FMP error correction request rejected

[PhilGee]

I recently submitted a correction request stating that a page of baptisms had been transcribed as burials (I did not check other pages). They appear to have ignored that detail, as "After looking at your reported errors, we decided not to make any changes at this time. This is because we concluded that the transcript matches the original record."

Admittedly, names, places and dates do match, it is the reference to burial that is incorrect!

 

[At home in NZ]

I recently submitted a correction request stating that a page of baptisms had been transcribed as burials (I did not check other pages). They appear to have ignored that detail, as "After looking at your reported errors, we decided not to make any changes at this time. This is because we concluded that the transcript matches the original record."

Admittedly, names, places and dates do match, it is the reference to burial that is incorrect!

It's hard to get good staff these days.

 

[Pauline]

This sort of thing was raised in another thread a few months ago - see here

As was said there, sometimes reporting the error a second time produces the required response but sometimes not.

 

[peter]

As was said there, sometimes reporting the error a second time produces the required response but sometimes not.

Can I suggest you check the first and last pages in the register - this should indicate whether the entire register has been wrongly described.

I suggest you then report it using the Customer Services link.

 

[PhilGee]

Page 98 has Baptisms followed by Burials 1812, pages 99-100 are blank and page 101 has 17 entries for 1812 with no headings - the following few pages are blank.
I have contacted customer services.

 

[peter]

Page 98 has Baptisms followed by Burials 1812

If there is no heading at the top of the page which refers to baptisms it's perhaps understandable that the transcriber assumed they were burials. I've sometimes struggled to tell which was which was which since pre-1813 the entries can be virtually identical eg "a child of John Smith".

 

[Stuart]

Is this a transcription error? Here's an extract from the 1861 census:
John Youngman Head Married Male .. 55 1786
Mary Youngman Wife Married Female 56 1805

Odd - I always thought the year of birth was worked out automatically, so how did that happen?

 

[peter]

Is this a transcription error? Here's an extract from the 1861 census:
John Youngman Head Married Male .. 55 1786
Mary Youngman Wife Married Female 56 1805

Odd - I always thought the year of birth was worked out automatically, so how did that happen?

I imagine the age was originally transcribed as 75 (understandable given the confusing marks on the image) and someone submitted a correction to the age, but not the birth year (these are separate fields).

 

[Stuart]

I imagine the age was originally transcribed as 75 (understandable given the confusing marks on the image) and someone submitted a correction to the age, but not the birth year (these are separate fields).

That's what I thought too. But it does seem odd that the birth year has to be calculated by the user, perhaps in error, and submitted with the correction. It's not in the original to be transcribed, so can hardly be mistranscribed. And even if the correction entry fields accept text, why does the processing not check the year for consistency with the age?

 

[peter]

That's what I thought too. But it does seem odd that the birth year has to be calculated by the user, perhaps in error, and submitted with the correction. It's not in the original to be transcribed, so can hardly be mistranscribed. And even if the correction entry fields accept text, why does the processing not check the year for consistency with the age?

They may have had in mind the occasions where the age is given in months, weeks, or days - or in years and months as in the 1921 Census.

 

[Stuart]

I was prompted by this thread to think about putting in corrections to Findmypast, which I'd not been in the habit of doing. So I thought I'd make a point of doing one next time I found an error. And the first one that came up was a probate calendar entry, for Arthur George Thomas Woodwards, and also for his wife Alice Poulson Woodwards. So unclear handwriting wasn't an issue! This copies the typography:

WOODWARDS Alice Poulson of 14 Lime Hill Road Tunbridge

Wells died 13 June 1966 at Pembury Hospital Kent
Probate Lewes 29 July to Claude Percy Wells solicitor.
£5344.​

There were two errors. One was Arthur's date of death, clearly printed as 12 June 1965, but transcribed as 1956. A common enough error - we've all done that at some time. That was accepted and will be corrected.

The second error was rather odd - both of them died at the same address in Tunbridge Wells. This town name was printed in bold, but no county was given. This bit was transcribed in both cases as:
Residence town .. Wells
Registry .............. Lewes
County ................ Somerset

So I requested a correction of that, and didn't see any need to add a comment. After all it is obvious, isn't it? And FMP replied with their standard text:

After looking at your reported errors, we decided not to make any changes at this time. This is because we concluded that the transcript matches the original record.

The transcript is designed to be an exact match of the original document, even if it includes a shortened name or an incorrect age, for example. We aim to reflect the information captured on the original record, which means that whatever is in the original document will be shown online.

I can think of a lot of rather rude things to say about that, but do I need to add anything?

 

[peter]

but do I need to add anything?

Possibly - did you complete the comment fields when submitting that corrections? The fact that two entries from different years were transcribed in the same way was a bit of a red flag - it suggests that that they enter the last word of the address, and if this returns a result from the gazetteer, accept it.

It probably didn't help that in both cases the surname of the executor was Wells. Forward the information to Customer Services as suggested previously - that way it'll go to someone who has broader training and more authority. Also note that Alice's middle name is missing from the transcript.