quite a few of mine too - I've found that if you exclude 'road/street/etc'...it works fine.... I have just tried with 'Oxford' in the Street Field' and London in the Area Field and it works fine; albeit you have to select it from a list - or am I just being lucky...
Lisa
-
Thanks Dawn :)
Leeeeeese, yes, I think you're getting lucky ;)
I tried on the person search leaving everything blank except street & borough & I got a long list but I know it was the right one as grandparents were there. Just playing around really ;D
Jane
-
Thanks for starting this thread Dawn, and thanks to everyone else for the additional tips. I have found a couple of households of OH's family through just using the basic search, but I am not that keen to find out more by paying to see the entire family, so the tips will help a lot.
;D
-
Re: USING TNA Reference Number
then if you do a blank search (no names or places) just using the reference, you ignore the RG101, the piece number (in my eg) 0950E and the item number 009
As well as this when you have loaded one up, to find another person in the same household just change the web address in your browser's bar, so if the address was www.123/345/56/67 change the 67 to 66 or 68.
[/quote]
Thanks Dawn
I found this very helpful and have manged to find other people in households where I didn't know their names.
Having found one chap I went back to the general FindMyPast search and put name and year of birth in to see who he was.
Besides the usual results census, BMD etc I found an entry for him listed as being in 1939 Register, which took me back to the entry I had found in 1939 Register
So it looks as though the 1939 Register is integrated into the main search database.
This may not be "news" but I thought it was interesting and could be useful matching people up.
-
Hi all, thought I should add what just happened when I was searching. Found GG nan on the free search but couldnt see her husband. Tried the tips given here with the reference numbers etc and still no luck. So i bought a credit and clicked on the transcript which showed just GG Nan, 2 uncles and 2 hidden. I then pressed view origional and not only could I see their neighbours on the same sheet (bonus for me as a cousin was also there - sorry if this has already been stated the bit about seeing the rest in the street) but right above Nan was her husband. He was missed off the search and missed off the transcript...but there he was!
Am a bit pleased with myself now lol x
-
Just had another quick look and its totally muddled up - On transcript Nan is given grandads DOB and occupation. The son is given Nans occupation and DOB and where the son is positioned on the origional is another family member who I havent a clue who he is but HES given the sons occupation and DOB....double double double check people...its only cus I think I know this particular family in and out that I clicked the errors!
(A bonus though is that I can see who was blocked cause he may still be living even though hes long gone) x
-
My thanks to everyone for the topic and search tips :)
It has led to some interesting results for me.
sami
-
If you have access to FindMyPast and look for your rellies on the 1832-1932 Electoral Register and find their address....you can get lucky and find them if they are still at the same address in the 1939 Register.
If people are patient....Just like with the 1911 census that we had to pay for.....the price will come down after the initial rush when FindMyPast have recouped some of their outlay and got new member....then the special offers will start....and then free access for a day.
Carol
-
Re: USING TNA Reference Number
then if you do a blank search (no names or places) just using the reference, you ignore the RG101, the piece number (in my eg) 0950E and the item number 009
As well as this when you have loaded one up, to find another person in the same household just change the web address in your browser's bar, so if the address was www.123/345/56/67 change the 67 to 66 or 68.
[/i]
Thanks Dawn
I found this very helpful and have manged to find other people in households where I didn't know their names.
Having found one chap I went back to the general FindMyPast search and put name and year of birth in to see who he was.
Besides the usual results census, BMD etc I found an entry for him listed as being in 1939 Register, which took me back to the entry I had found in 1939 Register
So it looks as though the 1939 Register is integrated into the main search database.
This may not be "news" but I thought it was interesting and could be useful matching people up.
[/quote]
Seems they have removed the reference number from the preview page now
Cheers
Guy
-
It looks to me as though FindMyPast have removed the TNA reference number from the preview results
???
-
It looks to me as though FindMyPast have removed the TNA reference number from the preview results
???
However it is still in the page url
Cheers
Guy
-
So RootsChat strikes again - and the "big guns" retaliate :o :o
-
I thought it might be still in the URL but have not deciphered it
-
I thought it might be still in the URL but have not deciphered it
You need these 2 red bits of info from the browser bar (if it's visible, ie it's not on my ipad).....
http://search.findmypast.co.uk/record?id=tna%2fr39%2f7356%2f7356e%2f002%2f04
-
I thought it might be still in the URL but have not deciphered it
You need these 2 red bits of info from the browser bar (if it's visible, ie it's not on my ipad).....
http://search.findmypast.co.uk/record?id=tna%2fr39%2f7356%2f7356e%2f002%2f04
%2f is URL code for slash '/'
BugBear
-
So RootsChat strikes again - and the "big guns" retaliate :o :o
Thought they might. I've been working through my rellies as fast as possible!
BugBear
-
Me too, got a few birthdays
-
They have changed something else here though as the free basic search is now showing who else is in the household, so instead of saying "2 other more people are on this record" it is now providing the names of one other person that is there which is a help.
-
Yes I have just had two addition names shown in the preview that weren't there before.
Carol
-
Thanks Treetotal, I thought that was new, just a shame that was available from the word go but better late than never.
-
I've just posted on the 'Up & Running' thread to say that the Australian site hasn't changed. Still showing full reference on preview, and no extra names, just the number of people.
