Unbelievably bad transcription on Ancestry Norfolk Record Office registers!!

[melba_schmelba]

Was just searching for a marriage yesterday, which by unbelievable luck was actually transcribed correctly. But a quick glance at the adjacent transcriptions made me look further, and further, and it was an absolute disaster. Era is 1720s-60s, we have the transcriber completely confusing the letters e for s and o, v for b, r for n, capital Ts for Js and Ps, and more, meaning that about 70% of the entries were wrong, often with letters wrong in the crucial place meaning it would be highly unlikely anyone could find it with a wildcard or soundex search. Have done my bit by correcting about 10 pages worth - then found out that there were bishops transcripts for the same register  . So I had a look at those thinking, oh well, being neater, they were probably mostly correct, but no still about 50% wrong  It's an embarrassment for Norfolk Record Office whose logo pops up everytime you load a register - did they have no say or control over the quality of transcription?

[CarolA3]

Judging by what happened with my home county - no, they would have no say whatsoever

The FHS and records office had worked very hard on transcribing and scanning the PRs so that Ancestry could put them online.  Great!  When Anc took the scans they were offered the painstakingly prepared transcripts, which you'd think would be part of the deal, but no.  They refused them and said they'd do their own, thanks very much

Some of them are reasonable, many are frankly poor, and when I came across the surname FRY transcribed as SOX .........................$*£()<>!!!! 

Carol

[Top-of-the-hill]

  I once found PAY in the census transcribed as COX. It must be something to do with X and Y! It is a name which does get transcribed as Day, Fay, Gay.... but then it is a fairly uncommon name.

[Tickettyboo]

Oh but now and then mistranscriptions are a great source of amusement.
I was looking the other day for a man on the 1939 register

Found him first time. Which was good as mistranscriptions/spelling variations of his surname are legion.
It was his occupation transcription that made me laugh though:

Threatens Engineer Steam Fitter & Whitesmith

(the image actually said Heating Engineer . . . )

I do wonder sometimes if these are genuine errors or produced in sheer boredom by the transcribers but it did brighten my day.

Boo

[melba_schmelba]

Judging by what happened with my home county - no, they would have no say whatsoever

The FHS and records office had worked very hard on transcribing and scanning the PRs so that Ancestry could put them online.  Great!  When Anc took the scans they were offered the painstakingly prepared transcripts, which you'd think would be part of the deal, but no.  They refused them and said they'd do their own, thanks very much

Some of them are reasonable, many are frankly poor, and when I came across the surname FRY transcribed as SOX .........................$*£()<>!!!! 

Carol

I am not surprised Carol  . It seems Findmypast are going someway past Ancestry now in the transcription and image quality stakes and I suspect deal in a much more constructive and friendly way with the various Record Offices around the UK. Some of the mistranscriptions strongly pointed them not being done by native English speakers - i.e. names that should be obvious like Sarah or Susan were mangled beyond comprehension .
  I would also have thought it would be in the Record Office's interest to allow themselves some oversight in the quality of transcription as part of the deal of handing over their registers.

[IgorStrav]

  I once found PAY in the census transcribed as COX. It must be something to do with X and Y! It is a name which does get transcribed as Day, Fay, Gay.... but then it is a fairly uncommon name.

Did you REALLY say that PAY is an uncommon name, there, T-o-t-h?

Have the years you (and I) have spent trawling through the cartloads of them in our trees faded into distant memory?
Surely not...

 

[Top-of-the-hill]

  Oh, all right then - it is a name mainly encountered only in Kent and part of Sussex!

[Andrew Tarr]

  Oh, all right then - it is a name mainly encountered only in Kent and part of Sussex!

I know one family up near here, in Shropshire.

[IgorStrav]

  Oh, all right then - it is a name mainly encountered only in Kent and part of Sussex!

I know one family up near here, in Shropshire.

They're probably connected in some remote way with ours, Andrew........all called John and James and Mary and Mary Ann?  Definitely......