1
The Common Room / Re: Genealogical term
« on: Thursday 25 January 24 06:10 GMT (UK) »Is there a genealogical term for this? if not, what term would you use to describe it?
I think the term is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_collapse.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I think the term is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_collapse.
2
The Common Room / Re: Researching a beautiful london Actress... and failing
« on: Tuesday 16 January 24 06:11 GMT (UK) »Can't see this entry on the GRO unfortunately to try to confirm mother's maiden name.
Indexed as male rather than female:
Name: Mother's Maiden Surname:
JAMES, ELIZABETH SMITH
GRO Reference: 1890 S Quarter in ST GILES Volume 01B Page 625
3
The Common Room / Re: 3-Month Ancestry.com Subscription for $1
« on: Monday 29 May 23 10:14 BST (UK) »
Thank you! I'm also UK-based, had no problems using that link.
There's a post in the Reddit thread suggesting that it only works if you signed up at .com in the first place (rather than .co.uk, for example). I don't remember doing that, but it's possible.
There's a post in the Reddit thread suggesting that it only works if you signed up at .com in the first place (rather than .co.uk, for example). I don't remember doing that, but it's possible.
4
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Zita , burial, understanding the information.
« on: Wednesday 27 April 22 17:29 BST (UK) »
From a long-standing association with that particular part of London, I can tell you that Leverton & Sons is still in business in Euston, at 212 Eversholt St, London, NW1 1BD.
5
Derry (Londonderry) / Re: Derry City Cemetery Records Project
« on: Monday 04 April 22 08:00 BST (UK) »
It's working for me too.
Similar results with traceroute. All this means is that the trace has reached a system - either an individual router or a whole network - that is configured to pass traffic but not to respond to traceroute queries. This doesn't imply a problem with the website.
If your browser has a private/incognito mode, try using that (in case it's a cache/cookie issue). If you can disable browser add-ons/extensions, try that (in case it's an extension issue). If you can test with a different browser, try that too (in case it's a browser issue).
Good luck!
Similar results with traceroute. All this means is that the trace has reached a system - either an individual router or a whole network - that is configured to pass traffic but not to respond to traceroute queries. This doesn't imply a problem with the website.
If your browser has a private/incognito mode, try using that (in case it's a cache/cookie issue). If you can disable browser add-ons/extensions, try that (in case it's an extension issue). If you can test with a different browser, try that too (in case it's a browser issue).
Good luck!
6
New Zealand Completed Requests / Re: Rangitikei Cemetery Database- "Forbidden"
« on: Tuesday 25 January 22 06:13 GMT (UK) »Working for me now too. Just odd that the word "Forbidden" was used.
It's a standard error message from the Apache web server software. Agreed, it's not very (end-)user friendly, as it's highlighting a specific technical problem. Its target is really the developer of the web page, rather than the cemetery database user.
7
Census and Resource Discussion / Re: 1939 Register - Annotations and What They Mean?
« on: Friday 15 October 21 18:57 BST (UK) »I have Microsoft Office, which is why I could quote from it.
Naturally. You couldn't provide the link, so I posted it to help out with source attribution
8
Census and Resource Discussion / Re: 1939 Register - Annotations and What They Mean?
« on: Friday 15 October 21 17:25 BST (UK) »From a piece in FamilySearch - link only opens in word so can't give the link
You'll need something that understands .docx files once you've downloaded it, of course, but this is the link:
https://familysearch.brightspotcdn.com/7a/0e/c8cf0edd4729b4cd56309ada9c29/1939-register-handout.docx
9
The Common Room / Re: genealogy websites uk
« on: Monday 06 September 21 18:17 BST (UK) »
FindMyPast has added this feature since I let my subscription lapse, so I can't vouch for it. But in general I have preferred FindMyPast to other sites and I find its search functionality much more to my taste. It seems to allow greater precision, whereas Ancestry returns anything and everything to get you excited. (And sometimes that has its place and is very useful too.)
I've ended up relying on Ancestry for several reasons: lack of funds and availability via my library while I was unemployed, ongoing library availability at home during lockdown, lack of time since resuming work to kick-start my research in a way that might justify a FindMyPast renewal.
In short: I like FindMyPast, but don't know if their public trees feature is any good. (I suspect it might be that - rather like Facebook and YouTube in their respective fields - Ancestry has gained critical mass and nothing else will ever be able to approach it in terms of breadth and mass acceptance, but I'd love to be proved wrong.)
I kind-of agree with KGarrad, but with reservations. I've seen so much poor quality research in other people's trees, but sometimes, perversely, that has been useful. And occasionally I see detailed but unattributed stuff that could probably only have been obtained from primary sources (certificates, family bibles, etc) that I will accept as 'possibly true' with the caveat that one day I have to identify the source myself.
I've ended up relying on Ancestry for several reasons: lack of funds and availability via my library while I was unemployed, ongoing library availability at home during lockdown, lack of time since resuming work to kick-start my research in a way that might justify a FindMyPast renewal.
In short: I like FindMyPast, but don't know if their public trees feature is any good. (I suspect it might be that - rather like Facebook and YouTube in their respective fields - Ancestry has gained critical mass and nothing else will ever be able to approach it in terms of breadth and mass acceptance, but I'd love to be proved wrong.)
I kind-of agree with KGarrad, but with reservations. I've seen so much poor quality research in other people's trees, but sometimes, perversely, that has been useful. And occasionally I see detailed but unattributed stuff that could probably only have been obtained from primary sources (certificates, family bibles, etc) that I will accept as 'possibly true' with the caveat that one day I have to identify the source myself.