Carol
-
So RootsChat strikes again - and the "big guns" retaliate :o :o
Perhaps we shouldn't have had "if you don't have a subscription" in the thread title! ;D ;D
(Actually, all these tips are just as useful whether you have a subscription or not.)
-
On FindMyPast's facebook page, lots of people are commenting that the number has disappeared, FindMyPast's reply is that they are working on it. That said, I have just done a new search and the numbers are back for me on firefox.
There are also posts about other names showing, with internet explorer, I've checked that also and still only have one name.
-
I've just updated the other thread, but what you see may perhaps depend on whether you have logged in (or not been logged in as I know you don't have to be in order to search) yesterday evening or today. I'm logged in on IE11 and only get one name and the ref, but logged in on Firefox and get more than one name but no ref.
-
It seems, through reading various threads about the new 1939 register, that there are errors,
Yes, transcription error: ALLUM has been transcribed as ALBURN
I haven't noticed anyone requesting lookups from the 1939 register as everyone knows it is pay to view each record. Similar with Scotland's People - it is rare for anyone to request a look up as it is a credit based system.
Please, please, please, can some nice kind benefactor with credit to spare tell me the details of:
Robert C Alburn, bn 1903 district East Ham. My grandmother Florence M bn 1901 is also there!
Thank you! thank you! thank you!
The money I have saved will feed my cat for almost a week and in return I'll visit the Suffolk Records Office and do some reciprocal research.
-
Rogier
Post your request here
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=734768.0
Dawn
-
Rogier
Post your request here
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=734768.0
Dawn
Thanks Dawn, Done so with whole ref number.
-
I've just taken the plunge and used my credits to purchase the entry for my parents.
Not exactly where I expected them to be, based on my birth in 1942, but!!! Glad to see the neighbours, including Mr "Wobinson" who I put through the hoops - poor man!!! Hid his turnip seed, locked him in the shippon, etc. etc. etc. b No wonder he hid from me ;D ;D ;D
My only gripe, and not the fault of FindMyPast - the District is "Northwich" so all maps etc. are attached to Northwich, about 8 miles away - but the family lived a few miles away, and had very little to do with Northwich - my memories are of "one bus a week on market day"!!!
-
Bumble Bee .... I think you will find the RURAL DISTRICT of "Northwich" covers where your parents were in 1939. I have used the site twice. One for a linked relative born in Ceylon and the other for a linked relative born in Pennsylvania, USA.
-
Yes, Barry you are correct, Northwich Rural District, and only the name of the house or farm. There is no indication that they actually lived in the village of Little Budworth. Again, no fault of FindMyPast, it's how the Register was set up in the first instance.
-
It has been mentioned elsewhere but a list of the registration district codes can be found here
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01gg3/
The prefix of a letter Y on a card usually means that the original card was lost or stolen and replaced
-
A lot of heat and dust has been generated re the TNA references that were on the free preview, and have been removed. With all the digitised records I can think of, you only get the full reference if you are a logged-in subscriber or have paid with a PPV voucher on FindMyPast, Ancestry et all - so I was surprised that it was there at all on the free preview.
-
A lot of heat and dust has been generated re the TNA references that were on the free preview, and have been removed. With all the digitised records I can think of, you only get the full reference if you are a logged-in subscriber or have paid with a PPV voucher on FindMyPast, Ancestry et all - so I was surprised that it was there at all on the free preview.
It is still not showing for me and this is the reply from FindMyPast this morning "After checking our website, this has not been removed, could you please try again and if the issue persists please get back in touch".
Does anyone else see the reference ? - I'm a UK only subscriber.
-
I'm a UK only subscriber too. I can see the ref in IE11 but not the second person but in Firefox I can see the second person but not the ref. The only difference is that I have been logged in to FindMyPast in IE since prior to the launch and haven't logged out, but in Firefox I had to login when I tried other day. I'm also viewing for the .co.uk address.
-
Does anyone else see the reference ? - I'm a UK only subscriber.
When I bring up a preview screen the reference flashes on as the page loads then disappears within about 1 second (you have to watch closely to see it).
That happens in both Firefox and Internet Explorer.
It is easier to see if you bring the preview screen up , concentration on the section of the box where the reference appears and refresh the page image.
Cheers
Guy
-
Does anyone else see the reference ? - I'm a UK only subscriber.
When I bring up a preview screen the reference flashes on as the page loads then disappears within about 1 second (you have to watch closely to see it).
That happens in both Firefox and Internet Explorer.
It is easier to see if you bring the preview screen up , concentration on the section of the box where the reference appears and refresh the page image.
Cheers
Guy
Or print screen at the moment of refresh... :)
-
I have a UK sub., and can see the reference using Chrome, but not with IE11.
-
I'm new to RootsChat and decided to sign up after reading this thread....it's been very helpful thankyou.
I had already worked out the TNA reference myself before coming on here and yesterday found lots of details to add to my tree and could see all the reference numbers but only one person in the household at a time. Then today I tried using the *street etc tips I found on here and "poof" suddenly the reference numbers are gone and now I get two people listed instead. I'm a suspicious bugger sometimes but could using the wildcard tips have triggered this?
Looking forward to reading more on this forum.
Cheers :)
-
Hi Carole699
Welcome to Rootschat ;D
Glad you're finding the forum useful.
The 'missing' numbers and names of others in the household depends on which browser you are using.
Lots of things on social media about FindMyPast. Apparently FindMyPast have been working on something?
Dawn
-
Hi Dawn
Thanks for the welcome.
I'm using IE11, but it seems strange that it was working yesterday and today it isn't (after I started using the wildcards).
But I'm now grabbing the ref from the address bar as suggested.
Cheers
-
ref not showing in address bar for me........good job I have already searched before they removed ref............will try another browser when my tech is around to help!
-
I thought it might be still in the URL but have not deciphered it
You need these 2 red bits of info from the browser bar (if it's visible, ie it's not on my ipad).....
http://search.findmypast.co.uk/record?id=tna%2fr39%2f7356%2f7356e%2f002%2f04
Can someone please explain (in terms that someone like me who knows nothing can understand ::)) what to do with these bits of information?
I have found a family I would like more information on but all I have is one name and "one more person in the record". (I am expecting a family of 5 though 3 would be under 100 years although all are long gone.)
Am I correct in thinking that FindMyPast have now 'fixed' the loopholes which allowed manipulation of results so we could eke more out of the free index?
This is the record in question:
http://search.findmypast.com.au/record/locked?id=tna%2fr39%2f4394%2f4394e%2f007%2f30
-
Ruskie, your link took me to Georgina Wright, using the BROWSER information gives me a list of 22 people, one of whom is William Wright born 1893.
So, to find the other folk listed: Open the link you posted, look at the url in your address bar and note at the end PIECE NUMBER [4394e] and ITEM NUMBER [007].
Go to the ADVANCED SEARCH page, scroll down to TNA REFERENCE and enter piece and item numbers in the relevant boxes...........not forgetting the LETTER after the piece numbers, in your example it's 'E'. Enter ONLY piece and item numbers and NOTHING else
-
if you put the url you quote back into FindMyPast and do the search you get Georgina born 1891 in the Wright household
if you change the last number in the url from f30 to f29 you get William Wright born 1893
change the number to f28 and you are now in the Moss Household
going up from f30 to f31, that record is redacted so you don't see the name of the household
f32 is in the same household as the redacted one and Bartley shows up as this persons surname
-
I put this in another thread but it may help people on this thread who may have missed it. It is also helpful for people without a subscription! :)
For missing people it could be a good idea to put the forename in the surname box and the surname in the forename box. So instead of John Smith try Smith John.
I finally found one of my relatives who had this happen to him although strangely he's the only one with the reference (33 who's visible) who's had this happen to him. :o
Although to make it worse his surname, which is now his forename, is spelled wrong as well! ;D
-
Can I make a request that everyone who uses the reference number to locate a family on the 1939 National Registration purchase an image of the family, if it is the correct one they are searching for.
If they do they will help not only themselves and current family historians or genealogists but future ones as well.
Why do I say this, they help themselves as the images carry additional information that has not been transcribed.
They help future genealogists by encouraging big companies to invest millions in high risk digitisation of records, if these companies do not see a return they will not take the risk in future.
At present only Findmypast is taking the risk in digitising these huge databases, companies such as Ancestry sit back until all the hard work and risk has been taken then cream off the profits when the records are licenced relatively cheaply.
Companies will only invest if they can justify the investment to their shareholders, if they cannot do that we will not see the benefit in the future of new records to research on line.
Cheers
Guy
-
Libby and Dawn - thank you both very much for the help with my query. :)
-
Interesting post on Chris Paton's Blog about the disappearing TNA Ref on the preview screen - http://britishgenes.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/1939-national-identity-register-terms.html
-
Well I think I've found my grandmother using the free search - she's not where I expected but someone with the same name & middle initial as my grandfather is listed in the same household so it seems possible.
As suggested, I tried putting surname in the first name box - no luck. But Cecilia Emma (only ever known as Cissy or Cis to my knowledge even on censuses) turns out to be listed as Emma C.
Presumably Grandad filled in the form......... ::)
-
Guy makes an important point (below). Neither HM Government nor Findmypast are under any obligation to digitise and transcribe recordsets like these. It has to be worth their while.
I found it interesting to read the tender document (http://www.government-online.net/scanning-tender-for-national-archives/): TNA's/HMG's liability/commitment extended only to making available a "secure location" for scanning, while everything else was carried out (to TNA's specifications) at the risk and cost of FindMyPast. From that tender document, it also looks like FindMyPast pays TNA royalties for use of the Register.
If FindMyPast don't see much of a return on their investment, then will they risk doing it again?
I'd also guess that the sooner FindMyPast have recovered a certain proportion of their costs, the sooner the Register will be included in subscriptions, which is when we can start looking up those niggling outer branches on our family trees that it's not worth spending money on, but it's nice to complete.
Yes, it costs money - that can't be denied. And the 1939 Register isn't cheap. But it's cheaper than the £25 FOI requests you used to have to make to get information from the Register, and it could probably be argued that if it weren't for all those people submitting FOI requests re the Register, the Government wouldn't have been spurred into action, in putting its digitization and publication out to tender in the first place.
Can I make a request that everyone who uses the reference number to locate a family on the 1939 National Registration purchase an image of the family, if it is the correct one they are searching for.
If they do they will help not only themselves and current family historians or genealogists but future ones as well.
Why do I say this, they help themselves as the images carry additional information that has not been transcribed.
They help future genealogists by encouraging big companies to invest millions in high risk digitisation of records, if these companies do not see a return they will not take the risk in future.
