Genealogy Chat

Received an e-mail from the FreeBMD team to say my correction had been accepted and the record amended..and thanking me for taking the trouble :-)

freebmd make it very clear that they will not alter anything which is not obviously their error........and ask people not to submit corrections which can't be demonstrated without doubt to be so

grannyfanny, was the name mis-spelt on the original index (ie the freebmd image)? If so, they will not change it as freebmd is meant to be a copy of the GRO index, including any mistakes that are on the index. They only change things that have been mistranscribed.

I sent in a correction to a mis-spelt middle name (I have the certificate proof) but it was never changed, my postem records it correctly.

I did fill in the correction info for Rosa Hannah as it was felt that hers was the one with the error but I put "GRO Indexes" as the source- added the postem in case anyone was looking for the marriage.

Is it worth bothering I wonder ?

I don't see any notation abt the page #. I do see a postem giving some details of Rilon's marr. I think FreeBMD will consider a correction note. I can't make out the first digit of the page # on FreeBMD's only scan. I have noticed Ancestry's scans are usually (but not always) better quality. If I were to submit a correction to FreeBMD, I would give the source as "Ancestry image" Unfortunately, I've not seen that image.

Yes Flick - thats my notation !!

As there is already a notation on the site about the page number, I think you'll find that freebmd will not do anything further.

But....there's no harm in trying

Thank you mgnv I do have the register entry it was the BMD entry I wanted to get corrected as several trees on Ancestry have the groom but not the bride and I wondered why :-)

Using the local index gets

Groom Surname Groom Forename Bride Surname Bride Forename District Parish Building Year Register Entry
FARMILOE Thomas RILON Rosahannah Stroud Horsley St Martin 1864 C19/1 338

http://ww3.gloucestershire.gov.uk/bmd/

Very many thanks for your help-will proceed to try and get the entries amended !

Thomas Farmiloe is Page 595

Rosa Hannah Rilon is faded and looks at first glance to be Page 695
but on further inspection i believe it is Page 595

And thats the actual image on Ancestry


Roy

Stroud against Rosa's entry is in italics and if you click on info for that entry, it says that p695 is not in the correct range, so it looks as if it is Rosa's entry that is wrong.


The image is really dreadful - I can't read the page number at all!

There is a slightly better image on Ancestry but even that isn't clear enough to tell if the first digit is a 5 or 6.

Possibly you could add a comment to both entries on freebmd?

The marriage in the 4th Q 1864-Stroud (Glos) RD

Was between Thomas FARMILOE and Rosa Hannah RILON

Rosa Hannah Rilon is entered as Vol 6a Page 695

Thomas Farmiloe is entered as Vol 6a Page 595

which means they are not together !!

Can you post the details, Elizabeth? Perhaps somebody else will be able to access the scans on another site.

Can anyone help please ?

I think there is something wrong with a marriage entry but cannot see the scans well enough to be sure if it is the entry for the Bride which needs correcting or the Groom

How do I raise this with them ?