Moderator Control Panel ]

New GRO Indices

A problem shared is a problem halved. Post your brick walls here and see whether you can offer advice to others

New GRO Indices

Postby SDV » Sun Jan 29, 2017 4:21 pm

I have had mixed experiences with the new GRO indices. On the one hand, the birth index with MMN allowed me to identify missing off-spring for several relatives. On the other hand, the death index seems poorly transcribed. Ernest BERRY d Q1 1905 Wandsworth was aged 23 according to the GRO, but was only 1 according to FreeBMD. Similarly, Emily BERRY d Q2 1908 Wandsworth was aged 16 according to the GRO, but was only 1 according to FreeBMD. In both cases, I believe that FreeBMD is the correct age of death.

Whilst features like MMN and age at death are potentially really useful, they are only so if properly transcribed.

Whilst on about the GRO indices, I am not finding them easy to use. Needing to specify gender is annoying on occasion, often requiring two searches. The search limit of 2 yrs is very limiting, as is the return of only the first 250 finds, particularly if the record you want is past the 250 cut-off. And sometimes you want to search not on surname, but on a combination of first name and registration district, which is not allowed.

In conclusion, useful but flawed.
SDV
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 4:47 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby AntonyM » Sun Jan 29, 2017 5:46 pm

The issue of infant ages showing months as years is a known one and is because of errors in the transcriptions when they were done some years ago. Report any that you see to GRO and they will check the entry and update the index.

The search engine is deliberately quite restricted ... they have suggested that the rules may be loosened once the current trials are complete.
AntonyM
 
Posts: 359
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 3:12 pm
Location: Buckinghamshire

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby ksouthall » Sun Jan 29, 2017 6:00 pm

SDV wrote:I have had mixed experiences with the new GRO indices...

Whilst on about the GRO indices, I am not finding them easy to use. Needing to specify gender is annoying on occasion, often requiring two searches. The search limit of 2 yrs is very limiting, as is the return of only the first 250 finds, particularly if the record you want is past the 250 cut-off. And sometimes you want to search not on surname, but on a combination of first name and registration district, which is not allowed.


I agree with you. Hopefully the searches will be made more user-friendly once the trial is over. I find having to specify a gender and the 2 year limit the most annoying as it means repeating the searches to trace all offspring.

It would also be useful if we could enter wildcards - unless we already can and I have missed that option. If so, please could someone let me know what the wildcards are? Thanks.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby janmlawson » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:02 pm

ksouthall wrote:
SDV wrote:I have had mixed experiences with the new GRO indices...

Whilst on about the GRO indices, I am not finding them easy to use. Needing to specify gender is annoying on occasion, often requiring two searches. The search limit of 2 yrs is very limiting, as is the return of only the first 250 finds, particularly if the record you want is past the 250 cut-off. And sometimes you want to search not on surname, but on a combination of first name and registration district, which is not allowed.


I agree with you. Hopefully the searches will be made more user-friendly once the trial is over. I find having to specify a gender and the 2 year limit the most annoying as it means repeating the searches to trace all offspring.

It would also be useful if we could enter wildcards - unless we already can and I have missed that option. If so, please could someone let me know what the wildcards are? Thanks.
janmlawson
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby janmlawson » Tue Jan 31, 2017 10:04 pm

I have found a couple of mistakes and told them about it. It's an interesting addition to research. A chance to search for marriages would be wonderful.
janmlawson
 
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby Guy » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:49 am

Sorry but why do people still insist on using the "mathematical" indices when talking about a word index.

Whilst it was originally correct when writing in Latin to use the word indices the English language rules use the word idexes as the plural form, unless it is used in a mathematical context. ;)
Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Guy
 
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 3:56 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby SDV » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:55 pm

Guy - you are a pompous pedant.

Both plurals are acceptable in English, the plural form "indices" is not restricted to the world of mathematics.

As a mathematician I tend to use the form "indices". But thank you for not bothering to comment on the main topic. In future, please don't bother to reply to any of my postings.
SDV
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 4:47 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby ksouthall » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:11 pm

SDV wrote:Guy - you are a pompous pedant.


There's no need to be rude to Guy as he has a lot expertise that he has shared on the forum. So saying, I'd have checked my spelling, Guy, as you missed an "n" out in "indexes" - LOL - as they say in the dreaded text speak. (In other words, Guy, I'm being jokingly pedantic so please don't take this seriously.)
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby SDV » Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:14 am

And there is no need for Guy to be pedantic. If he has no interest in the topic, then he should not post. If he has something to share with regards to the topic, then fine. But I for one do not need lessons in grammar and syntax.

The grammar and spelling police should mind their own business, especially as this forum is used by people of many different nationalities. And in some English speaking countries "indices" is the usual plural, though as I have said both are considered acceptable in most such countries.

Even if Guy considers my English to be wrong, it is plain rude to point it out on a public forum.

Now as far as I am concerned this thread is dead.

Moderators please lock or remove this thread.
SDV
 
Posts: 378
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 4:47 pm

Re: New GRO Indices

Postby ksouthall » Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:28 am

SDV wrote:Moderators please lock or remove this thread.


Why should you demand that the moderators remove other people's posts? Some people might find some of this useful.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Next

Return to General research queries


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests