Updated GRO

VicWynne

It's yet another thing that really bugs me about RootsIreland... Just make sure you save it - I usually print it to a pdf file...

CassieManson

pjproby wrote: »

At the very least, one of them, should issue a comprehensive statement, explaining the issue.

Interesting letter in the Irish Times on Saturday from the Press Office of the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht


Provides some clarification on the issues


www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/genealogy-and-protecting-data-1.1878388

Jellybaby1

But had that editorial not been published in the first place on the 23rd July, the Department would still have remained silent. Still no explanation on the website.

pedroeibar1

J Grenham has a piece in today's IT

jos28

Very unhappy about losing the civil records :mad:
I'm delighted I grabbed what I could while we still had access.

I managed to find a birth record for my GG Grandfather but unfortunately didn't keep the details so I can order the cert. Any kind soul able to help me find details for Michael Evans born Dublin 1881 ? Parents are James and Kate. He is not showing up in the Church records

Rox_88

jos28 wrote: »

Very unhappy about losing the civil records :mad:
I'm delighted I grabbed what I could while we still had access.

I managed to find a birth record for my GG Grandfather but unfortunately didn't keep the details so I can order the cert. Any kind soul able to help me find details for Michael Evans born Dublin 1881 ? Parents are James and Kate. He is not showing up in the Church records

This is the only one I can find:

First Name Michael
Last Name Evans
Year 1881
Registered Quarter/Year Jan - Mar 1881
Registration District Dublin North
Volume 2
Page 533

jos28

Thanks a million Rox. I suspect that might be this Michael Evans which unfortunately not the one I am looking for. I suppose it's worth ordering the cert either way

http://churchrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/details/73e4470199222

Rox_88

I noticed when I searched that there was also a death record for Michael Evans b.1881, d.1883 in North Dublin so more than likely the same child and definitely not your GG Grandfather

jos28

Rox_88 wrote: »

I noticed when I searched that there was also a death record for Michael Evans b.1881, d.1883 in North Dublin so more than likely the same child and definitely not your GG Grandfather

Great detective work there Rox and much appreciated. Good news for me but certainly not for the poor child. Thanks for all your help

Waitsian

Has there still been no official government statement as regards the online indexes? What the heck are they doing?

Hermy

Now, now! At least they're being consistent.:(

Jellybaby1

Consistently silent!

pedroeibar1

Hermy wrote: »

Now, now! At least they're being consistent.:(

Yes, and will remain consistent until they return from holidays in mid September.:rolleyes:

Jellybaby1

Oh flip!

jos28

This wait is so annoying. It's like giving a child a toy on Christmas Day and taking it back on Stephen's Day !
There we were, all having fun filling in the gaps in our trees and now - nothing !
Can they at least put the database back online with date restrictions until they sort the mess out.
Any ideas who we could bombard with emails/letters to get it moving again ?

pedroeibar1

I skimmed through what Grenham wote - it appears it is a Data Protection issue so it will involve that office and from the Govt side the Attorney General's office, along with legions of civil servants and 'experts'. A$$ covering at its worst, at a time when the country is trying to develop a genealogical tourist industry.

jos28

I have a contact in the Data Protection Office, must make a phone call to see what's happening

Jellybaby1

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I skimmed through what Grenham wote - it appears it is a Data Protection issue so it will involve that office and from the Govt side the Attorney General's office, along with legions of civil servants and 'experts'. A$$ covering at its worst, at a time when the country is trying to develop a genealogical tourist industry.

Whoda guessed!

Hermy

jos28 wrote: »

This wait is so annoying. It's like giving a child a toy on Christmas Day and taking it back on Stephen's Day...

It's more like telling a child a week before Christmas that they might get a toy sometime soon and then months and months and months pass before the toy appears suddenly only to disappear again just as suddenly.

The worst thing about it is that I had all this information on screen and I didn't think to save some of my searches. Quite a number of the surnames I'm researching are not that common so it would have been practical to do so.

Jellybaby1

Hermy wrote: »

It's more like telling a child a week before Christmas that they might get a toy sometime soon and then months and months and months pass before the toy appears suddenly only to disappear again just as suddenly...

Now just what do you think that child would do under those circumstances? Scream the house down! Lets! Who should we write (scream) to then? Which department, minister, whatever? Oh yeah, they're all on their holidays now, aren't they, so the child cools down in a few months! :mad:

jos28

Hermy wrote: »

The worst thing about it is that I had all this information on screen and I didn't think to save some of my searches. Quite a number of the surnames I'm researching are not that common so it would have been practical to do so.

Me too :mad:
I just saved the URLS and a fat lot of good they are now !

Hermy

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

...so the child cools down in a few months! :mad:

Except we still have those awful Captcha's to remind us of the whole mess!

shanew

there's a small plus side to the changes that I dont think was mentioned, I think it's recent - they modified the image screens so that it's easier to 'browse' the register images. They previous images were direct pdf links so you had to modify the url to browse to see previous/next pages, or look for the intro pages in the register, now it's easier. They copied my method for browsing directories etc...!!

CassieManson

shanew wrote: »

there's a small plus side to the changes that I dont think was mentioned, I think it's recent - they modified the image screens so that it's easier to 'browse' the register images. They previous images were direct pdf links so you had to modify the url to browse to see previous/next pages, or look for the intro pages in the register, now it's easier. They copied my method for browsing directories etc...!!

Wow did not spot that, that is brilliant! Thanks for pointing it out.

Waitsian

Well yeah that is good, but why only images for Dublin, and none for Kerry? very frustrating. The sooner that new bill gets through the better.

blue banana

mod9maple wrote: »

Well yeah that is good, but why only images for Dublin, and none for Kerry? very frustrating. The sooner that new bill gets through the better.

My understanding of this, is that the Dept of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht needed to purchase the microfilms from the NLI in order to computerise the records, for example, for Dublin and Cork & Ross. I don't think they obtained the microfilms for the Diocese of Kerry as these records had already been indexed and computerised by a FÁS project in Killarney and therefore were not computerised from microfilm in Bangladesh like most of the other records on irishgenealogy.ie. Evidence that microfilm was not used for Kerry is also clear by the fact that the records for some Kerry parishes go up to 1910/1911, much later than the 1880 date of the microfilms.

I don't know if the Department ever intend on making the microfilm images available for Kerry.

Jellybaby1

Every time I see a new post in here I think its good news about the civil records!

CassieManson

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Every time I see a new post in here I think its good news about the civil records!

Me too! Obviously no "quick fix" on the cards!

BigCon

Any news on this? Surely it can't take that long to edit the site so that only searches before 1914 show up?

Waitsian

BigCon wrote: »

Any news on this? Surely it can't take that long to edit the site so that only searches before 1914 show up?

Aren't all the decision makers on their hols?