Search for content in message boards

"Editing" census records: a rant

Replies: 11

"Editing" census records: a rant

Posted: 22 Nov 2013 9:04PM GMT
Classification: Census
OK, consider this a rant.

The ability to edit transcriptions on census records is a nice feature when used properly -- for example, to correct a transcriptionist's misreading. Unfortunately, there are way too many people running around abusing the tool to "correct" spellings and to add additional information that's not in the record.

For example, I have an ancestor named Robert Sutcliffe. He is often referred to in family history as Robert "John" Sutcliffe, and so some kind soul has taken it upon himself to edit all the census records to add "John" to his name when it doesn't appear on the original form (in fact, there is no reliable support for the tradition anywhere).

One of his descendants, also surnamed Sutcliffe, appears on one census with a surname of "Sutter". The same or another kind-but-misguided personage has corrected the spelling to "Sutcliffe" when in fact the original census document clearly reads "Sutter".

Please, folks! The editing feature is not a for adding supplemental information. It should only ever be used to correct transcription errors in cases where the transcriptionist clearly misread what was on the original form. It should not be used to "correct" the original, add married names, or do anything that goes beyond what is on the original form. Please resist the urge to do so.

/rant
SubjectAuthorDate Posted
calvinculver 23 Nov 2013 4:04AM GMT 
RobinBMc 23 Nov 2013 5:10PM GMT 
calvinculver 24 Nov 2013 5:36AM GMT 
RobinBMc 24 Nov 2013 10:54AM GMT 
calvinculver 17 Feb 2014 2:10PM GMT 
deeflint01 17 Feb 2014 4:52PM GMT 
keithnuttle 4 Jun 2014 1:08PM GMT 
deeflint01 17 Feb 2014 4:48PM GMT 
meekernj 24 Nov 2013 12:05AM GMT 
lindalew 2 Aug 2014 12:07AM GMT 
per page

Find a board about a specific topic