Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

"In From The Cold" - how are folks getting on?


AlanCurragh
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just curious to know how people are getting on - I've done three pages so far, with all names found. Some have taken a bit of hunting, especially those listed as RASC or Labour Corps on the GRO data - have normally found them listed on SDGW with their original battalion, then found them on CWGC by using Geoff's search engine, using that battalion.

Or alternatively, by using Geoff's search engine, and their service number (not always that readable). This throws up ones where the forenames are the wrong way round on GRO, or the surname is spelt incorrectly.

Anyone else have any comments on their searching?

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a PM from one Pal who hadnt realised how damnable difficult to read some of the pages are. This was the CD - is the Find My Past version just as lousy? Page 141 was quoted as a "bad un".

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan- About the same here, although you're a little ahead of me. Would it help if the search engine had wildcards in the service number. I've found quite a few where 2 out of the four to six digit are readable. Which together with a surname its been possible to find them. Prefixes are also a problem, they can be absent in one and present in the other or vice-versa. Or even different for RND.

geoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a PM from one Pal who hadnt realised how damnable difficult to read some of the pages are. This was the CD - is the Find My Past version just as lousy? Page 141 was quoted as a "bad un".

I think there are some a lot worse than that, seem to remember seeing some either very faint or out of focus. Out of interest is this difficult to read on screen or printed? I found my old CRT were fading and threw them out a while back. Laser printing at 600dpi on good quality paper helps and use a low power magnifyer to overcome my astigmatism (almost).

The S&N set were supposed to be taken from the best available copies of film, so we may be stuck in places.

geoff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff, your search engine is a godsend! There are so many I never would have found without it.

But it's slow progress here. Did about 5 hours today and finished one page.

Found 1 (perhaps 2) non-comms and 37 name/no. discrepancies.

I've added a few more tables into my batch report for discrepancies in other info. Is that OK?

I've got 11 rank discrepancies (some Sjts listed as Ptes. Are we supposed to flag "A/Sjt" versus "Sjt" etc.?), 7 date discrepancies and 1 regiment discrep. (CWGC says "Norfolk", GRO says "Supp." or something. Any ideas what that could be?)

Very difficult to read in parts (on FindMyPast), but at least the next page looks easier.

Adrian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only just started. I have found one on CWGC not on the GRO (at least not with same name). Is this something I should report?

Thanks.

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to say:

My 37 name/no. discrepancies include quite a few missing/added prefixes (e.g. GRO has S/1234 while CWGC has 1234, or vice versa). Am I right to flag these?

Adrian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I haven't been recording the differences between GRO and CWGC unless they are in surname - certainly haven't been noting differences in number.

Will try to start recording such differences from now on...

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Volunteers All...

NOTE

This is an exercise to find non-coms. It is NOT an exercise to find as many number and other discrepancies as you can.

Therefore....

1) Please do not note names in CWGC which are not in GRO.

2) Do not note minor differences in number (prefixes etc). We do not have time to check them.

3) Please note Surname differences.

4) Do not note Forenames in GRO where CWGC only has Initials. CWGC will not add the Forenames. Do not note reversed forenames.

5) Note what you believe to be scanning number discrepancies (eg 3134567 instead of 3/34567) only.

6) Remember that Labour Corps will appear in CWGC and often as a different regiment in GRO. CWGC should note both.

7) Do note any year discrepancies.

8) Do not note Rank differences.

The first batch is a learning curve for all volunteers so keep the feedback coming. The first form I received back had six possible missing names but five were found in CWGC after checking. Please use Geoff's search engine on the service number etc if you do not find the name in CWGC first time round.

Above all... Remember that the aim is to find non-coms.

Keep up the good work. It will be a long haul as you are now realising!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting stuff guys

Just had half an hour (at work!!, don't tell the guvnor...oops thats me :lol: )

Took a while but have now got a routine going.

Half screen with GRO list open and CWGC on other half - simply move CWGC screen down over GRO screen as you find em...works for me.

Might have a couple already...need to check SDGW etc later and double check CWGC

Actually enjoying the Buzz of maybe finding some.

Glyn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have only done a few and apart from one misspelt surname on CWGC have not found much - although GRO seems to be missing quite a few (I have stopped recording these).

One thing I have noticed is that the searching/indexing of the CWGC database leaves quite a bit to be desired (probably not news for most people but I had not noticed it before). I have had names not come up when I have put in a general search (which has given me men with the same surname) but which have then come up when I have put in a specific search with full initials. I also find that search results often give the same man twice especially after I have done a sort when large numbers of records are returned. It is not a major problem but suggests some inefficiencies in the database design.

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please use Geoff's search engine on the service number etc if you do not find the name in CWGC first time round.

In fact, based on my first experiences, I'd recommend use Geoff's search engine on service number as the main way of doing it, and then using it to search on name or date of death if number doesnt find it.

I've done a couple of hundred names this afternnon and have only looked at CWGC once (and that just as final confirmation that I couldnt find a guy).

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be surprising to see a man on the GRO twice?

Private Arthur W Attwood (G/24805) of the Middlesex Regiment who was killed in 1917 is dwon under Arthur W Attwood and Arthur Attwood. I am assuming there is no chance of it being 2 different men.

Can I also just check that if GRO has a man as CH Attwood (say) and CWGC has him as H Attwood then we don't need to record that - although any relative looking for him on CWGC may struggle to find him he is at least on there?

Thanks

Neil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neil

There are many double entries on GRO. If you are sure they are the same man (same number etc), don't worry about it.

Your second query - Do not record it. There are many differences like this which cannot be proven without further evidence - and this is an exercise to locate non-coms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry - can I just double check another point - in post (9) you state that you want to be informed of surname differences - is this still the case? I have found quite a few of these

Thanks

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan

Yes. Report all surname differences.

These may be examples of names that have common variations and there is no 'right' spelling depending on which records and which members of NoK supplied the info. However, some will be typos/scanning errors (in GRO or CWGC) and these can be checked.

Safest course of action is to report them all and I will sort them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Hartley

My email to you early in the week must have got lost. This is the gist

I am working on the cross check between SDGW (home) and CWGC. There are thousands of man hours work to do. We need more men but not everyone can justify the disc which is used for seconds in an operation that takes hours. I will “sponsor” a couple of researchers by taking their letters, printing the results from SDGW and posting them the sheets, at my cost. They can then spend happy hours sorting.

Is this of any use?

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need more men but not everyone can justify the disc which is used for seconds in an operation that takes hours. I will “sponsor” a couple of researchers by taking their letters, printing the results from SDGW and posting them the sheets, at my cost.

Peter/John

If this is feesible then I am happy to assist as I've as yet not been able to help through lack of the appropriate discs.

Regards

Will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will

John as said OK so let me know a postal address by email or PM and I will copy sheets to you

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John - just sent you an email regarding sending large files...

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...