Imperial War Museums launched the War Memorials Register to mark the 100th anniversary of the 1918 Spring Offensive

[TGM]

In my in-box today from WDYTYA:

War Memorial Register

 

Snippet:

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

This could be a useful tool, but there are some big caveats.

I've just had a look at the entries for my home village in Anglesey.

(Space doesn't permit me to type in the full name of the village.....)

https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/search?query=llanfairpwllgwyngyll

 

There are 8 memorials listed, one of which is a statue of Nelson on the shore of the Menai Straits, and I assume the one name listed as a casualty of the Napoleonic Wars is his.

One at the church is a specifically Second World War memorial.

 

Of the remaining 6, two are scrolls of honour dedicated to those chapel members who served, not specifically those who died.

The remaining 4 commemorate the fallen and are located on the village clock (26 names), in the parish church (25 names), in the memorial hall (26 names) and in the methodist chapel (10 members).

The total aggregate number of names on these four memorials is 87.

Yet between them all, there are only 28 men recorded. 10 appear on all four memorials. 13 appear on  3 memorials, 2 appear on only 2, and 3 names are on only one memorial.

It seems that there is no attempt to crossreference the men, and the data regarding their home addresses , and units (present on 3 memorials has not been preserved).

 

The information given above says they have over a million names, but as we know, UK Great War deaths numbered far fewer than that, so there must be massive duplication of names in this database.

A useful work? Well it's a resource, and a good starting point, but it's a long way short of being a comprehensive list of names on British war memorials.

As long as people remember that the list doesn't contain the name of every fallen soldier, sailor or airman, and that some are there 4 times or more.

(Hedd Wyn is recorded 5 times!)

 

(Other problems- transcription errors, the village is incorrectly placed in Gwynedd rather than Anglesey, and a hopelessly incorrect national Grid reference for the church.....)

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

Should be Gatherum

 

Mike

[Phil Evans]

The latest incarnation of UKNIWM.

 

The OS references are all over the place where-ever you are. There is a bit of history to why they used them, rather than Lat / Long, I believe.

 

This one is correct though. If not, you know who to blame.

 

You've made me feel guilty though. I started correcting the SE London OS references for a contact involved in the scheme a couple of years back and forgot all about completing it.

 

Phil

[ilkley remembers]

Just seen the entry for Ilkley memorial and I think that the names on it have been transcribed by a 4 year old. There are enough mistakes on the original never mind the mistakes that are on the IWM web page Private Bert Boddy becomes Boddy, Bent, Laurie Armitage is shown as Armitaee, Lzwere and so on. I can't even begin to think who Coon, Weller is supposed to be and I have written about all the names on the memorial.

 

I R

[Guest]

Have they just run it all through a computer?

 

Mike

[ss002d6252]

5 minutes ago, Skipman said:

Have they just run it all through a computer?

 

Mike

Certainly sounds like the sorts of issues you would get with OCR.

Craig

[Chris_B]

I would have thought  there was a high proportion of paper based records used in the creation of the old UKNIWM.  Records that may well have been discarded  in the last decade.  Every time they go through one of these re-launch exercise yet more transcription errors creep in.   A quick glance through the 587 listed for Mitcham Civic Memorial (WMR 12194) shows a few, e.g. RISLEY J. has become RISEEY J.   

 

On the plus side, all of David Ayling's  graveyard photo's have been added to this page:  https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/search?query=mitcham  They include my father's cousin Norman Frank Brown KIA in 1943. 

 

 

 

[graeme]

i stumbled across this scheme about 3 weeks ago. They were asking for volunteers to help record details. I fired off an email to volunteer. No reply. Anyone else feel like having a go, send an email. see what happens

[Guest]

 

       I'm sorry to have to raise this matter again  but we seem to be back  where we have been before.   There are precious few details of how this scheme works- just a request for volunteers to photograph and provide names for an IWM database (at least, administered by IWM).  But there are no guarantees- yet again- of whether there will be FREE ACCESS on an ENDURING basis for the materials generated by all this volunteer  effort.  Are we -again- back to collecting stuff on the goodwill of a lot of people, then slamming a pay-wall in when it is of sufficient  size?   

