IGI batch number Q

[Merry]

Nothing to add to BK6 from this thread

On 9th March 2002 I printed off an IGI entry for a baptism of an Ann Langford at Standon Herts on 25th Dec 1786 the dau of Francis and Mary Langford (not extracted). The batch number is given as C072912.

The batch number appears on the Hugh Wallis IGI site but the entry doesn't appear anywhere I can find any more.

Your comments would be appreciated ..... :)

[HarrysMum]

Oh Merry................I was just about to pm you with a similar question.....well...a question about something you found for me and I've lost......lol

I think I'll wait till morning and see if I can find it...

Your question looks easier...lol

[Merry]

Oooh, I hope it wasn't an Ariel? lol

[HarrysMum]

No.....that stupid John Nation and Mary Ann Skinner...........

You're right...Ann isn't on Hugh Wallis with that batch number.

I wonder if they've taken the 'not extracted' ones off.

[Merry]

if I open batch C072912 via Hugh Wallis there are only 34 entries in it, 33 of which are dated between 1873 and 1875 plus one for 1672. The batch says it covers 1671-1812 and 1844-1875.

[Merry]

No.....that stupid John Nation and Mary Ann Skinner...........



I don't remember tham. What was it? A marriage? I may have to vanish if mum arrives......

[Merry]

?????

http://www.westcountrygenealogy.com/somerset/broomfield_marriages.htm


Broomfield, Somerset
Transcriptions of Marriages - 1630 to 1812
The following transcripts of the Broomfield Marriages were kindly provided by Barbara Andresen

date............where.......groom.............brid e

1804 Jul 5 Broomfield NATION John SKINNER Mary Ann

[HarrysMum]

Yes, Merry, that's all I got when i opened Hugh Wallis as well. Even checked the other numbers...nuffin...

I have a thread with the ftaher of John Nation and I said I love you...lol. I can't work out why.....................well, I know i love you, but this was for something about Mary Ann Skinner......don't worry. I'll sort it in the morning and ask then. Have a good time with your mum.

[HarrysMum]

That's Merry.......but I've lost the baptism (or any proof) that MY John Nation is actually their son. He's supposed to be born between 1812 and 1820ish.

[HarrysMum]

Found it......mine that is.

Yours is still missing.

[HarrysMum]

Not even an Ancestry tree..............sorry.

[Olde Crone]

Rotating records? I know this isn't supposed to happen, but.....

OC

[kiterunner]

I wonder if they're in the process of moving it over to the new site? There are just over 100 records for that batch on the new site, though not the one you're looking for.

[Merry]

I have rarely used the Hugh Wallis site and was under the impression it was a list of submitted entries only - I presume I was wrong? (I can't get into it now to look)

[kiterunner]

It's primarily or completely a list of extracted batches.

[Merry]

Doh, that's what I meant!! (I am trying to watch the tennis, whilst two manic children fight all round the room at the same time :rolleyes:)

I was surprised to see 'my' batch was on it, as the print out I have isn't for an extracted entry.

[Olde Crone]

Merry

We discussed this at some length ages ago, maybe even on GR?

I accidentally discovered that SOME batch numbers beginning with C turned out not to be extracted primary records, but were made up from some clandestinely collected list and submitted many years ago to the LDS, who chose at that time to call them extracted records, which they SORT OF were!

Hugh Wallis presumably didn't know this and assumed like the rest of us that C batches were made up from a primary source in the way we understand that to be, i.e. someone sat down with the record and transcribed it, under the supervision of the LDS.

Perhaps this is why they have dropped the record as it isn't a primary or reliable source?

OC

[Merry]

Could be, couldn't it?!

I'm glad I kept the piece of paper - I don't usually do that :o

[HarrysMum]

So...................sort of what I said.

OC always says what I mean so much better...........lol

[JBee]

Sorry to butt in - but I had an entry with batch starting with "I" and never did fathom out what it stood for. Does anyone know please?

Can't recall at the minute who it related to - so can't looksee.

[Olde Crone]

I don't know what an I batch is, but I know it isn't reliable, along with J and K batches!

OC

[kiterunner]

It's from some kind of index, i.e. taken from a printed transcription or similar.