POW Lists Italy

[Brian S]

Ha,
I can see now why the sticky hasn't been amended or deleted.

There are 93.45 reasons for not doing so.

[timbo58]

I'm missing something here as there's no one called Tom on this thread?
and 93.45? what does that refer to please?

[Brian S]

I'm missing something here as there's no one called Tom on this thread?
and 93.45? what does that refer to please?

Tom Bennington !!!!!!

JUST THE £ sign in front of the Nos is missing .

I am sure that You and everyone reading my Posts will realise how inaccurate you sticky is when reading my Posts on the subject.

All you and Forum Members need to do is to check my Observations regarding WO 392/21 Which are also those of T.N.A.

[timbo58]

Sorry Brian , I have spoken to Tom and can now understand what this means.

As I understand it it quotes WO392/12 on the tutorial on FWRs site and should read WO392/21?

I will ask those who have permission to alter these pages to make the necessary alteration in which case, thank you for pointing it out.

I wasn't aware of the exact pricing for CD collections since that is not my remit hence a number & fraction weren't obvious to me either, my apologies.

[Brian S]

Thanks Timbo,
my main problem is with the description given to WO 392/21.

As said earlier I spent a full week comparing my Casualty lists of POW who died at Sea on the Nino Bixio and the Scillin and discovered over 600 men who had died in 1942. So the File is not as you are describing it to be. A list of POW Italy .
Wish it had been as my Father is listed. He died the previous November on the Scillin.

I took the Files description up with TNA who eventually changed it to match my findings.

You really should read the Files description now given on Discovery.

Brian

[timbo58]

Thanks Brian, I will look into that.
The collection we made from TNA obviously had the same title as that which TNA gave it originally.

[Brian S]

Not a problem,
I have had my own copy of the File for several years. Check yours and you will see many Listed as PG154 which was a POW Camp created in the third week of June 1942 at Sidi Hussein; Benghazi. Closed Nov 1942.

Just look for Dvr Sims T/221204 Initials should be W.H. but are not given as such. Then refer to the Alamein Memorial, you will see my point.

A great many more like this.

[timbo58]

The reference WO392/ 21 is the source this dataset is from it is titled exactly also as per discovery.

However I think your (very valid) point is that since we made this set it's description under that title has changed and we need to ensure our own changes to match that?

https://www.forces-war-records.co.uk...in-italy-1943/
It doesn't have anything descriptive on this page at all, other than the number and type of records and the TNA title?

Which page was in error?

Sorry, I'm just stumped.

[Brian S]

Timbo,
when keying in WO 392/21 on Discovery click on the results and my point that the File is not a list POW in Italian Hands 1943 will become clear.
In the full File description you will find a note saying so.

It is obviously a list of members of the Allied Forces who at sometime between 1940 - 1943 had been prisoners in Italian Hands.
As stated a great many had been killed in 1942. The Camps given are where they were last known to have been.

Just read the note that has been added and you will see my point.

Like many other TNA Documents the date given on this particular File is date of Compilation, not the date of the information within the File.

This trend shows up quite plainly in many War Crimes Files for Italy where the incidents have happened in 1943 - 44 most are dated as 1945.
The date of investigation.

TNA would get less complaints regarding "Discovery" if they re-assessed the descriptions given to Files and the mis-spellings given to many place names.
Instead they rely on readers bringing these mistakes to their attention.

[Brian S]

Timbo
there is a new version of Discovery now.
The Note given in the description for WO 392/21 clearly states what I have been saying for a great many months now.

The "Sticky" is clearly inaccurate and really does seriously mislead those just starting out researching the subject.