Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Problems correcting Census Online

2

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    Hermy wrote: »
    I wonder how many unemployed amateur genealogists there are in Ireland at present who would be glad to give their time towards a project like this. I know I would!

    This would be great - the only problem being busybodies who would be dying to help (not suggesting this is you!) but who might add to the problems, for which a government agency would hold responsibility. But if they were professionally supervised it could work.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,291 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    This would be great - the only problem being busybodies who would be dying to help (not suggesting this is you!) but who might add to the problems, for which a government agency would hold responsibility. But if they were professionally supervised it could work.

    Yeah, I know it could just as easily add to the existing problems without the right checks and balances but it just seems a shame not to tap a resource like this.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    I think it's nonsense to say that there's no money to carry out the work that needs doing - a complete cop-out in fact. If for no other reason the work should be done on purely commercial grounds - Ireland's genealogical tourist industry. In fact the 1926 census should be put online now and if the 100 year rule needs changing - change it! This time the work shouldn't be outsourced to anywhere. Did the actual paper census records get shipped to India and did any go astray?


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,059 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The digitization was done from old microfilm transfers, not paper


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,869 ✭✭✭odds_on


    This would be great - the only problem being busybodies who would be dying to help (not suggesting this is you!) but who might add to the problems, for which a government agency would hold responsibility. But if they were professionally supervised it could work.
    The system as used by FreeBMD in England seems to work very well and all by volunteers. But it takes many years to do.

    I did over 10,000 transcriptions for FreeBMD. Unfortunately, some people using FreeBMD seem to think that as a transcriber, you may also know something about the people you transcribed. I never once came across anyone in my family tree while transcribing.

    When doing the transcription of the Irish census records, the transcribers (probably on instructions from higher up) seem to have tried to give a complete name irrespective of if it was correct or not. The FreeBMD use a system of a ? if one letter is doubtful or an * for a group of letters.
    Either way, if you are researching a name that is transcribed as incomplete in letters or incorrect it is always going to be a problem to find that person.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,609 Mod ✭✭✭✭pinkypinky


    I think it's nonsense to say that there's no money to carry out the work that needs doing - a complete cop-out in fact. If for no other reason the work should be done on purely commercial grounds - Ireland's genealogical tourist industry. In fact the 1926 census should be put online now and if the 100 year rule needs changing - change it! This time the work shouldn't be outsourced to anywhere. Did the actual paper census records get shipped to India and did any go astray?

    I mostly agree but as MYOB said, the earlier censuses were already microfilmed. 1926 is still just on paper, so there's more work to be done. On the positive side (in terms of work) there's 6 counties fewer to do. Unfortunately, the CSO have dug their heels in, and apparently the government is afraid to tell them what to do.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    I think it's nonsense to say that there's no money to carry out the work that needs doing - a complete cop-out in fact. If for no other reason the work should be done on purely commercial grounds - Ireland's genealogical tourist industry. In fact the 1926 census should be put online now and if the 100 year rule needs changing - change it! This time the work shouldn't be outsourced to anywhere. Did the actual paper census records get shipped to India and did any go astray?

    I disagree absolutely with this. I'm really proud that Ireland has put the censuses online for free access, rather than selling them to a private company to hawk for profit like certain other records. Once you start saying that it's a commercial thing, you're on the road to everything being for profit.
    As for the work being outsourced to India, I'm perfectly happy with that - but the checking and correction should then be insourced to Ireland, and to people who know what they're doing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    I’ve very mixed views on much of the foregoing and (tipping forelock to Pinky) other than for ‘help’ I’m very much against Crowdsourcing unless it is closely controlled or limited to minor items when seminal recording/correcting is involved. For example it is used to good effect on sites such as the Australian Govt’s ‘Trove’ newspaper site, where the original record is alongside in another panel and veracity can be checked at a glance. Allowing the average punter to create/change links in official records would be a recipe for disaster, a huge error, as anyone who has seen their family on most PPV geno sites would know. Far better to check in several places and then join the dots oneself, in the knowledge that all is correct and not the fairytale of some ham.

    Secondly, our records are a national asset, part of our history / heritage and they have been paid for by the people through taxation. They have a dual value – a historical worth and one as a potential income generator. Morally, the various government agencies should be seen as trustees, not owners, and the authority to dispose of them as seen fit is questionable. I have no issue with a joint venture project (PPP) , not everything can be free in this economic clime.

