We welcome any query on Who When Where. If you have previously posted it on another forum (including the old WDYTYA forum), please state this in your opening post - this will save people redoing the research which has been done before: they can look at it and possibly go further with it.

1921 census review

A space for genealogy-related conversations.
phsvm
Posts: 81
Joined: 07 Jun 2020, 15:51
Location: Oxfordshire

1921 census review

Post by phsvm »

An interesting item about the 1921 census on the BBC news website today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59879470
Thunder
Posts: 436
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 01:43

Re: 1921 census review

Post by Thunder »

Whilst the website did not crash there are so many errors and data not entered, not surprised as this is what the private sector does.
User avatar
AdrianBruce
Posts: 358
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 18:57
Location: South Cheshire

Re: 1921 census review

Post by AdrianBruce »

Thunder wrote: 06 Jan 2022, 19:53... this is what the private sector does.
They work under contract from the state sector, who apparently often fail to set targets and then complain about the outcomes...
Adrian Bruce
User avatar
Guy
Posts: 135
Joined: 01 Jun 2020, 19:14
Location: Wakefield
Contact:

Re: 1921 census review

Post by Guy »

Thunder wrote: 06 Jan 2022, 19:53 Whilst the website did not crash there are so many errors and data not entered, not surprised as this is what the private sector does.
What errors have you found in the images, any or none?

I will take note of you comment when you produce a similar sized data set with no errors. It is often the case that many of those who complain have never attempted to produce something similar.
Cheers
Guy
As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
Hardwork
Posts: 86
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 14:15

Re: 1921 census review

Post by Hardwork »

The problem isn't one of private or public sector as regards errors and omissions or presentation. It is a problem created by large organisations and/or lack of oversight. In both sectors that can be a problem. However, if a task is not conducted by those who require it to be done, there is likely to be even less detailed oversight purely because the work that is being done is more remote from the people requesting it. How many times do we hear, "If you want a job to be done well, do it yourself"? In other words, delegation always has a risk attached, especially if it is not supervised closely by the person or persons who want the job done (or who are not that interested in overseeing it).
Brunes08
Posts: 44
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 23:09

Re: 1921 census review

Post by Brunes08 »

I have carried out transcribing for different organisations and in each case the same documents were transcribed by 3 people to ensure that mistakes were not made. How, on the 1921 census transcription, my grandmother is listed as having been born in Devon is beyond me. She was born in London and the original census clearly shows London. No other entry on the page identifies anyone as being born in Devon. The transcriber was clearly being very inattentive. Doesn’t fill me with a lot of hope in breaking down some of my brick walls.
meekhcs
Posts: 468
Joined: 02 Jun 2020, 18:19
Location: Lincolnshire, but Hampshire born and bred!

Re: 1921 census review

Post by meekhcs »

Yes the number of incorrect transcriptions is annoying.
At the same time I fully appreciate it is imposibble to produce a record of this size without there being inaccuracies.

BUT, Unless a Pro member of FMP which "buys" you a small discount, it is £6 to purchase the transcription and the original record. This soon mounts up. Talking to people today they have wasted money because what it says on the tin is not what is inside; eg place names differeing between FMP's decription of the record, the transccript and original record, people mentioned as being on the record in fact not appearing on the original record, and more. I am sure FMP are not offering refunds.

Personally I am going to wait until they become freely available and I can fully search. I have more than enough to be getting on with meanwhile and I am sure it will only be a matter of months.
Sally
paulr1949
Posts: 147
Joined: 02 Jun 2020, 18:25
Location: North West Kent

Re: 1921 census review

Post by paulr1949 »

I shall also wait for the time being. When the excitement has died down a bit, I shall look up all 4 sets of grandparents, but that is all.
Paul
User avatar
AdrianBruce
Posts: 358
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 18:57
Location: South Cheshire

Re: 1921 census review

Post by AdrianBruce »

A rather disturbing description of how the transcription was done appears on https://www.findmypast.co.uk/help/artic ... anscribed-. It says:
When transcription of the 1921 Census of England and Wales took place, each digital image had to be broken up into segments so that the person transcribing it could not see a whole record or household. This was to ensure we complied with security and data protection regulations but also why you might see various spellings of the same surname or street address on one record, because it has been transcribed by multiple people without the context of the whole record.
In other words, having hit an excessive number of errors on the 1939 Register by splitting the page into columns, they appear to have gone and done something similar on the 1921!

The prime issue for me is that, by this point in time (January 2022), there are no relevant data protection regulations - the whole thing is open. So why create such an impediment to quality for such a short period? I am assuming that the indexing process takes some months but why could derogations not have been granted for those months? After all, we saw films of people restoring pages prior to imaging - they must have been looking at the whole page, so they must have had a derogation. Did anyone in authority (i.e. TNA) actually talk to the Information Commissioner about what a sensible path forward would have been? Or did TNA, yet again, presume that the Man in Kew knew best?
Adrian Bruce
Thunder
Posts: 436
Joined: 14 Jun 2020, 01:43

Re: 1921 census review

Post by Thunder »

Guy wrote: 07 Jan 2022, 08:18
Thunder wrote: 06 Jan 2022, 19:53 Whilst the website did not crash there are so many errors and data not entered, not surprised as this is what the private sector does.
What errors have you found in the images, any or none?

I will take note of you comment when you produce a similar sized data set with no errors. It is often the case that many of those who complain have never attempted to produce something similar.
Cheers
Guy
I spent 16 minutes looking for my grandparents as FMP had dropped the 'h' as shown in their surname (and correct) on the image, also the Barton-upon-Irwell Poor Law Institution was transcribed as Barton upon Derwell if I recall correctly and the institution was transcribed as the Poor Low Institution, all correct on the image. Also for Broadmoor Asylum mis-spelt as Aslyun. One of my uncles stated correctly to be born and living (not in Broadmoor) in Eltham South-East London was transcribed as being born in Hertfordshire. When I did transcribing at TNA these errors never happened.
Post Reply