At present only Findmypast is taking the risk in digitising these huge databases, companies such as Ancestry sit back until all the hard work and risk has been taken then cream off the profits when the records are licenced relatively cheaply.
Companies will only invest if they can justify the investment to their shareholders, if they cannot do that we will not see the benefit in the future of new records to research on line.
Cheers
Guy
-
Well I did the free bit and thought to myself "You don't get owt for nowt Frank" and purchased on household with who I suspected had a bit of a brick wall of mine in it ..................................
BINGO!!
There he was with his full date of birth, 10 minutes later I have his death which confirmed it for me and another 10 minutes and his birth certificate is ordered from the GRO which will give me his parents, ;D ;D ;D
Worth every penny ;)
Frank.
-
I bought 2 records under the old system provided by the 1939 Register Team. I may get some images from FindMyPast at some point in the future. Sorry Guy I understand what you're saying but I don't feel obliged to buy to support future projects. I'm a former FindMyPast subscriber and they've had a lot of money from me in the past.
Blue
-
I too, have just unlocked two more households - my grandparents. One set lived in a small village in Cheshire, and it was interesting to see a number of the neighbours. Of the 13 households (44 persons), I can see 4 ARP Wardens, 1 special constable (Gamekeeper and Estate Rabbit Catcher :)), a WVS lady, a Red Cross Nurse and a member of the Observer Corps.
My other grandmother lived in Halifax, not quite so interesting for me as I do not recognise any of the neighbours, although I see that my grandmother had a lodger. I'm sure that I recognise the lodger's name - just now need to find electoral rolls for Boston Spa in the 1950s, to confirm that my memory isn't playing tricks on me. :o
-
The other day I had a quick look at the register and, using the tip read on here, also managed to find others in the same house. The tip was to use the piece and item numbers from the Reference number. However, today I tried this again and although I can find someone on the initial search page, when I go to the preview the registration number is not shown. What am I doing wrong?
-
It got removed it's been discussed in various threads. You will still find it in the URL at the top of the page and it still works okay on the search.
Blue
-
Thanks Blue70 - ah yes I see now! I hadn't read those posts so hadn't realised - I had just been doing what had worked perfectly the other day thank you for pointing me in the right direction.
-
I bought 2 records under the old system provided by the 1939 Register Team. I may get some images from FindMyPast at some point in the future. Sorry Guy I understand what you're saying but I don't feel obliged to buy to support future projects. I'm a former FindMyPast subscriber and they've had a lot of money from me in the past.
Blue
Have you ever been annoyed when a web site you subscribe to has slowed down because an online provider has a "free weekend" when non subscribers can access the site for free?
That in effect is what the use of reference numbers was doing to the 1939 servers. The result was more costs due to having to provide extra capacity to cope with unforseen demands. Which in turn means subscribers having to pay more.
The more costs also mean a longer period of charges for the dataset before it is added to the subscription site.
All in all it is for your benefit in the long term.
Cheers
Guy
-
I bought 2 records under the old system provided by the 1939 Register Team. I may get some images from FindMyPast at some point in the future. Sorry Guy I understand what you're saying but I don't feel obliged to buy to support future projects. I'm a former FindMyPast subscriber and they've had a lot of money from me in the past.
Blue
Have you ever been annoyed when a web site you subscribe to has slowed down because an online provider has a "free weekend" when non subscribers can access the site for free?
That in effect is what the use of reference numbers was doing to the 1939 servers. The result was more costs due to having to provide extra capacity to cope with unforseen demands. Which in turn means subscribers having to pay more.
The more costs also mean a longer period of charges for the dataset before it is added to the subscription site.
All in all it is for your benefit in the long term.
Cheers
Guy
There was always going to be a lot of activity early on after the release of the 1939 Register on the site. I don't really think you should be judgemental about how other people use genealogical sites.
Blue
-
There was always going to be a lot of activity early on after the release of the 1939 Register on the site. I don't really think you should be judgemental about how other people use genealogical sites.
Blue
I was not being judgemental I was providing a reason for the removal of something that could cause extra expense for subscribers.
I could have used a different comparison but I chose not to as that one would have caused offence to many.
I am trying to make people realise that sometimes things are done which though they may be seen as trivial or annoying at first may have benefits in the long term for all.
Cheers
Guy
-
Thank you Guy for giving us the other side of the story, made me think how much I spent on the 1911 when it came out and how excited I was to get answers...........I had thought oh I know where the family were in 1939 even found some on Electoral rolls, so anyway having a 25% discount as a subscriber I bit the bullet and bought some credits and surprize first 2 I unlocked where not where I expected them to be!! and although I had always known my mum to be a photographic printer I thought from school her she was in 1939 down as a dental operator!
I must admit to a little disappointment at the newspaper, photos and other bits but I am glad I have had a look.
Sandie
-
It got removed it's been discussed in various threads. You will still find it in the URL at the top of the page and it still works okay on the search.
Blue
Disappointed that the URLs on searches have been changed so that they no longer contain the piece and item number, nor do they appear as a quick flash when you first see the search results page. Unless someone has found a way to interpret the new URL.
i'm saddened because this was the only way that worked for me - so many of mine are missing (presumed badly transcribed with lots of ??s, or in some cases simply not there). Nor are address searches working for me (in villages road names seem not to be used). I'd provisionally located a number of people I meant to look up later, but stupidly never wrote down the piece and item number, so now they're still confusable with people of the same name.
