EnjoyCaraid
1871 Census - watch out! .....
Moderator: Global Moderators
-
caraid
- Posts: 92
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 3:55 pm
- Location: Berwickshire
Had a few problems when trying to access 1871 using the AOL browser, kept jumping to the other dates, went on to IE and it worked OK, but very slow. Sadly have no credits left and when I tried to buy more couldn't get anywhere. i'll just let you guys play with it over the w/end, cause I'm off camping for a few days and I'll try again next week, when hopefully you'll all be back at work Enjoy
Caraid
EnjoyCaraid
-
FionaZ
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:08 am
- Location: Sydney Australia
Hi All,
I'm a first time poster although I have been a member for a few months.
I think the piggy bank must be full because I could not buy any credit either! I shall wait till you are all asleep and try again!
Regards,
Fiona (In Aussie)
I'm a first time poster although I have been a member for a few months.
I think the piggy bank must be full because I could not buy any credit either! I shall wait till you are all asleep and try again!
Regards,
Fiona (In Aussie)
Seeking Clark,Jones,Frame,Stirling,Wilson, Robertson,Cousland,Hamilton, Mackie, Thomson to name a few
-
Skene Dhu
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 1:47 am
- Location: Edinburgh
Census
Ah did whit Caraid did as well, managed to get on the Credit Purchasing screen, then pressed "buy credits" an guess whit happened, ah goat an ither "buy credit" screen, whits wrong wi ma money, are they no wanting it or summin ](./images/smilies/brick-wall.gif "Brick wall")
John[/quote]
John[/quote]
-
Guest
I had no problem very early this morning- before too many people realised the census was finally available. First tries quickly found two family groups of interest -with a surprise or two as well.
Things have been painfully slow this evening and the site does not even come up at times. A couple of searches came up with no results, when I know for a fact that the individuals were alive and in Scotland.
So I will be happy with what I was able to find- for now, and wait for things to get sorted out. At least we still have the extended number of hours to search.
Catherine
Things have been painfully slow this evening and the site does not even come up at times. A couple of searches came up with no results, when I know for a fact that the individuals were alive and in Scotland.
So I will be happy with what I was able to find- for now, and wait for things to get sorted out. At least we still have the extended number of hours to search.
Catherine
-
mesklin
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 9:25 pm
What's money?
Finally tried to access 1871 Census.
Slow was not the word! Glaciers shot by while I waited. I switched on a performance monitor to watch my 1Mbit broadband connection. Long bouts of nothing with occasional blips of 28kbit.
Half the time, the graphics did not appear. Sometimes the site would not load. But what the heck, the site is undoubtedly in demand. So gotta expect a little slow...
So why did it take my £6. Mail me a receipt. But NOT add the credits to my account
I had a few time expired credits. It activated them, so SP got the money. But not a single credit was credited!
Have sent an e-mail to SP, and unlike the last few emails sent, this time I will get a reply...
...because we are talking money here, and I will hound them till they come up with the goods. Watch this space.
Dave
Slow was not the word! Glaciers shot by while I waited. I switched on a performance monitor to watch my 1Mbit broadband connection. Long bouts of nothing with occasional blips of 28kbit.
Half the time, the graphics did not appear. Sometimes the site would not load. But what the heck, the site is undoubtedly in demand. So gotta expect a little slow...
So why did it take my £6. Mail me a receipt. But NOT add the credits to my account
I had a few time expired credits. It activated them, so SP got the money. But not a single credit was credited!
Have sent an e-mail to SP, and unlike the last few emails sent, this time I will get a reply...
...because we are talking money here, and I will hound them till they come up with the goods. Watch this space.
Dave
-
mesklin
- Posts: 325
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 9:25 pm
Duplicates
Please be aware that the 1871 index has quite a few people down twice!
The people are under exactly the same number, but under 2 different places! As an experiment, I will (credits forthcoming) download one of these duplicates to see what I get.
It's hard enough finding ancestors without clones appearing
Dave
The people are under exactly the same number, but under 2 different places! As an experiment, I will (credits forthcoming) download one of these duplicates to see what I get.
It's hard enough finding ancestors without clones appearing
Dave
-
JustJean
- Posts: 2520
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 12:52 am
- Location: Maine USA
Hi Dave
I noticed the same thing today. One person was reported twice. I didn't purchase the certificates but might be able to find them again in my search list. I thought it was odd at the time. It's a real shame too cause I have ones that I know should be there...and they aren't
Jean
25 March
Hah...finally got back in and bought credits and am back in biz. These are the identical records I believe....