      There is already a project recording war memorial names,of both wars, on the pay-site "The Genealogist". I must confess that it's main contributor and manic war memorial photographer/transcriber, Mark "Ancestral Trails" Herber is an old friend, though I have no connection to "The Genealogist". Mark has clocked up about 250,000 indexed  names and pics. so far (Singapore just ready to go live, I understand, North-East in progress). Now, that clearly is a paysite.

    Given the requests that have been made on previous occasions elsewhere-that we all pull together-well, just until the tills are plugged in- must raise some cautions about this project.

      The web-page for IWM for the volunteers to the project  has a note about "Copyright" in IWM websites tucked away in the bottom left corner. Yes, I know- we are using the "C" word again (Martin,where are you when we need you?)    Given that IWM has what is known down my local Magistrates Court as "form", might I suggest that we endeavour to find out how this scheme will work in future years?  What is the status of access  and whether it will be charged for, what is the copyright position of contibutions made??

    We have been here before, we are dealing with repeat offenders.  Personally, I cannot see that any database of names of any size is going to be free to access for any length of time. 

 

 

   

Edited 16 July , 2018 by Guest

[Knotty]

Cynically they might just offer up a lottery, the first thousand pulled out of the hat get access to the data free. I can’t see any organisation resulting to using that particular format, can I?

[Guest]

  I do not particularly wish to be gloomy (We have West Ham  United to provide that function in my life)- but the name listings are already charged for by another commercial outfit- and I believe it does generate commercial income for "The Genealogist". IWM has a much larger database of memorials already-and by seeking to get ahead by now including names, it will overtake "The Genealogist" at a stroll. But to the apparatchik mind, if a system already has people willing to pay for it elsewhere, then why not charge for your own public sector version???  

     In addition, the stalled attempt to continue "Lives" does not really seen resolved to me. Now -obviously- there is some mileage in continuing the processes of commemoration after 11th November 2018 and "Lives" still seems to me to be hanging in mid-air. And how it might meld in with  War Memorials puzzles me. Obviously, there is space for one system to continue chugging along and adding information.

     I have no objections per se to a pay-wall to access a worthwhile site (here, as a side note-Lives simply bit off more that it could chew)  but I think that the "volunteers"  should know up-front if they will have to pay to access their efforts in future years. As David Underdown, of this parish, has said elsewhere, the basis of Treasury funding is "cost recovery"  The proposition of "owt for nowt" cuts both ways - I do not  expect a useful site to be free ad infinitum- it is entitled to recover it's costs. BUT- neither do I think that those that  "grow" the site be in any ignorance or doubt of charges coming down the pike in future time. Alas, the expectation that "goodwill" and "volunteer" are "commercial resources" that can be "harvested" means that I think that this should be matched by a degree of openness, which thus far has been lacking-

[Clear Bell]

On 23/03/2018 at 18:08, Chris_B said:

I would have thought  there was a high proportion of paper based records used in the creation of the old UKNIWM.  Records that may well have been discarded  in the last decade.  Every time they go through one of these re-launch exercise yet more transcription errors creep in.   A quick glance through the 587 listed for Mitcham Civic Memorial (WMR 12194) shows a few, e.g. RISLEY J. has become RISEEY J.   

 

On the plus side, all of David Ayling's  graveyard photo's have been added to this page:  https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/search?query=mitcham  They include my father's cousin Norman Frank Brown KIA in 1943. 

 

 

 

Just noticed this thread.

 

Another problem with lists based on memorials is that the names on the memorials might, of course, be incorrect. I researched the RCA memorial website and have pointed out the transcription errors in the section to do with Percy Metcalfe's its sculptor:

 

http://remembrance.rca.ac.uk/

 

I am also aware that the two Norris brothers included in this memorial are mixed up together in the Roll of Honour in, I think, St Anne's Church in Wandsworth.

 

[Michael Pegum]

The searching by place is imprecise.

 

A search for 'Newport, Shropshire' also gave results for the Newports in Gwent, Dyfed and the Isle of Wight.