I mentioned this in another thread, so I hope it's okay to repost it, but I hoped it might save some of you time in your initial forays into Ancestry's 1901 census index.
It appears from the searching I've done so far that the approximate birth year calculation is out by ten years, at least as of when I'm writing this post. Hopefully they'll correct it quickly.
For example, searching for a relative born in 1883 gave me three possibilities, all 8-year-old children, not 18-year-old young women, and the same has been true for all the searches I've tried so far. The age is correct in the list of family members, but the approx birth year is not.
Kathy
Problem with 1901 census at Ancestry .....
Moderator: Global Moderators
-
kathyc
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:25 am
- Location: British Columba
Problem with 1901 census at Ancestry .....
Researching MacLeans, MacRaes, and MacKenzies of Torridon and Shieldaig, MacKenzies and Frasers of Ballindalloch
-
scooter
- Posts: 372
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:22 pm
- Location: Kent, England
Hi Kathy,
The whole thing is a mess, the results I've been getting are very much a lucky dip, the search engine seems to be roaming all over the place!
You'd think they'd test it before putting it online? Not very professional so far....
Scott :shock:
The whole thing is a mess, the results I've been getting are very much a lucky dip, the search engine seems to be roaming all over the place!
You'd think they'd test it before putting it online? Not very professional so far....
Scott :shock:
Researching Wishart (Glasgow & Kirkcaldy), McDonald (Donegal & Falkirk), Thomson (Star, Fife) & Harley (Monimail, Moonzie & Cupar)