Unit Diaries

[Foxkarej]

Does anyone know of any plans in the future to put the diaries on line with Ancesty.co.uk like the recent release of MIC's ?

Thanks John.

[shinglma]

Some already are. Whether they plan to do the whole lot is another matter.

See documents online at the NA website for war diaries held in WO 95.

However at £3.50 per month to download they can be expensive.

Regards

Mike S

[armourersergeant]

More importantly as seems to be the case from other members notice, they are not always complete and often you are denied access when attending the NA to the original files.

I am desperate to get to the NA to finish my photography of the brigade and divisional diaries before they go on line.

regards

Arm

Ps Sorry to have a moan

[Foxkarej]

I agree with the setiments, I'm researching over 450 men on our local war memorial so diary extracts at £3.50 a time is a definate non starter for me.

I was thinking more in terms of them being passed over for inclusion in Ancestry. I pay a set annual subscription to them and can access and copy as much as I like for that subscription.

Our library has the local paper archives on microfiche and the deaths of a lot of the men are featured, complete with photographs of them so I'm trying to build up a full story on each man and details of the action that caused their deaths would have been nice to add.

Anyway, I can live in hope they are included on Ancestry at some time, meanwhile I'll have to start posting here to see who has got what.

John.

[bmac]

Sadly it seems to me that things at the NA are moving inexorably towards paying for access and at a price which will start to exclude all but the well off. Though you can access the originals of war diaries that are now on-line you do have to make a special application and give some reason why. I have no problem with these things being put on line so that people who find it difficult to get to the NA can access them but the originals should still be available to all those who attend the NA without jumping through hoops. And, of course, if you don't know you can see the originals then people will end up paying £3.50 per page to get copies of something they could get for free. Indeed, I did just this some time ago when accessing several Sherwood Forester War Diaries and spent quite a lot of money. Later I made a special application and saw them for nothing. I shouldn't have to do this, IMHO, but there is clearly an expectation at the NA that people will pay for on-line documents wherever they are accessed and that will start to restrict access. Involving Ancestry or any third party is just an extension of this philosophy.

I appreciate the financial pressures are on at the NA, viz. notices about extended waiting times for documents resulting from staff shortages and the talk of parking charges, but these are the National Archives and should be freely accessible to all those who wish to access them not just those who can pay.

[jay dubaya]

And how pleased was I when it came to researching 2 brothers KiA with the CEF, I got their unit diaries, all nicely typed, enlistment papers and the local paper informing of their deaths....all online and all free. Also this week all the AIF diaries have gone online.

So why can't the NA do the same?

I don't believe that there should be a charge for this kind of information, it belongs to the nation and should be easily accessable to any interested party. That said, I wouldn't have a problem with them going online at Ancestry and paying a one off annual fee,

cheers, Jon

[stiletto_33853]

Bill,

Unfortunately my experience has been somewhat different. I am a regular visitor to the NA (or was until they commenced the work they are doing at present) and having photographed many war diaries in their original form was horrified when a particular War Diary that I had not completed went on-line. Looking at this particular War Diary on-line at the NA and comparing it to the photographs on my lap-top it was nowhere near complete with lots of battalion orders, maps and casualty returns missing, dates mixed up (Nov 15 down as Nov 17 etc. and in some cases even the battalion numbers mixed up)

When I mentioned this to the staff, they got someone down to talk to me regarding this matter, he announced that they had fulfilled their requirements to the public by putting it in a readable format and it was not available to view in the original form now or in the future. I am afraid that it ended up in a bit of an arguement. I showed him all the photographs that I had taken alongside the NA on-line version and pointed out the huge variations, but to no avail. I was informed that I could request the original version, IF (big word that) I could show valid reason and requested it some four months ago and am still awaiting a date when I can view this diary to complete my photographing and have what will undoubtedly prove to be a diary in full rather that the NA version. Similar experience when I asked to see another diary for a forum member, due to the fact that when they scanned it and placed it on-line they had left out some maps from the original.