Are FindMyPast deliberately doing this to make searches more difficult? Any ideas?
-
chris_49 - FindMyPast are well within their right to change the way the search works, in my opinion. Allowing free searches is a way to entice people to buy credits, not as a means of free information. They've got to make money, after all! However they've got to provide enough information for people to be sure they've got the right household, otherwise people will be reluctant to spend their credits.
Anyway, that's just the way I see it...
EDIT
Sorry, didn't mean to sound ranty. I've been finding out loads of information from the free searches, and haven't bought any credits (yet). But I don't begrudge FindMyPast for needing to cover the extensive costs of hosting the register.
-
chris_49 - FindMyPast are well within their right to change the way the search works, in my opinion. Allowing free searches is a way to entice people to buy credits, not as a means of free information. They've got to make money, after all! However they've got to provide enough information for people to be sure they've got the right household, otherwise people will be reluctant to spend their credits.
Anyway, that's just the way I see it...
I agree. The free information gained ? When searching with the reference number you got a list of presumably all the people on that page, neighbours, family members, others living in the household who are not redacted. I don't really see that as free information. In some cases with my family I have several men whose wives I have no name for. I was working on checking say a Fred Bloggs married to Jane via freebmd in order to confirm the right Fred before spending money. I can't do that now so won't be spending any money on guesswork.
I can however see that if (and in nearly all cases I don't) you know the address and the names of the people who ought to be living in a particular household the only information gained by paying to view the image would be someone's occupation :-\
FindMyPast have removed the reference numbers and we'll just have to lump it! :(
-
I think they have shot themselves in the foot by removing the references for the URL.
I have purchased the batch of five households using the 25% discount for use on the most important households, and was debating whether to get another five for the next tranche of households. However, now with even less information available to confirm the correct households and avoid wasting money, I will pass for however long it takes to become part of the sub (whether that be a year or two, they aren't going anywhere). I simply cannot justify any more money on a vague punt on maybe getting the correct household just to get very little new information - over the five I have unlocked, I have one unexpected address and three "new" DoBs, two of which are false!! Even things I was expecting to see (known changes of address during the war) are not featured, so all-in-all not a good return for my almost £19, and that is when I KNOW I have the correct record.
-
I didn't mention the word free. These refs were the only way I could find anyone. I intend to buy credits as soon as they find my mother (email sent, no proper reply) whose entire hamlet is missing - gap in the item numbers was my only real proof of this, since all address search attempts failed. I'm reluctant to waste credits on families I'm not sure of (the common surnames in Wales are a bugbear).
If they offered to unlock another record if you got the wrong one, that would help - but I suppose people would abuse that, too.
Any thoughts on my original question?
-
suey - another way of using the free search is to use the "other household member" fields, then you'll know exactly who's in the same house. Doesn't work so well with common surnames, obviously. This might help you with your unknown wives.
Sounds like I'm going against my own morals here... ;)
chris_49 - sorry I didn't mean to make accusations. I think FindMyPast are altering the free search to cut down on abuse, but this makes it less likely for honest users to find who they're looking for. Maybe they could offer a simpler search for users who haven't bought credits, and a more extensive search for those who have, so that they don't spend credits on the wrong household. Just a thought...
-
I agree, this change is going to make it less likely for people to buy more credits if they can't be sure they have the right person.
I have been searching for a William Baker born 28 July 1894. None have the right exact birth date, but searching just on 1894 comes up with a couple of pages of Williams in 1894 and a lot more who have no birth year listed. His middle name was Arthur, but there is only one William A Baker born in 1894 but he has the wrong wife. It is now going to be impossible to try and find the right William, so not going to waste any more time or money on it.
-
Yes I've tried "other household member" with little success unless the surnames were rarer. In fact I've tried every field. In urban areas, street usually means street, but in rural areas the settlement name can come up there instead, and street names ignored. You might get addresses like 33 Little Walsingham. (My favourite is 1 Stank, near Barrow. Well, I know bathrooms were rare then!)
I think there needs to be some compromise here. I balk at the £25 fee to unredact someone - surely the army of family historians are doing FindMyPast a favour by enlarging the database, correcting mistranscriptions, all for free. (I accept transcribers can only record what they see).
For the 1911 I bought credits for near relatives, then a subscription when it was available. But my impression, so far, was that this census was much better transcribed - probably because they were reading householders careful neat handwriting rather than some overworked clerk's efforts.
-
Does the 'occupation' field help?
Example: my grandad was a bricklayer. If I enter that as his occupation, he's there. If I enter 'plumber', he's not there.
Carol
-
suey - another way of using the free search is to use the "other household member" fields, then you'll know exactly who's in the same house. Doesn't work so well with common surnames, obviously. This might help you with your unknown wives.
Useful tip, thank you :D It's long work though with common names, never mind, it'll keep me out of mischief for a while ;D
I too appear to have a street missing. :-\
-
I'm really struggling, so don't think I will find enough households to benefit from their members discounts.
For instance, I can't even find my Mum at all.
Is it possible that she could have already have been away in the ATS by the time of the register?
May have found some of her family but can't be sure.
Currently more likely to give up my membership than add to it.
Similar problem's with Dad's family. Nowhere with enough of them together to have any confidence that I have found a record of actual family,
-
Apart from the advanced search options, such as occupation which CarolA3 mentioned, and the free preview now gives the name of another person in the household (assuming that there is one), which wasn't included before.
