Scottish mistranscriptions

[Just Gillian]

Anyone who uses the Ancestry Scottish census transcriptions has had to learn to be resourceful in working out the actual names, places of birth and occupations. But I was stumped tonight by the job of "Water Poorfranken (ville)". Fortunately, I found him on an earlier census as a "Waterproff Coat Maker"(sic)!

Obviously, I can see that "Water Poorf" must have been waterproof, but I just cannot work out what the "ranken (ville)" must actually have been.

It's such a shame that the cost of viewing the original images on SP is too high to allow one the luxury of viewing any which aren't essential.

[Merry]

Is he David Rosenheim b 1873?

fmp has the 1901 transcription as "WATER PROOFMAKER (IDLE)" which seems like a sensible version of ancestry's efforts!

[Just Gillian]

That's him Merry! Thanks.

Good to know he was either a lazy waterproof maker or an out of work one :d

I'm so used to not having FMP that I had completelly forgotten I had the free one month sub running, thanks to Julie. Off to compare some of my other Scottish oddities now you've reminded me!

[Olde Crone]

Here's my best!

"Samartive Beguine Bleaner"

turned out to be Locomotive Engine Cleaner.

OC

[Just Gillian]

I found myself trying, unsuccessfully, to remember your famous one last night OC. Thanks for reminding me.

I'm irritated by the stupidity of some of the transcribing - although I do know you are supposed to write what you see. If two people in the household were born in Poland, is it really likely that a third was born in Roland? Or can I take it that the transcriber hasn't heard of either Roland or Poland?

[Olde Crone]

Yes, I am irritated too - write what you see of course - but if what you see doesn't make sense, ask someone else what they think!

OC

[kiterunner]

I assume their transcribers were paid by quantity, not quality, and if they spent time asking other people what they thought, their production rate and therefore their pay, would go down.

[Olde Crone]

I'm sure I once read that prisoners in the USA (?) transcribed Ancestry Scottish census as part of an overseas aid project. Little incentive to get it right, who would care whether they did or didn't - only us, the end user.

It further irritates me that when I did subscribe to Ancestry, I felt compelled to correct all this tripe whenever I came across it, thus vastly improving Ancestry's records.

OC

[Kit]

and getting nothing but a thank you email in return, which is usually several months down the track.

[Just Gillian]

It further irritates me that when I did subscribe to Ancestry, I felt compelled to correct all this tripe whenever I came across it, thus vastly improving Ancestry's records.
OC

OC - Generally, I don't send corrections for the Scottish mistranscriptions, on the basis that I haven't seen the original. But I wonder what Ancestry's reaction would be if, in the comment box, I started to put "A more likely interpretation of the script based on FindMyPast's transcription."

and getting nothing but a thank you email in return, which is usually several months down the track.

Toni - because I'm helping someone right at the beginning of their research, I've been looking at vast numbers of census lately. I've noticed that my thank yous for corrections are now arriving in under three weeks and I have been wondering why. Possible reasons that sprang to mind were: an increasing number of complaints, a noticeable migration from Ancestry to other sites, or (gulp) a "tidy-up" in preparation for another price hike.

Mistranscribed or not, I know much more than I would have done about my non-direct lines because of the affordability of Ancestry's Scottish census access. I have only subscribed to Ancestry via cheap copies of old FTMs for several years now, but, given their actual subscription prices, and the standard of most of the other transcriptions I use on there regularly, I do feel they should be providing, in all their databases, a product which I could describe as more than "better than nothing". In fact, in databases where the original images are not available for comparison, they should be taking more care to ensure a high level of transcription accuracy.

Well, that little rant has charged my batteries up nicely for the day :d.

[kiterunner]

OC - Generally, I don't send corrections for the Scottish mistranscriptions, on the basis that I haven't seen the original. But I wonder what Ancestry's reaction would be if, in the comment box, I started to put "A more likely interpretation of the script based on FindMyPast's transcription."


I don't think FMP would agree to people using their transcriptions to correct ancestry's.

[Just Gillian]

lol Kate - it was a tongue in cheek suggestion. I don't think for a moment Ancestry would keep the comment in anyway.

I wonder though what the legal position would be - the correction would be "based on" rather than an exact "copy" of FMP's record.

[kiterunner]

I can imagine FMP cancelling someone's sub if they used it that way.

[Merry]

I can imagine FMP cancelling someone's sub if they used it that way.

So they wouldn't see it as a free positive advert for their site?!! lol