1881 England Census - child with no age transcribed

[PK-KTK]

How do I enter a child into the family when they have not had their age transcribed, but their age is listed as 10months on the image?
I refer in particular to the record of Class: RG11; Piece: 1803; Folio: 103; Page: 8; GSU roll: 1341435.
I believe the 10month old child lived into his 50's at least, so it is certainly possible others will be seeking him.

 

[Liberty]

How do I enter a child into the family when they have not had their age transcribed, but their age is listed as 10months on the image?
.

I think (though the moderators will doubtless confirm or correct) that if the image shows there was an age, you can override the transcript and put it in.
(I have a similar problem in an 1841 census where an age has been left out because it is hidden under an impenetrable black mark. I know what I would expect it to say but it doesn't actually say it)

 

[PK-KTK]

at least with the 1841 census we are "allowed" to enter the correct data from the written if the transcription is wrong, but the 1881 says clearly transcription only - I think I need Peter's (or another admin's) ruling on this one.

1841:

for this census take the data from the handwritten census if the transcription is wrong (but never include information not shown on the census)

1881:

enter the following information exactly as it appears in the census transcription even if you know that it is wrong or incomplete. Do NOT take information from the handwritten census schedule, as it may prevent your relative being matched with the same person entered by another member. When a private household is split over two pages use the references for the first page for the entire household.

 

[Liberty]

Yes, I think we need an official ruling. I can see where Peter is coming from. My GGM Hannah is wrongly down as 35 in the 1881 census transcript, but if you look at the original, it does (underneath the enumerator's scrawls) say 25. My LC entry remains at 35 because that's what others will find on e.g. FMP
CAN you enter no age? Does the system not throw up an error message?

 

[Tim]

Yes, I think we need an official ruling. I can see where Peter is coming from. My GGM Hannah is wrongly down as 35 in the 1881 census transcript, but if you look at the original, it does (underneath the enumerator's scrawls) say 25. My LC entry remains at 35 because that's what others will find on e.g. FMP
CAN you enter no age? Does the system not throw up an error message?

But isn't the other issue that you can ask FMP to correct their transcription? In 99% of the cases I've reported they have updated names, ages, addresses etc when I've suggested the correct data. And then you have 35 and the next person has 25.

Peter I'm sure will answer, but I believe this is where the red ! is used if there is a match. If 2 people match on census numbers and names, and the only difference is age, the red ! shows that a piece of data needs checking.

 

[PK-KTK]

Yes, I think we need an official ruling. I can see where Peter is coming from. My GGM Hannah is wrongly down as 35 in the 1881 census transcript, but if you look at the original, it does (underneath the enumerator's scrawls) say 25. My LC entry remains at 35 because that's what others will find on e.g. FMP
CAN you enter no age? Does the system not throw up an error message?

I can't leave the age empty, no - it's a required field - and entering 0 would be incorrect.
I've had to leave a 30 year old as a 53 year old because of the transcription aspect

But isn't the other issue that you can ask FMP to correct their transcription? In 99% of the cases I've reported they have updated names, ages, addresses etc when I've suggested the correct data. And then you have 35 and the next person has 25.
Peter I'm sure will answer, but I believe this is where the red ! is used if there is a match. If 2 people match on census numbers and names, and the only difference is age, the red ! shows that a piece of data needs checking.

I don't have access to FMP (no subscription) but as I still have a subscription with Ancestry, I have to rely on their transcriptions
Yes I could request the correction, but that may take months to happen, and would mean that anyone who enters from the mis-transcribed data would potentially not be matched with those who enter from the corrected data

 

[Liberty]

But isn't the other issue that you can ask FMP to correct their transcription? In 99% of the cases I've reported they have updated names, ages, addresses etc when I've suggested the correct data. And then you have 35 and the next person has 25.

Peter I'm sure will answer, but I believe this is where the red ! is used if there is a match. If 2 people match on census numbers and names, and the only difference is age, the red ! shows that a piece of data needs checking.

Um, but in the meantime, the LC rules say I MUST enter 35 even though poor Hannah would appear to be 35, unmarried and on the shelf. (Instead of being 25 and about to marry my GGF). I daresay any Cousin would match on her parents....

 

[Tim]

I can't leave the age empty, no - it's a required field - and entering 0 would be incorrect.
I've had to leave a 30 year old as a 53 year old because of the transcription aspect


I don't have access to FMP (no subscription) but as I still have a subscription with Ancestry, I have to rely on their transcriptions
Yes I could request the correction, but that may take months to happen, and would mean that anyone who enters from the mis-transcribed data would potentially not be matched with those who enter from the corrected data

Hi KT,

I think this demonstrates the point I was trying to make, there are at least 2 sources you can use for census data, and these could all be different to each other.

So, entering the census details and the names and age as transcribed would still get you a match with a red ! Which is good and what you want.