-
Apart from the advanced search options, such as occupation which CarolA3 mentioned, and the free preview now gives the name of another person in the household (assuming that there is one), which wasn't included before.
Well, sometimes. At home, I get the extra person (the HoH, unless your search is for the HoH, when you get person number 2.) But if I'm on at the library, that doesn't happen. Go figure.
Also some mystifying households. One has a man born 1931, who died before 1991, plus five redacted. If these are his 5 known siblings, the oldest was 12 in 1939! Their parents, born in the 1900s, are not found there or anywhere! It's only because I had piece and item number that I found that Granny and their youngest aunt are very near, that I made any sense of it. Paying to open the first-named household would tell me almost nothing.
-
Bear in mind that if the year of birth has been mistranscribed, there will be redacted records which shouldn't be redacted, and vice versa. This would make some households appear confusing!
-
Bear in mind that if the year of birth has been mistranscribed, there will be redacted records which shouldn't be redacted, and vice versa. This would make some households appear confusing!
My aunt is mistranscribed in that it shows her year of birth as 1860, but strangely with the correct day and month. When I saw her earlier in the year she was looking good for 155 ;D
Thankfully though, this meant she was not redacted from the index, which meant I could identify where she, my Nan (mistranscribed name) and my Dad (redacted) were evacuated to - it had my aunt's name and her later married name. Having bought the image, I found the 1860 date was for the person below, from the next household. Also, in the image, my aunt was correctly redacted.
-
On address searches, I've seen 'Off High Street' and 'Back of High Street' - guaranteed to mislead those looking for just plain High Street.
In Liverpool CB there's 'Woolton R', 'Woolton Road', 'Woolton Road, Liverpool' and 'Woolton Road, Lpool'. All the same road.
I now put * before and after my search terms :)
Carol (not getting second person's name) >:(
-
My aunt is mistranscribed in that it shows her year of birth as 1860, but strangely with the correct day and month. When I saw her earlier in the year she was looking good for 155 ;D
Haha, that's brilliant! I've found a few mistranscribed years, but nothing this extreme!
-
I'm getting a second person now on the previews whether signed in or not. I suppose it's FindMyPast's way of making up for what they took away. Good cop/bad cop ;D
Blue
-
Disappointed that the URLs on searches have been changed so that they no longer contain the piece and item number, nor do they appear as a quick flash when you first see the search results page. Unless someone has found a way to interpret the new URL.
snip
Are FindMyPast deliberately doing this to make searches more difficult? Any ideas?
No they are not doing it to make searches more difficult.
In my opinion they are doing it because people have been bragging on the forums and mailing lists that they were using the reference number to get the information without having to purchase the images.
If you need to blame someone blame those freeloaders.
They are the people causing the problems, don't forget if FindMyPast software writers were not having to find ways to stop that kind of activity they could be writing programs to reconcile deaths with the redacted entries on the register and other similar useful work.
You can still use the reference number just purchase an image.
How come nobody is complaining when the get two pages of images for the price of one when a household stretches over two pages.
We recently had a thread on Rootschat about saying thanks seems many apply double standards in their lives.
As I have mentioned before all the work Findmypast have put in to digitising the 1939 National Register provides you the current family historian with a useful source which will still be useful to our descendants.
In addition All the work they have put in will also benefit their rivals in the future when they are allowed to licence the dataset, again benefiting you.
Finally if you want to view the dataset free visit the National Archives and there you can view the digital transcriptions and images provided by Findmypast without purchasing a single one.
Cheers
Guy
-
maybe we could play TNA reference number bingo?
Take a random 4 digit number and add a letter to the end and then take a random 3 digit number greater than 002, out them into the TNA ref boxes of an advanced person search and see what happens?
3000a 002 = Wallsend
3400a 002 = Halifax
-
I wouldn't object to buying the household image for my grandmother, but having seen the page at TNA the header at the top of the page is cropped off so I don't know the name of the village. She lives in a cottage without a street name. I've been told by FindMyPast the page before hers also has no street names. All I know is she is in Winslow RD.
I've been in correspondance directly with FindMyPast since last Thursday and they are still unable to tell me where she was.
-
Guy, the question was sort of rhetorical. Maybe I've been unlucky in not finding so many of mine via the conventional searches. But I like Claire's idea of revealing the piece numbers to people who've actually paid up, sadly I think that'd be difficult to implement. I'm just mad at myself for not noting down full details of searches for people I (thought I) had found.
-
dawnsh - I don't think that villages are named - full stop. I have opened records for one set of grandparents, and my parents - both living in the same village. The heading is perfectly clear and just shows the Borough, UD or RD. There is no indication anywhere on the page as to the name of the village. My grandparents are shown as living at "The Post Office, Village". My parents are shown as living at "Meadowholme".
-
But I've seen the image for my greatgrandafther and he is living in the village of Steventon, Abingdon RD
(BTW I've just had a reply from FindMyPast confirming what you've written.
I've asked them to scroll through the previous pages until the name of the village can be found.
There isn't a scroll page facility at TNA)
-
Northwich 447 might tie up with someone in the 1911 census still living a the same address in 1939
-
I was just saying that for the two images I have opened, for my grandparents and parents, there is no indication on either page that the "Village" is in fact Little Budworth. Addresses are given merely as the name of a house or farm, and occasionally the added name of a Lane.