    Access and control should not be parted with lightly and there is a balance in what could and should be done. The technology is there to do the job properly, auto-scanning, script / image recognition technology, and suitable business models/templates are available (e.g. Scotland’s People). To achieve success any such project needs a knowledge of genealogy, access to the records and what other countries are doing/have done. Over and above all that is a need for decisive leadership, which has been notably lacking on almost all that has been done to date. Without a ‘firm hand’ to put down the bitchfest , the usual petty empire builders, minor functionaries and ‘experts’ would bemire the project forever.

    Outsourcing, its benefits, to whom and how is another topic!


  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,059 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Commercial transcriptions are not without their accuracy issues either, as anyone who has dealt with older indexes on Ancestry would know. I'd also say at their rates, the IFHF are commercial and again, the transcriptions there are often woeful.

    I would hate to see us copy exactly the ScotlandsPeople model, which seems to be a way of getting the many Americans (well, mostly) who are in to the concept of "clans" to fund the Scottish Government through the back door. Despite having solved the biggest mystery of all in my family (again - well, mostly - need to contact Glasgow Council about a burial still) I can't but resent the site for its extremely high charges and patchy information. Charging me for an index search is bad enough, but charging me to see a semi-result when I can't get the image because they've not bothered scanning it is horrendous.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    I disagree absolutely with this. I'm really proud that Ireland has put the censuses online for free access, rather than selling them to a private company to hawk for profit like certain other records. Once you start saying that it's a commercial thing, you're on the road to everything being for profit.
    As for the work being outsourced to India, I'm perfectly happy with that - but the checking and correction should then be insourced to Ireland, and to people who know what they're doing.

    I think we are at cross purposes here, I'm not suggesting that the census records should be commercialised but that because of the importance of genealogical tourism to Ireland all the stops should be pulled out to provide the best possible service. On a personal basis I'm driven demented trying to research family history in the USA where every click of a mouse requires a credit card and I am not suggesting we go down that road. However, I believe that at the stroke of a pen somebody in Government could sort this out and the pittance in additional funding found - will it happen....I won't hold my breath.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    I’m very much against Crowdsourcing unless it is closely controlled or limited to minor items when seminal recording/correcting is involved.

    Of course it would not be a question of random people being able to change national records! But crowdsourcing as the Census has done, and then having the corrections *checked* and if correct added would be really useful.

    (For instance, you can often find who a blurry name on the Census is by looking at findagrave, something that probably wouldn't occur to the academics.)
    Secondly, our records are a national asset, part of our history / heritage and they have been paid for by the people through taxation. They have a dual value – a historical worth and one as a potential income generator.

    I would be totally against this. I really hate the way that records - records of human life, of the whole human race - have been turned into a source of profit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    Secondly, our records are a national asset, part of our history / heritage and they have been paid for by the people through taxation. They have a dual value – a historical worth and one as a potential income generator.
    I would be totally against this. I really hate the way that records - records of human life, of the whole human race - have been turned into a source of profit.

    That is a different argument and is a political one, not genealogical. Internationally almost all heritage places charge an entry – museums, art galleries,etc. Most archives are closed to those not conducting 'academic' research. Some ‘countries’ have visa fees and others e.g. Galapagos Islands even charge an entry fee (and Ireland has a ‘travel’ tax!)

    For records an ‘access payment’ is IMO acceptable if it is used maintain or make more records available and providing it is not unreasonable and ‘delivers’ what is promised. For example were the GRO to enter a PPP with the CLDS and they put up the images of the BMDs in a searchable format I would be quite happy to pay X for a cert view and 2X for a print. Most of us would save money in the long term and the PPP would have a nice earner to supplement its funding.

    Just look at the €70 million wasted on the debate over just ONE of the proposed Children’s Hospital sites ( I think the total amount is a multiple of that). Think of what that would have done for Irish genealogy!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,108 ✭✭✭Jellybaby1


    The BMD records only exist because the population, we and our forebears created them by being born, living, marrying and dying. They belong to the people, not the Government who should merely be guardians, as already stated here by another poster. If they make it too commercial they kill the goose that lays the golden egg, i.e. tourism. The tourists expect to find something when they come, but shouldn't be fleeced when they do, and of course, neither should we. I know, geese, eggs, fleece, but you get my drift! :)


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,609 Mod ✭✭✭✭pinkypinky


    Jellybaby1 wrote: »
    The BMD records only exist because the population, we and our forebears created them by being born, living, marrying and dying. They belong to the people, not the Government who should merely be guardians, as already stated here by another poster. If they make it too commercial they kill the goose that lays the golden egg, i.e. tourism. The tourists expect to find something when they come, but shouldn't be fleeced when they do, and of course, neither should we. I know, geese, eggs, fleece, but you get my drift! :)