I am sorry, but after this experience, and a few others, I have a big problem with an organisation such as the NA, who have (to the best of my recollection) no enforceable QA Policy or no Audit's. As to Ancestry and placing the war diaries on there, if the NA are not scanning the entire diaries all you will get is what the NA have scanned unless they let ancestry in to rescan the whole shooting match, which for financial constraints Ancestry undoubtedly will not do. So, we have diaries scanned in the barest minimum form (not all I should add) which I am sure will suit the person just wanting to see what the battalion was doing on a certain day and find out what uncle Fred was up to. But for someone like yourself, myself and countless others who want to know the finer details, sorry guys but you are Sh...t out of luck. (In fairness I must also add here that it seems more prevelant in the latest diaries rather than the earlier scanned diaries)

This from an organisation that it supposedly in charge of the caring of our History and Heritage, supposedly being the key word.

Welome to the world of Disney

OK rant over

Andy

[Foxkarej]

I seem to have provoked a little debate and comment, which I have no problem with.

My wish to have the diaries on Ancestry (in any manner, complete or not) is due to the reasons behind my research.

Our town war memorial has no dates on any of the plaques at all. First War casualties are listed alongside Second War, Korean War and unfortunaytely modern day Iraq and just have surnames and initials, so no one can tell what conflict each plaque represents. I found that because no record exists of who was who I would do something about it, for the First War at least.

It is my aim to have details of all these men lodged within our local reference library and bring together as much information about each as possible so their actions cannot be forgotten, and in as many cases as possible, people can see the faces behind those names.

In common with anyone who has a hobby, cost affects how much you can achieve. I get a wealth of information on Ancestry for my £80 odd pounds a year but couldn't afford to do this on individual £3.50 downloads.

John.

[bmac]

Bill,

Unfortunately my experience has been somewhat different. I am a regular visitor to the NA (or was until they commenced the work they are doing at present) and having photographed many war diaries in their original form was horrified when a particular War Diary that I had not completed went on-line. Looking at this particular War Diary on-line at the NA and comparing it to the photographs on my lap-top it was nowhere near complete with lots of battalion orders, maps and casualty returns missing, dates mixed up (Nov 15 down as Nov 17 etc. and in some cases even the battalion numbers mixed up)

When I mentioned this to the staff, they got someone down to talk to me regarding this matter, he announced that they had fulfilled their requirements to the public by putting it in a readable format and it was not available to view in the original form now or in the future. I am afraid that it ended up in a bit of an arguement.

Andy,

I, too, had to rant quite a bit as the lady I originally spoke to was not open to the idea that they had failed to copy everything in the original files. I was re-directed to another person and this gentleman eventually agreed to let me see the files which I did the same day. No idea why I succeeded when you failed but the randomness of their response is another worry.

Clearly, though, you are right - there will be a tendency to 'edit' what is copied because:

1. it costs less; and

2. it is human to take the lazy way out.

Of course, if you've never seen the file before you will never know whether anything has not been copied and important material could well never see the light of day.

[stiletto_33853]

Bill,

Exactly, if you have never seen the diary before it was digitised you would not know what information there actually is in them and valuable material will be lost forever. When these diaries eventually get consigned to a salt mine somewhere and become illegible for future generations to use it will be a national tragedy, but the NA are supposed to be guardians of OUR history.

Then, of course, there is the question of future operating systems, will these digitised format's be usable on the programmes of the future. I know the NA are looking into this with Microsoft but with the volatile markets who knows if Microsoft will be around in another decade or so, so its very like gazing into a crystal ball, not something I would care to do with a nations history at stake.

Have to agree with your points 1 & 2, but, the cynic in me is wondering if the NA are now just catering for the family who wants to know what Uncle Fred was doing on a particular day as they can maybe earn more revenue from that source rather than the anorak's such as ourselves who want to know every little bit of information possible.

John,

I take your point and I am sure that what is being done is suitable for YOUR purposes. Just a quick point though, quite often in the War Diaries you will find Appendices to actions on a particular day or between certain dates and action reports. Supposing the man you are searching for was killed on such and such date and the War Diary just said see Appendix I, which often happens. If these Appendices are not being scanned then you are none the wiser at all, hence the present way of scanning war diaries leaves you empty of any detail. Maybe your man was killed in a trench raid which might be covered solely in an action report with the war diary stating 'Trench Raid.' For example, I can learn more of what the 1st Battalion Rifle Brigade did in the Appendices than I ever can from the war dairy. There was a further armistice suggested by the German officer commanding the regiment opposite them following the Christmas Truce of 1914 for New Years Eve, with the actual letter in the appendices but there is no mention of this in the war diary. Valuable information lost forever if these diaries are not scanned in their entirity.

