Possible CWGC errors

[Guest KevinEndon]

If you have a possible CWGC error then please pm or email Terry Denham who will look it up.

I have edited this after Terry's reply.

Private ADAMS W Royal Scots Fusiliers

SDGW has him as 18190 1st Btn

CWGC has him as 16190 1st Btn

N/A has him as 1819 2nd Btn.

[Coldstreamer]

the NA - is that the actual card or just on line - on line can be differant to the actual card

[Guest KevinEndon]

Its the online number. I am not going to pay £3.50 to download the MIC. I detest being ripped off and having to pay for our heritage.

[Coldstreamer]

I agree - £3.50 is too much for too little

[Terry Denham]

Can I suggest that we do not clog up the Forum with these items. The bandwidth would be gobbled up overnight. There are possibly tens of thousands of them.

If you PM or email me with them, I will always check them out and get amendments if necessary.

However, could I ask that you double check with the GRO list (if you have the disks) and always quote the name, number, regiment and burial/commemoration location as it will save a lot of time

[Terry Denham]

Kevin

There are thousands of them.

All sources have such typos which is perfectly understandable considering when and how the various lists were compiled - and by whom (bored army clerks mostly). When you add the fact that most have been retyped or re-entered or scanned several times since the original lists were compiled, you multiply the number of errors dramatically.

Then, of course, you have to factor in that all lists were compiled by hundreds of different human beings in the first place - each with their own levels of accuracy etc.

CWGC already has thousands of number amendments in the pipeline after an exercise I undertook early this year. It will take time to get them all processed.

[John_Hartley]

And the Forum's "In From The Cold" project will be finding even more apparent name/number discrepancies - probably on a daily basis.

John