Paul Barrett Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 When so many UK references such as BMD indexes only quote dates to an accuracy of one Quarter it's a PITA to have to enter "Bet 1 Jan 2000 and 31 Mar 2000" "Bet Jan 2000 and Mar 2000" is shorter but sets my OCD alarms off because strictly, between Jan and Mar means Feb. I'm surprised the GEDCOM date standard doesn't support "Q1 2000". Is this issue confined to UK records? Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Lloyd Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 No it applies to most of the colonised countries e.g. NZ, Australia etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 In that case you have to wonder why Q1 to Q4 and year aren't supported. So much easier to enter. Ah well, will just have to do it the hard way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfloridian Posted October 6, 2017 Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 Of course to complicate the issue, (for instance) Jun 1946 (or Q2) includes the latter weeks of March - as in my case! So, March 1946 (Q1) also includes many births from December 1945 But: are you using this to record a year of birth or do you also want to record the quarter and year of registration of that birth? Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 It's usually to record the Birth, Marriage or Death as accurately as I can, in situations where the BMD Index is the best source that I have without paying £9 for a certificate. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfloridian Posted October 6, 2017 Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 Nothing - especially accuracy - ever comes cheap. At the last count, my certificate collection amount to 860. Not just the date but there is also so much other important and / or fascinating information to be gained from the certificate itself. Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Lloyd Posted October 6, 2017 Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Paul Barrett said: It's usually to record the Birth, Marriage or Death as accurately as I can, in situations where the BMD Index is the best source that I have without paying £9 for a certificate. Paul I think you can just accept that historical records are not going to give you complete accuracy - there are always issues with transcribing or recording. Some also may be deliberate - e.g. the registering of a birth late to hide the hanky panky that occurred before marriage! Govt records- the BDM's recorded in quarters - only record when the registration was done, which is why so many overlaps of the actual event into the next quarter. Your only real solution is to get the certificates and I have also found errors in them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Newfloridian said: Nothing - especially accuracy - ever comes cheap. At the last count, my certificate collection amount to 860. Not just the date but there is also so much other important and / or fascinating information to be gained from the certificate itself. Alan Oh, I completely agree and for direct ancestors we usually go that route. But as we move to the more remote parts the tree I just can't justify the expense. We often find new lines of research from certificates too. I just wish it wasn't such a palaver recording Q1 1885 or whatever, Actually there's a thought, what happens if you do it that way? I assume it screws up age calculations because it's a non valid date format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Chris Lloyd said: Some also may be deliberate - e.g. the registering of a birth late to hide the hanky panky that occurred before marriage! He he. I have found a few of those. Both my wife's side and mine have had mothers of improbable age or amazing fecundity. And in every case we've discovered that it's the illegitimate child of one of her daughters. The funny thing is, they lied on the Census form which was sealed for 100 years but told the truth on the birth certificate that was in the public domain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRobison Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 4 hours ago, Chris Lloyd said: I think you can just accept that historical records are not going to give you complete accuracy - there are always issues with transcribing or recording. Some also may be deliberate - e.g. the registering of a birth late to hide the hanky panky that occurred before marriage! Govt records- the BDM's recorded in quarters - only record when the registration was done, which is why so many overlaps of the actual event into the next quarter. Your only real solution is to get the certificates and I have also found errors in them. Also, divorced people many times stated they were widowed on census records. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfloridian Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 16 hours ago, Paul Barrett said: It's usually to record the Birth, Marriage or Death as accurately as I can, in situations where the BMD Index is the best source that I have without paying £9 for a certificate. Paul I do all my data entry in Legacy and then upload it to TNG via GEDCOM. When I use the BMD indexes I always add the reference in Legacy as a source. This then appears as a reference mark against the relevant line on the individual's page and the full reference is given in the source list. So, in the case of Emma Ball (link below), I originally found that she had died in 1874 (hence the [1] at the end of the line) and this is then referenced in the source at the bottom of the page as [1] Belper 7b 388 (OND 1874). I then completed the details after I had received her birth and death certificates. I use her as an example as this trace was one of the most staggering (and tragic) exposes I have ever come across - not only helping a fellow researcher clarify her own branch, but also explaining a previous census return which had been totally misinterpreted by half a dozen user added trees on Ancestry. We know from other studies that in one year in the 1860s, one third of baptisms at one church were of illegitimates - and until this month, the actual parish registers have not been available on line). Given my particular interest in cousin marriages it is only by detailed study of the actual images can you get anywhere near the truth. Emma Ball (1858 - 1874) If of interest, I'll explain further offline Cheers Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 I agree with your methodology, and do something pretty similar The issue I have is that many of my people have not only an image of the certificate but also images of the BMD Index entries. TBH, I think that in that case the certificate trumps the index images. I don't disagree about the need for citations. So, as I plough through a further 800 disconnected images, I am dumping the index image where a certificate is present. And I do question the value of the index image if the citation is present. At first I thought the disconnected images (as I brought the tree in from Ancestry via FTM) were a disaster. But the opportunity to critically examine each piece of unused media has done wonders for the quality of information that's now on the tree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfloridian Posted October 15, 2017 Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 Hi Paui Small observation which may be of no significance. I was looking through the recesses of Legacy today for a totally unconnected reason when I happened to notice at the bottom of one of the screens, this check box: "Don't convert British Quarter dates to a date range" Now I don;t know whether Legacy does that conversion as a default (I've never tried it) or whether other programs have similar options, but just a thought. Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Barrett Posted October 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2017 Interesting..... it's clearly more of an issue for other people too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.