OCR madness .....

Post by **emanday** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:15 pm

OK. It is in Scotland, a recognised Parish and it's NOT in Gamrie!

The letters "uaerar" do NOT appear in the correct placename.

Does that help

Post by **AndrewP** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:36 pm

emanday wrote:luaergawrio
...
Challenge - Any suggestions where these two ladies hailed from

A wilder guess than the last one - (Chapel of) Garioch?

All the best,

AndrewP

grannysrock · Post by **grannysrock** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 2:41 pm

The letters "uaerar" do NOT appear in the correct placename.

Does that help

mmm that leaves "lgwio"

Linlithgow ?

Sally

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 4:42 pm

Following Sally's logic, so that "L", "g" and "w" occur in that order, the only other parishes that fit, apart from Linlithgow are.....

Logie Wester
Legerwood and
Lesmahagow

David

Post by **emanday** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 6:56 pm

Sally's the Winner

Now I want to know how I get Ancestry to convince me that a human being came up with that interpretation?

grannysrock · Post by **grannysrock** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 7:29 pm

Bur since I asked for clues,

, I don't think I am a worthy winner. :

However that won't stop me

. I've got a horrible cold anyway.

Now I want to know how I get Ancestry to convince me that a human being came up with that interpretation?

Clearly it was an

that transcribed that record - there must be millions of them out there

given the number of abductees in our trees.

Sally

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:13 pm

emanday wrote: Sally's the Winner

Now I want to know how I get Ancestry to convince me that a human being came up with that interpretation?

I'd put the chances of such a contact from Ancestry to be somewhere around 0.001 %

I'd dearly love to be proven wrong ......

David

Post by **emanday** » Tue Dec 12, 2006 8:43 pm

grannysrock wrote:

Bur since I asked for clues, , I don't think I am a worthy winner. :

However that won't stop me . I've got a horrible cold anyway.

Now I want to know how I get Ancestry to convince me that a human being came up with that interpretation?
Clearly it was an that transcribed that record - there must be millions of them out there given the number of abductees in our trees.

Sally

The point is - you asked the right question! If. like me, you do crosswords, knowing the consonants had to be helpful.

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:03 am

Well done Sally

That one had me stumped completely.

So we still reckon that the transcription was 'untouched by human hand'

Russell

Post by **emanday** » Wed Dec 13, 2006 2:50 am

There might have been a human hand involved in transcribing the person'a name, but that placename came straight out of an OCR scan!

And to think; I have paid for a subscription to Ancestry! How many of the people I am looking for aren't showing up because the birthplace or census place is like that?

I get the feeling that they are rushing stuff through to maintain some kind of "record availability" quota. Someone should tell them that quality is a lot more important than quantity. What's the use of ??? million records if too many of them have faults like this?

Feel better for that