Also, there are normally other people in the household so in theory you should get a positive match on those.

 

[Tim]

Um, but in the meantime, the LC rules say I MUST enter 35 even though poor Hannah would appear to be 35, unmarried and on the shelf. (Instead of being 25 and about to marry my GGF). I daresay any Cousin would match on her parents....

Hi Liberty,

I think you would still get a red ! match on this person even if people put different ages in, and I think as you very rightly say, you should get complete matches on the other members of the household. So don't dispair!

 

[Liberty]

I don't have access to FMP (no subscription) but as I still have a subscription with Ancestry, I have to rely on their transcriptions
Yes I could request the correction, but that may take months to happen, and would mean that anyone who enters from the mis-transcribed data would potentially not be matched with those who enter from the corrected data

PK, I thought this was the case, but I found I could submit a correction on FMP (I only have 'free' membership, so as to see the 1881 census). They have already come back to say they have accepted my correction for my prematurely aged GGM. As Tim indicates, this submission of corrections should sort out the problem we both had

 

[Bryman]

I have come across a slightly different situation which I would like an answer to.

I have entered a family of 7 members from the 1911 UK Census and according to the FMP transcription, the age of the youngest is 0. The original census form shows the age as 11 days. Should that be entered as 0m or 11d, or something else, on My Ancestors page?

The other 6 family members have been matched with another LC member but not even a ! for the youngest member.
I have tried both 0m and 11d but no match in either case. Of course, the other LC member may not have entered that newborn but I would still like to know what the correct action should be in this situation.

 

[PhilGee]

Is this not a case for using the "transcription" age and adding the correct year, month/year or full date in the "corrected birth date" fields?

However, I must admit to being wayward in this area as I have been using the "image" ages because these are the ones that are "correct" for the census and on my personal transcriptions and the listings I work from I also send correction requests to FMP whenever I find an error (not all are accepted, though - I'm waiting to see if they change "Ivan" to "Iwan" on the 1939 register).

Phil

 

[Bryman]

Is this not a case for using the "transcription" age and adding the correct year, month/year or full date in the "corrected birth date" fields?

If the original form had shown the age as 1m or 2m then that is what should be entered but in this case it showed 11d.
My question was what should everyone enter so that an appropriate match can be made? I had not intended to question whether the corrected date information should be completed as well.

I was hoping that there would be a general agreement amongst forum members or else a ruling from Peter.
Don't be shy. What does everyone else think?

 

[Tim]

I would enter 11d if that is what it says on the image. You would match with everyone else in the household but you may get a red ! match on this person.

 

[Pauline]

Don't be shy. What does everyone else think?

I've just checked and I have someone entered who was just days old, and given as such in the original. I entered the age as 5d.

 

[Liberty]

I would enter 11d if that is what it says on the image. You would match with everyone else in the household but you may get a red ! match on this person.

I believe that the 1881 census [as the heading for this thread] is the one and only case where we are supposed to enter what the transcript (as on e.g. Ancestry, FMP) says. For 1841 and 1911 etc. we should go to the image, and transcribe to the best of our ability - '11d' in this case.

I guess that the purpose of LC is to make a match and contact, and exact agreement on all household members is not necessary.
In one of my 1911 households I have matches for some members but not all, and I believe this is because I and the other LC member are sticking to our respective guns as to what was actually written for the name.

 

[Bryman]

In my particular case, it was the 1911 census so I have now changed the age back to '11d'. If it had been from the 1881 census then '0m' would have been the requirement although I had the impression from somewhere that '0m' was not desirable. I had not come across anything other than x months before so was not sure if days or weeks should be entered.

I guess that the purpose of LC is to make a match and contact, and exact agreement on all household members is not necessary.

I agree. However, it is important that all members enter the same information in order that a match can be made if appropriate.

In one of my 1911 households I have matches for some members but not all, and I believe this is because I and the other LC member are sticking to our respective guns as to what was actually written for the name.

This is always a potential problem and can only be discussed and possibly resolved by direct communication between respective researchers. Unless the census entry is for a single individual rather than a 'whole' family, there should be other individuals which should be matched and hence contact becomes possible.

It is always good to aim for perfection but that is not always necessary to meet the purpose of the LC website.

I often submit corrections to FMP but that can lead to difficulties when different members record details from both before and after the corrections are made. Unfortunately, FMP does not leave any indication that a record has been updated. FMP assumes that everybody will want to find and record the correct information. I have tried to explain the difficulty when matching at LC but have not received any reply. There will never be perfectly correct information available due to mistakes made in the original recording of names and ages. My only hope is that corrected census transcriptions will make the record easier for others to find.

 

[peter]

All ages are rounded down by the Lost Cousins software to the nearest whole year for matching purposes, so it doesn't matter what protocol different census sites use. It isn't a difference in transcription since all major sites use the same LDS transcription the difference is in how they process the data.