A challenge for 2017 - become a transcriber for FreeREG

[BumbleB]

You are correct - I did double-check with the spouse's entry, which is correct as Epping, 4a.

I might ask my Co-Ordinator for his opinion as to whether I correct it or not 

[Andrew Tarr]

You are correct - I did double-check with the spouse's entry, which is correct as Epping, 4a.

I might ask my Co-Ordinator for his opinion as to whether I correct it or not 

To add to my earlier suggestion - there are two reasons for making a correction:  district 4a would be correct for Epping at that date, and the spouse's entry confirms the error.

If it had been a question of correcting the spelling of a personal name, for which there is no other supporting evidence, then it has to be 'type what you see'.

[BumbleB]

I've put my query, and I'll report back.

[clairec666]

I'll be interested to know the response, BumbleB.

This morning I've been transcribing burials from 1934, but in the middle was one from 1933. I'm guessing from the dates either side that it is an error and was actually in 1934, but obviously I have to enter 1933. I've mentioned it in the "notes" column though, otherwise nobody would guess there was a mistake (unless they accessed the register themselves).

[BumbleB]

I've just this minute received an answer from my Co-Ordinator = Type what you see.  The error will be rectified at a later date by FreeBMD team.

[Andrew Tarr]

I've just this minute received an answer from my Co-Ordinator = Type what you see.  The error will be rectified at a later date by FreeBMD team.

Does this mean that your co-ordinator will initiate the correction?  If not, how will it be detected?

I wonder how long it will take.

[Andrew Tarr]

This morning I've been transcribing burials from 1934, but in the middle was one from 1933. I'm guessing from the dates either side that it is an error and was actually in 1934, but obviously I have to enter 1933. I've mentioned it in the "notes" column though, otherwise nobody would guess there was a mistake (unless they accessed the register themselves).

I recently transcribed a series of (baptisms, I think they were) where the cleric had gaily continued from December through January into February before changing the year.  I corrected those, recording the mistake in the Notes.  A lot of searchers easily consider published data as accurate, and I think we can tidy some things up (scientifically of course) rather than just being unthinking automatic dogsbodies.  The well-intentioned corrections don't always happen, do they?

[clairec666]

I've seen search results on FreeBMD where the district appears in italics; if you click on it, it tells you that the district name hasn't been recognised or doesn't fall within the expected page range. I'm guessing this is what your co-ordinator means?

[clairec666]

This morning I've been transcribing burials from 1934, but in the middle was one from 1933. I'm guessing from the dates either side that it is an error and was actually in 1934, but obviously I have to enter 1933. I've mentioned it in the "notes" column though, otherwise nobody would guess there was a mistake (unless they accessed the register themselves).

I recently transcribed a series of (baptisms, I think they were) where the cleric had gaily continued from December through January into February before changing the year.  I corrected those, recording the mistake in the Notes.  A lot of searchers easily consider published data as accurate, and I think we can tidy some things up (scientifically of course) rather than just being unthinking automatic dogsbodies.  The well-intentioned corrections don't always happen, do they?

So do you think I should transcribe it as 1934 and put 1933 in the notes? I think it's pretty clear that it should be 1934, rather than an entry being recorded a year after the event. I know it's going against the "type what you see" rule, but if someone was searching for a burial in 1934 they would dismiss this record without even looking at it, and would miss my notes about the incorrect year....