Yes, you're quite right that the Registration District number is the same - BUT neither my parents nor my grandparents were living in the village in 1911 - they were all in Halifax.
-
Exactly the same situation with my grandmothe's entry.
so if you didn't know they were in Little Budworth, how would you find out?
-
I'll probably buy one of these records at some point in the near future. I've already got two transcripts from HSCIC 1939 Register Team. One 'uncle evacuee' is redacted on the FindMyPast version so I'm not tackling that one. The other 'Manx-born' one is transcribed on FindMyPast with the name spelt wrong, will that spelling appear anywhere on the image? If it does it'll be annoying. I'm thinking of getting other great grandparents, the great grandfather being of interest as his birth was not registered although he was born in England. It'll be good to have something with his date of birth on and as a good freesearcher I know that the birth date we thought was right for him is on the 1939 Register record.
Blue
-
Bear in mind that if the year of birth has been mistranscribed, there will be redacted records which shouldn't be redacted, and vice versa. This would make some households appear confusing!
I couldn't find my grandmother, so I put in her date of birth. She still didn't appear in the search results, but her son did. He was born in the 1920s, and died after 1991, so he shouldn't show up. Looks like their birthdates got transposed.
I'm not getting the second name now, although I did for a little while a couple of days back.
It's really not worth my while pursuing this now, it's too difficult to find people and all too often the ones I want to know about will be redacted, even though they are long dead.
So FindMyPast won't be getting any of my money.
-
dawnsh - I don't think that villages are named - full stop. I have opened records for one set of grandparents, and my parents - both living in the same village. The heading is perfectly clear and just shows the Borough, UD or RD. There is no indication anywhere on the page as to the name of the village. My grandparents are shown as living at "The Post Office, Village". My parents are shown as living at "Meadowholme".
I find this - put in Cubbington and all you get is people on Cubbington Road in Leamington/Lillington. Put in Offchurch and you just get households on Offchurch Road in Cubbington! For a common name for a village road, like High Road, or for a long road like the Welsh Road (which goes through three counties) it's a nightmare.
I think the rule, if there is one, is that villages aren't named but hamlets are (sometimes by using the street box).
-
The discussion on FindMyPast's pricing structure has been moved here
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=735597.0
Please remember this topic is for hints and tips.
-
No reply button comes up on that new thread, is it locked now and we can no longer contribute to the pricing structure debate?.
I am logged in otherwise I wouldn't be able to post here
-
sorry, it's been locked by Administration.
-
ok, without jumping up and down and making a big noise, has anyone found any random name in the 1939 census, clicked on the 'preview' button, clicked on 'update the record', clicked on 'close an open' record and looked at the top of the screen?
sshhhhh!
-
ok, without jumping up and down and making a big noise, has anyone found any random name in the 1939 census, clicked on the 'preview' button, clicked on 'update the record', clicked on 'close an open' record and looked at the top of the screen?
sshhhhh!
Errr nope ;D
-
ok, without jumping up and down and making a big noise, has anyone found any random name in the 1939 census, clicked on the 'preview' button, clicked on 'update the record', clicked on 'close an open' record and looked at the top of the screen?
sshhhhh!
;D
Blue
-
ok, without jumping up and down and making a big noise, has anyone found any random name in the 1939 census, clicked on the 'preview' button, clicked on 'update the record', clicked on 'close an open' record and looked at the top of the screen?
sshhhhh!
Errr nope ;D
Have sent you a pm....
-
Dawn asked if we had done that and I replied no ,cos I haven't.
I'm not even sure why I would need to?
I only got a 10% offer (not 25% as a lot seem to have done) from Find My Past,despite having world membership for years.
I have now paid nearly £50 (2 lots of £24-95) but I have found both sets of grandparents and one for a friend.
I'm quite happy ,as it would have cost me loads to spend the £42 to get it from the NHS (and I didn't know where some of them were living) Also going down to Kew would have cost loads too.
Carol
-
ok, without jumping up and down and making a big noise, has anyone found clicked on screen?
sshhhhh!
well that will be that avenue closed within the week ::)
-
After waiting a week to get a response from FindMyPast re a missing street & the ref number issue & then having to prompt them for a response...I received the following last night. Oh & they've asked which street too, so it will be interesting to see if they respond to that next.
"With regards to the reference number, we’re continuing to refine several aspects of the Register, and the relocation of The National Archives’ reference numbers is part of that process. The National Archives approved removal of reference numbers from the preview of locked or unlocked records, URLs and search results to ensure protection of Findmypast's intellectual property rights."
Cheers
Carole
-
that's a stock reply and has been used a few times on their FB page. ::)
-
So wanted to try your tip dawnsh, but it appears FindMyPast have removed the reference numbers. Would have been such a blessing as our rate of exchange is fiendishly high, it makes purchasing credits well nigh inaccessible. About R115 for one access - and from what I have been reading things are not very straightforward, one is likely not to find what you are looking for anyway.
Bit off when we subscribe anyway.
Ceeoh
-
have you seen reply #111?
-
:) Thank you
-
Thought they had closed that loophole
-
Hi Carole699
I am also experiencing delayed responses, eventually (several days) followed by a question to which they should have an answer already.
I feel that I am giving them more information than they are giving me, at a consideral cost.
-
have you seen reply #111?
