GRO indexes on gro.gov.uk !

[Nick_Ips]

I agree with John. I don't think there have been many negative comments, and those that have are generally constructive in their criticism. Feedback on what doesn't work well not only helps the GRO (if they see it), it also helps people on Rootschat who may be having similar difficulties.

For example, I've just been looking for this record from FreeBMD and confirmed from the original GRO index:
Births Dec 1840   Levett    Elizabeth Sarah        Stow    12   378

On the GRO site, an exact search on 'Levett' '1840' 'Dec' & '12' gives no results.

Changing to "Phonetically sounding variations" gives 250+ results on 5 pages, none of which match the FreeBMD result.

Changing to "Similar sounding variations" gives 19 results, one of which is a "LOVETT", which appears to match the FreeBMD result.

It took me about 20 searches to get this answer. Given that many people currently searching will already have Year, Q, Volume, Page (or can quickly get it from FreeBMD) the demand on the website could be reduced by allowing a search with just these 4 details, rather than requiring a surname and gender.

So whilst I think having the new data on a new free site is great, I do feel it isn't unreasonable to constructively comment that the objective of managing load on the site could be better achieved by removing the current 'required' fields if alternative 'known' data is supplied. This would be a better approach than users having to use the name 'variations' options, which others have commented are far slower (i.e. more demanding).

Just trying to be constructive, and suggesting other Rootschatters shouldn't give up if they get the "No Matching Results Found", you just have to adopt different approaches to those we've learnt on other sites.

[Sloe Gin]

This is a personal thing, but I always use numbered quarters (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).
I find it quite difficult to process M Quarter, J Quarter, S Quarter and D Quarter.
I really have to think about it.  I wonder why they use that format.

[coombs]

Well the new indexes giving mmn before 1911 forced me to buy another sub for SEAX and I did confirm that John Stock and Rebecca nee Letch did have 2 children, one in 1851 and one in 1854. The first one was born in South Ockendon, was baptised there and died as a baby. Until then I never knew John and Rebecca ever had any children, I thought all his kids were fro his first wife. I need to find out whatever happened to the second Ellen Stock born 1854.

[BumbleB]

This is a personal thing, but I always use numbered quarters (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).
I find it quite difficult to process M Quarter, J Quarter, S Quarter and D Quarter.
I really have to think about it.  I wonder why they use that format.

Possibly because that was the format from the inception of Civil Registration in 1837 

[KGarrad]

This is a personal thing, but I always use numbered quarters (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).
I find it quite difficult to process M Quarter, J Quarter, S Quarter and D Quarter.
I really have to think about it.  I wonder why they use that format.

Probably to avoid confusion?
The tax year starts in April, so Q1 is April to June

March quarter means exactly what it says - the quarter ending in March.

[Sloe Gin]

Probably to avoid confusion?
The tax year starts in April, so Q1 is April to June

March quarter means exactly what it says - the quarter ending in March.

It is not at all clear to anyone unused to the system.  It could mean the quarter beginning in March.  Or May.  The J could be for June or July.  At least FreeBMD uses the fuller abbreviations Mar, Jun, Sep and Dec, which makes it a little easier.

As for the numbers, my genealogy software uses Q1 for the Jan/Feb/Mar quarter, and so on.  The tax year is irrelevant 

[Nick_Ips]

Is there a definitive answer as to what a dash "-" means as a result for mother's maiden name?

The GRO document "Index Data Quality & Error Reporting" says "Why is Mother's Maiden Name shown in most, but not all birth indexes? In some cases Mother's Maiden Name was not data captured, and will appear in the online index as a dash. However, where possible, we have enhanced the indexes to include Mothers Maiden Name where it has previously not been provided on the microfiche indexes."

In the context of the document, 'not data captured' seems to mean at the time the digitised records were transcribed, but there are no clues there why the data would not have been captured.

It would be nice to know if the "-" can be interpreted (on the balance of probabilities) as the mother's surname being the same as the childs (i.e. probably an unmarried mother) rather than meaning something else like the entry was unreadable.

However, I'm expecting the answer to be that "-" simply means the name was not data captured for any of a number of reasons 

[AntonyMMM]

This is a personal thing, but I always use numbered quarters (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4).
I find it quite difficult to process M Quarter, J Quarter, S Quarter and D Quarter.
I really have to think about it.  I wonder why they use that format.

I remember this being discussed at a meeting with GRO when the system was demonstrated - they did say that the MJSD notation for the quarters is the standard GRO usage, and always has been.

[Sloe Gin]

I remember this being discussed at a meeting with GRO when the system was demonstrated - they did say that the MJSD notation for the quarters is the standard GRO usage, and always has been.

I realise that, but I do think it makes for easy misunderstandings:
For instance, that an individual listed under Births Sep 1924 was born in the month of September rather than in the quarter ending in September.