Andy

[Chris_Baker]

I get the overwhelming impression that the idea that these are PUBLIC RECORDS has been sacrificed.

[Kate Wills]

Has it not occured to the NA that they could make more by charging less?

[Foxkarej]

Andy (Stileto)

I take your point and this has altered my view somewhat, if I am creating an accurate record that future generations will hopefully view, then accurate it must be. I am still determined to create this record but journeys to Kew are totally out of the question for me.

With the numbers I'm researching, I hope people don't get fed up with seeing my name and posts starting.. does anyone have.........

On the plus side, the amount of posts I could be doing will see me creeping up the ranks here. I'd resigned myself to a life as a Corporal when I'd exhausted all the family members I was researching and the detailed replies I got on those from members!!!

John.

[stiletto_33853]

Chris,

I could not agree more unfortunately, and while the majority of people just meekly sit there and accept (either through ignorance or apathy) what is happening the more it will happen, maybe.

Kate,

Possibly the influx of people ordering MIC's at £3.50 when they were first released set a bench mark for the NA to work from, but agree wholeheartedly with you.

John,

You paid £80 odd pounds for Ancestry, as your research might deepen a bit you are now faced with the possibility with paying yet another subscription with the release of the 1911 census coming up, as this has gone outside of Ancestry, and so it goes on. About two years ago, if I remember correctly, the NA sent out a questionaire asking if you would be prepared to pay for something similar to Ancestry, through the NA, and get 100 downloads per day, and how much you were prepared to pay for it?? what happened to that ??

So, we are now faced with paying subscriptions to view public documents, not only that but the NA seem to be deciding what you can see and what they scan, and, in the foreseeable future probably more subscriptions if the NA decide to release documents to different companies. Please refer to Bill's comments in post #5 and the first sentence, it will start to become prohibitively expensive.

The ironic thing is that people get worked up about the possibility of having to pay for a parking space rather than what matters, and they proclaim an interest in History.

Andy

[armourersergeant]

Its not the paying as such that I would object to, £3.50 for march 1917 or some such for the complete diary is ok, given that the divisional diary will contain in some instances fifty scans, or more! Yet I worry that only a bare few pages will be copied. It is in the missing copies that the real gems are often discovered.

Mind made up soon as, I am off to the NA, was it better when it was the PRO I ask myself, to get the rest done, Mrs Arm will have to bear the cost and abscence of me for a day or two. I made a silent promise to myself and the men of 21st division to keep their story alive, I will not be denied that right.

Rant over, but simmering inside.

Arm

[stiletto_33853]

Arm,

You are absolutely right, the real gems can be found by digging deep into the diaries. God knows what they will decide to scan if they ever get round to scanning more Divisional and such like diaries, where I have found a lot of gems. I have got most of the 14th Division Diary copied now but need the rest, let me know when you are thinking of going up, about time we met again and caught up.

Andy

[saberhagen427]

Here's something positive that could be done regarding this situation if you've discovered material that's missing from the war diaries on Documents Online:

Register with the Your Archives website.

Find or create a catalogue reference page for the relevant WO95 reference.

Add a description of all the material that's present in the war diary but has been omitted from the scan.

This would draw more attention to the situation, demonstrate to the NA that it's a problem, and help people who are researching that battalion.

Just DON'T use the site to post personal opinions, particularly if they're critical of the NA, its staff, or its policies. That would be counterproductive, and anything which includes personal opinions will be deleted by the mods.

[stiletto_33853]

Gavin,

Myself and others have made the NA aware on countless occasions that it is a problem, in our eyes, and what have we seen done about it, so far, didley squat.

It would appear that the FACT that these are public records is totally irrelevant, and, that I am afraid to say our thoughts or opinions seem to count for nothing to date.

This is from someone that used to be total believer in the National Archives, used to be.

