Oxfordshire Records Online?

[clairec666]

I've not got many relatives from Oxfordshire, but have managed to find most of them in Ancestry's new records - hurrah! Good work all round, and thanks OFHS.

[smudwhisk]

It seems Westcote Barton post 1813 burials are missing.   Not showing through the browse facility so its not just an issue of not being indexed.  As the OFHS have transcribed them, it would appear to be an issue with Ancestry.

What with that and the fact that many of the post 1754 Marriage Registers have been included in the 1583-1812 Parish Register collection instead of the dedicated 1754-1930 Marriage Register collection.  Typical Ancestry.

Edit - post 1837 Marriages for Westcote Barton are missing too.  Only the Banns Register is there.

Rather annoying since I don't have that many in Oxon and Westcote Barton is one of the few parishes I'm interested in. 

[coombs]

Someone once said "I doubt Anc will ever release Oxon due to OXFHS having the records". Shows that you can never trust such phrases.

My paternal gran's mum was from Oxford, moved down to Sussex then ended up in Essex and my paternal grandfather's great gran came from Oxfordshire so I will be busy.

[smudwhisk]

I've subsequently heard that the Westcote Barton post 1837 marriages and post 1813 burials haven't actually been deposited at the Oxfordshire History Centre which is why they are missing from Ancestry as they haven't been digitised.   The OFHS transcripts were apparently done by the Bartons History Group.  Disappointing for me, but explains their absence rather than it being an Ancestry screw up for a change.

[coombs]

Combe seem to not have put their records after 1705 on yet.

Most are online though it seems. I have managed to send some brickwalls flying down to the ground to dust now.

[mgeneas]

I can't find any marriages in Wardington between 1726 and 1754

[PrawnCocktail]

There is a serious problem with the earlier burials.

Those which are just a name are fine. Those which come with a relationship may not be.

If the entry reads "John Smith", you can find it. No problem.

If it reads "John son of John Smith", chances are that it's only been indexed as "John"
"Ann daughter of John Smith" or "Ann wife of John Smith" is only indexed as "Ann"

Choose a parish, and just put Ann or Mary into a burials search.

Now, that might work for some people. It doesn't for me. It means searching the burials manually for each child to make sure it didn't die, and for the mother for years.

I emailed Ancestry, and what I got back was:
"We always strive to ensure that the information we provide is accurate. Please note that we generally receive data from outside sources and post it as it was provided to us. In order to maintain authenticity in our records, we cannot make changes directly to material not created by Ancestry. To make these types of changes, you will need to contact the original creators of this data, have them correct this in their own records and then send this update to us for posting."

I had always suspected there were no quality checks.

I have already expended considerable time adding corrections to Deddington, thinking it was just Deddington, but it isn't.

[smudwhisk]

Its not just burials where they have missed off the surname.  I was looking for some baptisms in Alderton in the 1670s and 1680s and in the same situation where it said "John son of John Smith and Mary", they have left off the surname for both the child and the parents so are just indexed under first names.

I've been adding quite a few corrections too, including I think also some in Deddington.

[PrawnCocktail]

They appear, from the content of the email, to be referring this back to the OFHS, that they have to make mass corrections, and send them in for uploading? Surely that doesn't make sense?