    The BMD records are already commercial! They charge search fees and individual cert fees. All the while having a digital database that is inaccessible to the public. If the cost of getting that database online increased the cost of each cert by a couple of euro, I would happily pay it.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,288 ✭✭✭mickmackey1


    odds_on wrote: »

    When doing the transcription of the Irish census records, the transcribers (probably on instructions from higher up) seem to have tried to give a complete name irrespective of if it was correct or not. The FreeBMD use a system of a ? if one letter is doubtful or an * for a group of letters.
    Either way, if you are researching a name that is transcribed as incomplete in letters or incorrect it is always going to be a problem to find that person.

    Why on earth did the 'authorities' not insist on BLOCK CAPITALS when filling in the form, bloody frustrating...:rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    That is a different argument and is a political one, not genealogical. Internationally almost all heritage places charge an entry

    "Because the neighbours do it" was always barred in our family as an argument for doing anything.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    "Because the neighbours do it" was always barred in our family as an argument for doing anything.

    This is straying off-topic, but your family's criteria are not the way the real world should work. There is an economic cost for everything.

    As an example, I had never got around to ordering (possible only by fax/letter) a marriage cert from Australia. By chance I today discovered that since the beginning of this month the BMDs of Queensland, Australia are searchable and can now be ordered online – certs can be mailed or images can be downloaded in PDF format (cheaper at AUS$20). HERE

    I’ve just bought the 1870’s marriage cert of my g grandmother’s brother. A painless experience, immediate result – I input his name, his wife’s forename and a date range. It popped up immediately, clicked on the reference number and it walked me through the payment process.

    The details it contains are :-the status of the spouses, their birthplaces, occupations, ages, places of residence, names of parents (including their mothers’ maiden names!) parents’ occupations and witnesses.

    The cost was about €14, which is considerably less than the search, postage or fax costs that the old system would have incurred. I got all the above info in seconds, not weeks. Was it worth it? YES.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    Was it worth it? YES.

    In my research for a book about various people during the 1870-1925 period I check the census records usually several times a week. Would it be worth it if I had to pay €15 each time? Maybe. Would I be able to do it? No. Would my research suffer? Yes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    In my research for a book about various people during the 1870-1925 period I check the census records usually several times a week. Would it be worth it if I had to pay €15 each time? Maybe. Would I be able to do it? No. Would my research suffer? Yes.
    That argument does not stand up to the reality of everyday life. What you appear to want is free online access to information that has had value added. That is not a viable option anywhere. If the costs are fair and your research project is worthwhile, it will bear that cost.

    Any business must have a coherent business plan to survive - that presupposes giving value and taking payment. Consider the length of time, the hours, days, weeks and the travel involved in looking for an ancestor before the advent of the CLDS site and the internet. Card indexes, call numbers, queues, gone to lunch, the head-wrecking handwriting compounded by dodgy microfilm and even dodgier microfiche readers, the ‘Sorry, that’s out in Santry’. The ‘will I chance finishing this film roll (I’ve waited a day for it) and risk a parking ticket or had I better go now?’ Take as an example the Census records you quote – were it not online you would have to go to the NAI or NL or CSO or wherever they are stored, search for a DED, name, family, etc., obtain the various Return forms and then transcribe what you need – it would take days, if not weeks. The price of €4 for a copy cert is not a lot - most hobbies have a cost, that €4 is the price of a few photo prints, a good golfball or a few shotgun cartridges.

    Anything worthwhile in genealogy has an intrinsic cost which can be covered by government grant, sponsorship or a pay per view model. The Irish State has put up some records FOC and (generally) has a reasonable fee structure for other records: the CLDS provides ‘sponsorship’ because of its religious beliefs.

    The real argument should be about the price:quality ratio, the lack of many records, the grossly misleading claims by some on what is available and the internecine fighting among the various genealogical groups and organizations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    That argument does not stand up to the reality of everyday life.

    Yes it does! The research I'm currently doing has been immeasurably helped by being able to check individuals' names in the 1911 census for free. I can only dream of how wonderful it will be when other records are available online.

    Not everything is about grinding a profit out.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    Yes it does! The research I'm currently doing has been immeasurably helped by being able to check individuals' names in the 1911 census for free. I can only dream of how wonderful it will be when other records are available online.

    Not everything is about grinding a profit out.