7 1871 MCMEAKIN ELLEN F 4 CATHCART LANARK 560/00
002/000
016
8 1871 MCMEAKIN ELLEN F 4 CATHCART RENFREW 560/00
002/000
016
I noticed the same thing today. One person was reported twice. I didn't purchase the certificates but might be able to find them again in my search list. I thought it was odd at the time. It's a real shame too cause I have ones that I know should be there...and they aren't
Jean
25 March
Hah...finally got back in and bought credits and am back in biz. These are the identical records I believe....
7 1871 MCMEAKIN ELLEN F 4 CATHCART LANARK 560/00
002/000
016
8 1871 MCMEAKIN ELLEN F 4 CATHCART RENFREW 560/00
002/000
016
-
Lizzie
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 1:51 pm
- Location: Newmarket, Ontario
-
JustJean
- Posts: 2520
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 12:52 am
- Location: Maine USA
Hi folks
Got another set of clones.....
6 1871 ROBERTSON DAVID M 25 OLD KILPATRICK DUNBARTON 501/00
001/000
009
7 1871 ROBERTSON DAVID M 25 WEST KILPATRICK DUNBARTON 501/00
001/000
009
....only now at least I know that if you buy one...the second one comes along for free.....so you can't go wrong!!!
Jean
Got another set of clones.....
6 1871 ROBERTSON DAVID M 25 OLD KILPATRICK DUNBARTON 501/00
001/000
009
7 1871 ROBERTSON DAVID M 25 WEST KILPATRICK DUNBARTON 501/00
001/000
009
....only now at least I know that if you buy one...the second one comes along for free.....so you can't go wrong!!!
Jean
-
AndrewP
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6189
- Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 1:36 am
- Location: Edinburgh
Hi Jean,
I suspect thst your clones in Old Kilpatrick or West Kilpatrick will apply to the whole of Enumeration Distict number 501. That district is referered to as "Old (or West) Kilpatrick" on the GROS list of Registration Disticts. I would expect to find the same in the neighbouring Registration/Enumeration District number 500 "New (or East) Kilpatrick".
Your other clones in Cathcart suffer from a boundary anomaly. Cathcart was one of these parishes (and later Enumeration District and Registration District) that was spread into two counties - in this case Renfrewshire and Lanarkshire. For registration purposes, GROS seem to have used Renfrewshire as the county (probably appropriate as the Statistical Account of 1845 tells us that it was split by the county boundary, but the largest part of it was within Renfrewshire). There must have been another moving of boundaries in 1912/1913 when Cathcart became number Registration Distict 633/b in Lanarkshire, finally to be absorbed into the Burgh of Glasgow in 1926/1927. As in 1871, it could be that a census result in Cathcart could have been in either county (and the county should show on each individual page of the census), the easiest thing to do for indexing is to list it under both. Otherwise, if they had listed it as Renfrewshire, that would be correct for the majority, but for the Lanarkshire minority of the Enumeration Books (or Pages) it would be wrong.
As the pages viewed on, or downloaded from SP are indexed by number, you could view the same page twice, should you wish to do so. At least the SP system recognises that you have already viewed that page (page number), therefore does not charge you again to see the same page (with same page number) under a different location name/description.
All the best,
Andrew Paterson
I suspect thst your clones in Old Kilpatrick or West Kilpatrick will apply to the whole of Enumeration Distict number 501. That district is referered to as "Old (or West) Kilpatrick" on the GROS list of Registration Disticts. I would expect to find the same in the neighbouring Registration/Enumeration District number 500 "New (or East) Kilpatrick".
Your other clones in Cathcart suffer from a boundary anomaly. Cathcart was one of these parishes (and later Enumeration District and Registration District) that was spread into two counties - in this case Renfrewshire and Lanarkshire. For registration purposes, GROS seem to have used Renfrewshire as the county (probably appropriate as the Statistical Account of 1845 tells us that it was split by the county boundary, but the largest part of it was within Renfrewshire). There must have been another moving of boundaries in 1912/1913 when Cathcart became number Registration Distict 633/b in Lanarkshire, finally to be absorbed into the Burgh of Glasgow in 1926/1927. As in 1871, it could be that a census result in Cathcart could have been in either county (and the county should show on each individual page of the census), the easiest thing to do for indexing is to list it under both. Otherwise, if they had listed it as Renfrewshire, that would be correct for the majority, but for the Lanarkshire minority of the Enumeration Books (or Pages) it would be wrong.
As the pages viewed on, or downloaded from SP are indexed by number, you could view the same page twice, should you wish to do so. At least the SP system recognises that you have already viewed that page (page number), therefore does not charge you again to see the same page (with same page number) under a different location name/description.
All the best,
Andrew Paterson