Andy

[bmac]

Gavin's idea is fine as far as it goes but, of course, cannot answer the problem of how do you know what is missing if you haven't or cannot see the original file. The NA policy that needs changing is the one that says once a file has been digitised the original should not be made available (unless you are prepared to argue the toss and jump through several hoops). Access to digitised files on-line is a fine idea for those unable to access the NA direct and for those happy to (relatively) skim the surface of a unit diary or other file but it should not be the ONLY way to access these documents and the NA needs to know this.

But, there again, the NA does seem to be a place where simple answers to slightly more complex problems are the norm. The 21 file a day limit is, for example, the right answer only if you are trying to limit the total number of files accessed every day. What it does not answer, however, is the issue of people blocking access to files by ordering their 21 files and then keeping them sitting in their pigeon holes unread, sometimes for several days (it's happened to me!). The answer to this problem is to limit the number of files anyone can have out at any one time, with new files being released when the old ones are scanned back in.

The file limit is irritating for a researcher as if you are looking at personnel files, for example, 21 can be done in under 3 hours (given a 20 minute waiting time) in my experience, which leaves the rest of the day pretty useless. For that reason, when looking at these files, I use the bulk order system which gives me 51 files in a day (30 bulk + 21 normal). A system I recommend to all if looking at 'same class' files.

[John_Hartley]

As such, I don't have an "in principle" objection to paying for download. It is the price of sitting here in Stockport rather than travelling to Kew where I could get a free download. Although I've just spent over £100 on downloads which was a bit of financial jolt.

I do have an "in principle" objection to the fact that I may not be downloading the full diary. Certainly at least one of my extracts refers to an Appendix which just isnt there. Perhaps it was not amongst the originals (past experience of Kew visits tells me that does indeed happen more often than one would think). The difference is that with a download I have no way of knowing if it is genuinely missing or the scanning process has been poor. And from what Andy says, it seems unlikely that I will easily be able find out.

Yours

Unthrilled of Cheshire

[NigelS]

Received the email below from the NA today which might be of interest (if it hasn't already landed in your inbox). The survey includes questions on payment methods, would annual/monthly subscriptions be useful, preview before purchase, a price structure based on the number of pages etc, etc, etc, - I don't know whether they're only contacting a random sample of users, or whether anyone can take part. The survey is supposed to be anonymous although it does return an ID number once completed. Unfortunately in order to read the survey all the way through, it's necessary to respond to the questions.

Dear customer,

The National Archives is currently planning the future development of the document copying services provided via our website. We are keen to get as much input into the development of these services from the online visitors who have used them. Our records show that within the last year, you purchased a copy of a document online from The National Archives. We would like you to tell us what you thought about the document copying service that you used by completing the following short online survey. The survey will take around 10 minutes to complete. Please follow this link to tell us about when you downloaded a digitised document in pdf format, a service also known as Documents Online:

http://surveys.nationalarchives.gov.uk/aki...urvey?id=907381

Thank you for your support

Yours faithfully,

Robert Doran

Marketing Communications Coordinator

The National Archives

robert.doran@nationalarchives.gov.uk

[dfaulder]

There seems to be some form of consensus here, so

Perhaps what we as a forum need to do is identify a suitable member of the National Archives Advisory Council and when we have done that we then individually lobby that person or persons.

Failing that we consider whether we can do a poll amongst our membership and then lobby the Lord Chancellor to allow our nominee to sit on the advisory council or even on the management board.

David

[joseph]

Hi,

I filled in the survey which deals heavily with service and how you pay, the final comment I stated 'It should be free' not that this was an option on any of the questions. Rather a survey that has deceided what it wants to do and its questions and choice of answers aimed at that decision. Not worth my time and effort.

Regards Charles

[dfaulder]

>><<The survey is supposed to be anonymous although it does return an ID number once completed. >><<http://surveys.nationalarchives.gov.uk/aki...urvey?id=907381

>><<

Interesting; for an anonymous survey, your survey id number was different to mine!

David

[NigelS]

'joseph' date='Mar 11 2008, 09:12 PM' post='879447': ".. Rather a survey that has deceided what it wants to do and its questions and choice of answers aimed at that decision.

Unfortunately this is typical of all surveys & "public consultations" these days be they government, local authority, or commercial, and a I daresay a number of "consultants" get some very hefty fees for concocting them in such a way that the submissions can be interpreted to achieve the intended goal.

NigelS