    Which neatly brings the thread full circle. The 1901 and 1911 censuses FREE online are a wonderful resource - one that could be hugely improved for a pittance by making correcting easier. If extra staff are needed, let them be brought in from some other over-staffed area in the State sector. Anyway, if the website had been properly designed in the first place......


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    Which neatly brings the thread full circle. The 1901 and 1911 censuses FREE online are a wonderful resource - one that could be hugely improved for a pittance by making correcting easier. If extra staff are needed, let them be brought in from some other over-staffed area in the State sector. Anyway, if the website had been properly designed in the first place......

    I actually like the site design a lot. Here's the Icelandic version, slicker, more *obviously* informative, but in a way less so:

    http://www.manntal.is/?0.03317481721751392

    (They're still expanding this, with many more records to come.)

    Incidentally, here's the census return for PH Pearse and family - seems to have stymied the poor transcribers. Must put in corrections:

    http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/reels/nai000133850/


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    The National Archive Census website is still not fit for purpose and a trawl around my limited number of ancestors today threw up errors previously reported still in place, whilst others had been corrected as if by random. Still no means for reporting details of incorrect street names/townlands etc. Needless to say I have emailed Minister Jimmy Deenihan again - for all the use that will be. :mad:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,824 ✭✭✭Qualitymark


    The National Archive Census website is still not fit for purpose and a trawl around my limited number of ancestors today threw up errors previously reported still in place, whilst others had been corrected as if by random. Still no means for reporting details of incorrect street names/townlands etc. Needless to say I have emailed Minister Jimmy Deenihan again - for all the use that will be. :mad:

    Well, there's so many places to put every penny at the moment; I can completely understand how there isn't the money to make these corrections while the country is in deep crisis (psychological as well as financial; Ireland used to be a kind place).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    Well, there's so many places to put every penny at the moment; I can completely understand how there isn't the money to make these corrections while the country is in deep crisis (psychological as well as financial; Ireland used to be a kind place).

    Can you though? We are supposed to be coming up with all sorts of ways of getting out of the economic mire and tourism is touted as one of the ways - genealogical tourism in particular. All it takes is a tiny redeployment of staff within government - where there's a will there's a way. A 'can do' mentality so lacking in Ireland is what's required.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,108 ✭✭✭Jellybaby1


    I would be happy to do the job of correcting but I doubt they'll be offering me a job, paid or unpaid any time soon.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day


    I'm afraid I'm like a dog with a bone with this one. Slightly quicker response this time at just over a month for a holding letter. Seems like the minister could do with some extra (or more efficient) staff himself!

    Census+2.PNG

    CENSUS+REPLY.PNG


  • Registered Users Posts: 53 ✭✭Ozymandiaz


    Since the 1901 and 1911 censuses went online I have submitted a number of corrections to the National Archive people and, while not receiving any reply, they were corrected. These were largely transcription errors. However, last year I submitted further corrections and these have not been corrected. Some of them were street/townland names etc. and the set-up online does not allow for those type of corrections. When you do finally find an email address to contact - not on the Census site - there is no response. I rang the National Archive today and felt that I was really talking to myself or it could have been the janitor. Anyway, in the heel of the hunt I have emailed the Organ Grinder aka Minister Jimmy Deenihan to see if he can get something sorted out. I should imagine that my experience is not unique and there must be a multitude of transcription errors that could be sorted out relatively easily if there was sufficient manpower. Given that Genealogical tourism could be the next big thing some joined-up thinking would be a good idea. Anybody else have any experience of reporting errors etc? :)
    You are to be thanked for bothering to go to so much trouble. I too have submitted corrections on occasion. However, while we all deplore mistakes and hate being ignored by faceless bureaucrats it is possible that the manpower to deal with these things has been withdrawn or greatly reduced given the current economic climate. I think in the overall scheme of things we should exercise a little good judgement, continue to do the right thing ourselves and remain patient.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 11,291 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hermy


    I think people have been patient for long enough and it's more than past time that the powers that be got their house in order on matters genealogical.
    And regarding the economy, looking after our genealogical heritage will generate funds and tourism, so it makes no sense to me that the funding and manpower is withheld.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 53 ✭✭Ozymandiaz


    We need a little perspective here. I would love to see all relevant genealogical source material digitised and uploaded for free on the internet. Oh, joy! Access to the 1901 and 1911 Censuses is free. They might not be perfect, and they might be the occasion of a little frustration at times, but I would rather see backroom bureaucratic support staff cut than frontline health services, for example. If it is a choice between knowing who my g'g'grandmother married in 1850 or having an extra weekly visit by the district nurse, I know which I would pick.


Advertisement