Author Topic: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)  (Read 638 times)

Offline Stuart_McDonald

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« on: Friday 03 November 23 01:27 GMT (UK) »
Hello
Are records that are listed as "This record is officially closed" for the 1939 Register on another site are actually accessible?
Harry Walker (born 28 August 1879) and his wife Florence (born 15 June 1896) and one child are readily readable but the remaining children aren't, even though all are deceased.  The residence is at Wisbech. 
Many thanks from Australia.
Regards
Stuart McDonald

Offline Dundee

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,072
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #1 on: Friday 03 November 23 01:47 GMT (UK) »
They should only be redacted if they were born after 1923 but sometimes mistakes are made.  If you want their records opened you need to do it via FindMyPast.

Scroll down to 'What if my ancestor's record is closed'

https://search.findmypast.com.au/search-world-records/1939-register#learn-more

Also check FindMyPast to see if they are open, Ancestry is a long way behind on updating their indexes.

Debra  :)

Offline Dundee

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,072
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #2 on: Friday 03 November 23 01:55 GMT (UK) »
I can see two children, Kathleen (1921) and Joseph (1930) open on both sites. 

Debra  :)

Offline Stuart_McDonald

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #3 on: Friday 03 November 23 01:59 GMT (UK) »
They should only be redacted if they were born after 1923....
Thanks Debra, if a child is born after 1923 but appears, does that imply someone else has requested a release of the record?
Cheers, Stuart


Offline Stuart_McDonald

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #4 on: Friday 03 November 23 02:02 GMT (UK) »
I can see two children, Kathleen (1921) and Joseph (1930) open on both sites. 

I guess it's in the "eye of the beholder", I can see Joseph but not Kathleen, but I'm not on FindMyPast.
Tanks, Stuart

Offline Dundee

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,072
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #5 on: Friday 03 November 23 02:31 GMT (UK) »
Ancestry looks like this to me.

Debra  :)


Offline Dundee

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 8,072
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #6 on: Friday 03 November 23 02:36 GMT (UK) »
I see that Kathleen is not actually indexed and that is probably just someone not doing their job properly. 

Debra  :)

Offline Stuart_McDonald

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #7 on: Friday 03 November 23 02:37 GMT (UK) »
Ancestry looks like this to me.
Thanks for the comparison, it looks the same to me except Kathleen, or the line where Kathleen appears on your screen shot, is blacked out.
Thanks again
Stuart ;D

Offline Stuart_McDonald

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 239
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1939 England and Wales Register (Cambridgeshire)
« Reply #8 on: Friday 03 November 23 02:39 GMT (UK) »
I see that Kathleen is not actually indexed and that is probably just someone not doing their job properly. 

Heavens to murgatroyd, who  would have thought.