auchonvillerssomme Posted 1 December , 2007 Share Posted 1 December , 2007 Its a very interesting exercise, we could perhaps market it as one of those brain training thingies you see advertised. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 1 December , 2007 Share Posted 1 December , 2007 [quote name='auchonvillerssomme' date='Dec 1 2007, 06:08 PM' post='as one of those brain training thingies you see advertised. Or as a "doing me brain in" thingy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombowcock Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Hi John, I have just ordered the GRO lists so would be welcome to start helping out when the disks arrive ! Will confirm when they have arrived. Do not have SDGW so can't help on that front I'm afraid. All the very best James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisharley9 Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Due to work I have only managed to get one page done so far - however Geoff's Widget has speed the job up no end & hope to get a page done Sun evening Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Will confirm when they have arrived. James When you're ready, drop me a PM with your email address. I can then send you the "search tips", form to record the missings, and details of how to access Geoff's new improved search engine Widget - and your first batch of names. Many thanks for volunteering. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Pals By way of a general update for volunteers and, of course, other members, three batches of the GRO exercise have now been returned and double-checked by Terry. Quite a number of name and date of death discrepancies have been identified, together with 18 apparent non-commemorations. Extrapolating this upwards suggests we might find a reasonable number of names. Certainly at the lower end of the original guesstimates, which is perhaps reassuring - and certainly confirming this is a very worthwhile project we're undertaking. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frajohn Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Hi "Or as a "doing me brain in" thingy " Sorry, but it is not the brain that's suffering, more the eyes. Midday appointment, Saturday at Vision Express. Hope things improve after that. Must admit Geoff's "Widget" has helped a great deal. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaymen Posted 7 December , 2007 Share Posted 7 December , 2007 Should have my first batch done in about a week. Do I want anymore after that....... oh alright then, BUT not Smith or Brown, its enough looking through hundreds named Bailey Glyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KevinEndon Posted 8 December , 2007 Share Posted 8 December , 2007 Its strange what is unearthed, I have a few blokes whose regiments are down as ALIAS. I have seen it in names but never a regiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 8 December , 2007 Share Posted 8 December , 2007 The word ALIAS appears in the 'Regiment' field on the entries in the CWGC database. Check one out. It is not unusual. When you get one, you are not looking at their true entry but at the alias cross reference. They will be listed under their real name with a full entry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geoff501 Posted 9 December , 2007 Share Posted 9 December , 2007 If you find an entry with regiment as ALIAS, using 'widgetry', a quick easy way if you want the true record is to select Link, read the true family name in the Additional information field. Return to the widget and replace the surname with the true name, leave the Service number the same and search again. This should find the true record, with confirmation of the regiment given in GRO. (don't forget to reset Surname if you are searching through a block of surnames!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 11 December , 2007 Share Posted 11 December , 2007 Just to give you brave volunteers an idea of how difficult it can be....! One of the potentially 'missing' men sent to me in Kevin's first batch (from SDGW) was as follows... Sjt Charles Edward COLLINS MM 59747 Royal Welsh Fusiliers Died 24.12.18 Kevin couldn't find him on CWGC - and nor could I despite intensive searching for an hour using every trick in the book. I looked on Ancestry for the service record (luckily A-C are online). No luck there and so I tried the MICs. I found that this man had three MICs. The index entries for them showed on the first that his details were as per Kevin's list. On the second it said that he had gone from the RWF to the Training Reserve as as No. 24476 (couldn't find him on CWGC under that either). On the third it said that be became a captain in the Royal Irish Rifles (no luck there either)! By now, I couldn't let it rest and so I plumped for the captain MIC and invested £3.50 to download the actual document. This solved the puzzle and no wonder he couldn't be found. He turned out to be buried in Brighton very near to where I live - in a war grave I know well! Who would have guessed that Sjt Charles Edward COLLINS MM RWF was actually Capt Coutart de Butts TAYLOR MM Royal Irish Rifles!!!!! He used an alias whilst serving as an OR but reverted to his true name on becoming an officer (for the second time IIRC - a Boer War veteran). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 11 December , 2007 Share Posted 11 December , 2007 No-one said this was going to be easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KevinEndon Posted 11 December , 2007 Share Posted 11 December , 2007 I have failed the team, the bloke was there all the time and I missed him. Terry, are you going to these lengths on every possible non comm or were you that sure he was there somewhere and you had to solve it. Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 11 December , 2007 Share Posted 11 December , 2007 Kevin Most don't need that level of attention but I knew there was more to this one after seeing the MICs. Having said that, all 'possibles' are checked as thoroughly as possible before being elevated to 'probables'. I was just surprised that it turned out to be one of 'my' locals. I have details of his alias in my files but never made the connection and I have had discussions with others in the past over this interesting character. I even had his CWGC entry corrected some years ago as it had a typo in the forename! If you were going to miss one, this would have been it!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCurragh Posted 11 December , 2007 Author Share Posted 11 December , 2007 John or Terry - are you able to give us any more idea how things are looking in terms of the 18 (possible) non-coms John mentioned on the 7th? How many have you been able to elevate to "probables"? Thanks Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 12 December , 2007 Share Posted 12 December , 2007 Alan Not yet. The early batches are still coming and every one alters the average found per volunteer. I do not intend to issue updates every time one comes in - too much to do. However. when each letter batch is complete, every volunteer will be sent a list of what has been found. By that stage, all 'probables' will have been checked again one final time before they become 'non-com cases' to be put forward. So far every volunteer who has returned a batch has found at least two probables after the first checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCurragh Posted 12 December , 2007 Author Share Posted 12 December , 2007 Thanks for the update Terry - for the moment, it's enough to know that it looks like the project is going to be very worthwhile... Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geoff501 Posted 16 December , 2007 Share Posted 16 December , 2007 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 Does anyone know if there is any quality difference between Find My Past and the CD? Presumably the former is just a web file presentation of the latter. If its any consolation, I've just completed a rather faded page 207. If page 141 is thought to be a 'bad un' then compare these two. So it can be done, but it is not always easy. I was able to identify all entries except four. I suspect there are some more difficult (out of focus, but have not seen any recently). Some of the original pages may be carbon copies, which may account for the poor quality. The first name on page 207 was B.A.S.T.A.R.D, and there were quite a few on the page. Things are easier now, I'm on BATCHELOR, so I hope to single out a few missing men. I took me as long to do page 207, as about 3 typical quality pages. All jokes are entirely accidental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 16 December , 2007 Share Posted 16 December , 2007 Im still waiting for a reply on my non commemmorated coldstreamer since February... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geoff501 Posted 14 January , 2008 Share Posted 14 January , 2008 One man in my current GRO batch seems to be buried in Wales: http://www.cwgc.org/search/casualty_detail...asualty=2759695 I suspect it is correct and he just got put on the wrong list. Are there many like this? (there is a name discrepancy, so he will be in my report) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 14 January , 2008 Share Posted 14 January , 2008 I went a bit goggle eyed with pages 91-100...fortunately the 2nd batch I printed off was 1000% better. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 14 January , 2008 Share Posted 14 January , 2008 Geoff It is known. They actually made it wounded to the UK but the records never caught up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 14 January , 2008 Share Posted 14 January , 2008 I went a bit goggle eyed with pages 91-100... Some pages are awful. I've printed them out and use a large magnifying glass on a stand (I knew it would come in useful some day). I've found the best way to use Geoff's Widget is like this. Say I have reached Hartley. I type in Hartl% and get the full list (which will include Hartly and Hartley). I then sort into number order. I can then run the cursor up and down the Widget list to check off the GRO list. The great benefit about this is it quickly spots where a number that you can't quite read must be - 48?? must be between 3999 and 5000, etc. If there was more than 20 or so Hartley, I'd introduce the initial letter. So, I might be searching on Hart% J%. It's a doddle - relatively speaking. J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geoff501 Posted 15 January , 2008 Share Posted 15 January , 2008 Some pages are awful. I've printed them out and use a large magnifying glass on a stand (I knew it would come in useful some day). I've found the best way to use Geoff's Widget is like this. Say I have reached Hartley. I type in Hartl% and get the full list (which will include Hartly and Hartley). I then sort into number order. I can then run the cursor up and down the Widget list to check off the GRO list. The great benefit about this is it quickly spots where a number that you can't quite read must be - 48?? must be between 3999 and 5000, etc. If there was more than 20 or so Hartley, I'd introduce the initial letter. So, I might be searching on Hart% J%. It's a doddle - relatively speaking. Same method used here and I must thank Adrian for suggestion the fields be sorted. However when I printed page 207, all that was visible on the left side was the dots! As you say a relative doddle. Once in a while J.H. Hartley is H.J. Hartley so you have to dig further. One thing that has worked several times for names that are not found due to being significantly different is to search on SDGW entering regiment and forename only and browse through the list to find a likely match. For example Berry was Perry etc. Just wondering what Smith will be like - we must be near Brown now? geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now