Looks like they've closed that loophole too :(
The search form has changed too, so you can't use the "Other Household Member" any more. I've found a way around this, but if I write it here, it'll be gone in days ;D
-
looks like you now have to unlock and view the record to confirm the errors before you can apply for a correction
and the 'missing' other household member feature is a temporary one, the technical team are working on it!
-
and the 'missing' other household member feature is a temporary one, the technical team are working on it!
I thought maybe they'd removed that bit because it was giving away too much information for free! With uncommon names, you could work out exactly who was in the same house as each other, without even looking at the free preview.
-
they said the missing ref no was temporary and the technical team were looking into it!! ::)
-
Am I imagining this? or have I seen a link to a list identifying the location of piece numbers?
-
I posted a link to the 1911 census and the piece numbers which can in a lot of places tie up with details found on the 1939 schedules at the top of the pages
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/browse/r/h/C13339
click on the county, then select a district and then look for the area you are interested in.
-
Thanks dawnsh
-
The catalogue reference for the 1939 Register is RG 101
http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C14663902
and it contains more than 660 thousand pieces because the 1939 enumeration districts are much smaller than they would be in a census. They are based on local authority boundaries which may differ from registration districts. It is easier to get your bearings if you use it in conjunction with the list of area codes on the FindMyPast site, which they have listed both alphabetically by area code, and also geographically.
http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/1939-register-enumeration-districts?_ga=1.229684824.551440129.1437955750
-
The link I posted is particularly useful for rural areas where the name of the village is not shown at the top of the 1939 page.
My grandmother is in Buckinghmshire, Winslow district ref 147/3, using TNA link I've established she is in Whaddon
RG 14/7955 1911 Registration Sub-District: Winslow Civil Parish, Township or Place: Whaddon RD 147 RS 1 ED 3
She lives in a cottage, without a street name.
-
Hi all,
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but I recently attended one of FindMyPast talks on the 1939 Register. We were told the reason this RG reference number was removed was because they became aware that data was being 'harvested' in bulk and that CD's were beginning to appear for sale on the internet with 1939 information. We were also told that there is continual weekly updating going on and it also sounds like others in the household (apart from those redacted) will start to appear when you are looking at a household
CD
-
Hello
Is it still possible to search using these tips, as I can't find any reference number ???
Thanks
I have been asked to start a new topic as my original post is now lost in the middle of a very long topic
Using the TNA reference to Search
I don't have any credits but have managed to find out who was living with my great-grandparents
Do the search for the person you do know and make a note of the reference
eg RG101/0950E/009/*
you don't need the last digits represent by the *
then if you do a blank search (no names or places) just using the reference, you ignore the RG101, the piece number (in my eg) 0950E and the item number 009
If I do this search I get a long list of people but the family I want will have sequential numbers. You have to do a free preview of all the names but you can work out who is living with whom. Just hover over the free preview button and the full reference should be displayed at the bottom left of the screen in the URL the button leads to.
(this is all dependent on the type of device you are using and the platform, I'm using a tower and windows 7, tablets and androids may display differently)
The lady that was living with my great-grandparents was listed after them.
and this from davidft
I tried this and at first it did not work. The number I tried putting in was 27561, Arggg so for anyone who doesn't pick it up the fifth digit of the piece reference is alphabetical so I should have been entereing 2756I rather than 27561 and then it does work.
Just seen the above post looks like reference numbers have been removed, please can any one confirm. Thanks
-
You now only get the reference number after you have paid to view the image.
Are you a yearly subscriber? If so images will be included in your subscription after 16th February, only one catch you need to click auto renew on your subscription, although the e mail I had tells me that my subscription has been frozen and I also have a 10% discount on my next sub. I will pay £89.55 as opposed to all new subscribers who will have to pay the new sub of £119.95.
I guess someone has to pay to cover the costs which have not been met via pay per view...
Anyone using the monthly or six monthly subscription option won't get the 1939 Register :(
-
Thanks Suey, for explaining that, hopefully it will be on the library edition a bit later.
-
Unless you're searching for people with very common names, you can enter the location and name of person in the same household, and by process of elimination you should be able to work out who's living in the same house. Same thing works on 1841-1911 censuses.
-
Without reading all 16 pages of this thread are the search tips all still valid?
I never had any compelling need to search this register especially at that high price but now its going to be available as part of a subscription I would like to look out of curiosity. I can see both sets of my grandparents but no children as they are all locked as some are still alive and I don't have death certificates for those who have died.
-
If you're going to qualify for the 1939 being inclusive in your package, you're not going to need most of the tips - they were mainly used to pinpoint records and their associated household without being forced to unlock the wrong record. With the lookups being included you can click and look at them at you heart's content, as many as you like
You still won't be unable to unlock the unopened records though without going through the proper process and I don't think there were any tips around that
-
Thank you Stevie, the light bulb just came on duh!!! :D
-
Even with free access for annual subscribers in a few weeks time, the tips on this thread will certainly save time in locating the right record. And trying different ways to search if a record appears to missing at first.
-
I just couldn't work out who "1 more person are on this record" was.
I tried searching for possible surnames with no luck.
So I searched on the STREET, the person I knew was there in OTHER HOUSEHOLD MEMBER and entered the BIRTH YEAR as 1900 -/+ 40yrs. Lo and behold all members of the household appear, without even hitting preview ;D
-
I was trying to find Mother in law with no luck ....so I tried father in law and then found reason I couldn't find MinL the black redacting line they put through child was crooked and her name was covered!! so try different members if one is missing never know what you will find!