Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    77

    Unhappy FamilySearch coverage

    Apologies if this topic has been covered - I did search on the forum, but may have overlooked a posting.

    A genealogical magazine I was reading recently stated that "the new site doesn't have coverage for Suffolk yet". I started wondering if there is a list anywhere of which English counties (or even parishes?) are currently covered in FamilySearch, and the dates of coverage.

    I have rummaged around the FamilySearch website, but can't find a list.

    Would really appreciate it if someone could point me in the right direction, or tell me it doesn't exist, so I can stop looking!

    Many thanks,

    Pam

  2. #2
    bamagirl
    Guest

    Default

    Hi, Pam.

    Were you asking if the IGI is still available on the new FamilySearch? As near as I can tell it is. The Hugh Wallis list has been fixed so it works with the new site as well:

    https://
    freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~hughwallis/IGIBatchNumbers.htm#Menu

    If you prefer the old IGI interface, it is available at:

    https://www.
    familysearch.org/eng/search/frameset_search.asp?PAGE=igi/search_IGI.asp&clear_form=true

    Finally, if you want to see the list of collections on the new FamilySearch, look at the bottom half of the page at:

    https://www.
    familysearch.org/

    You can browse the Historical collections by location. When you do, please notice that many collections have not been completely indexed to work with the general search form. Most of these, however, are organized in a way that let's you systematically find the specific item(s) you seek.

    I hope this helps.
    Regards,
    -Barb

  3. #3
    Reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    16,792

    Default

    You posted this in the IGI section but you actually seem to be asking about the new search system. It's not something I'm very familiar with but "Browse by Location" would appear to make it pretty clear what the coverage is.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,620

    Default

    Sorry, Peter but I have to disagree with you.

    In some instances you can get the county, and then get the parish and the years covered, e.g. Norfolk parish registers. But where it says things such as 'England deaths and burials 1538 -1991' I don't think you can get a list of the coverage.
    I tried putting 'Suffolk', 'county of Suffolk', and 'Suffolk, England' in the residence box for the England deaths and burials. I seemed to get the same result each time, and the first page of results was a very mixed bunch. Burials in Norfolk of people who lived in Suffolk; burials of people who lived in Suffolk Street Birmingham, Suffolk Place Brighelmston Sussex, - and burials of two people who lived and were buried in Suffolk.

    Pam, I think the people to ask are actually the LDS themselves. In the bottom right-hand corner of the page, under 'Resources' there's a 'Ask for help' link. Your answer may be in one of the links. If not then use 'contact Family Search'.

    (another) Pam

  5. #5
    jac65
    Guest

    Default

    Hi

    The problem is that it looks like the LDS have transferred baptisms on the 'old' IGI as one database called England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 This database has over 69 million records but no breakdown as to the coverage by county. The Hugh Wallis site does help to see what may be included. The same applies to marriages and burials. Where various counties are listed in the Browse by Location such as Cheshire, they seem to be records added to the new Familysearch that were not on the old IGI.

    Andy

  6. #6
    bamagirl
    Guest

    Default

    Hi, All.

    As an experiment, I entered some items on the updated FamilySearch search form. Since I don't have any personal research in Suffolk, so I just pulled a name out of the air:

    Firstname: John
    Lastname: English
    Death: England
    Year Range: 1800 - 1850

    Search Result: 10,603 records

    Scrolling down to the "Filter your results by" box. You can filter by collection, event location, event dates, etc. Each time you do, you can clear a filter by clicking the little "x" to the left of that filter.
    I clicked:
    Death Place and a popup box said "British Isles (158)"
    Clicked that and it put that in the blue box.
    To the left of the new filter is a little blue > , which when you click on that gives a new popup box that says:
    " England (158)
    United Kingdom (1)"
    Clicked on England(158)

    When I click on the > on this new line in the filter, the pop-up shows the counties with number of results in each:
    " Berkshire (1)
    Cambridgeshire (4)
    Cheshire (3)
    County Durham (7)
    Cumberland (5)
    Devonshire (1)
    Essex (5)
    Gloucestershire (7)
    Greater London (2)
    Hampshire (3)
    Hertfordshire (1)
    Kent (13)
    Lancashire (9)
    Lincolnshire (2)
    Lincolnshire Parts of Lindsey (2)
    London (11)
    Middlesex (9)
    Norfolk (36)
    Northamptonshire (2)
    Northumberland (10)
    Shropshire (2)
    Somerset (4)
    Suffolk (7)
    Surrey (2)
    Sussex (2)
    Warwickshire (3)
    Worcestershire (8)
    Yorkshire (10)
    Yorkshire West Riding (1)"

    So I selected: Suffolk (7)
    The results show only records from John English from the "England Deaths and Burials, 1538-1991" collection, with deaths in Suffolk in the time frame I specified.

    I hope that helps.
    Barb

  7. #7
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Thank you all for your replies. I do really appreciate your input. Having read over your tips and tried to use a few things you’ve mentioned, I’ve concluded that the bottom line is: no, there isn’t any list of coverage the way I had envisioned it.

    The two main parishes I’ve been looking at in Suffolk are: Laxfield, and Eye. I had tried Hugh Wallis’ site, but it hasn’t been very useful in this instance. He only lists a batch number for Laxfield from 1858 to 1874, and he doesn’t include Eye at all. I know there are earlier records in the IGI for Laxfield, and numerous records for Eye. I thought I had read somewhere that Hugh’s site is no longer being updated, but I may have misunderstood.

    Thank you for the results from your experiment, Barb. I had been basically searching the same way, except I put Suffolk in the place box on the first screen, instead of filtering it on the results screen. The results are the same, except the records for the rest of the country are given as alternatives, below the records for Suffolk. Thank you also for the tip on the non-indexed records – I hadn’t scrolled down the list of Historical Collections to notice that some were marked ‘Browse Image’. That’s good to keep in mind.

    Andy – your suggestion that LDS have transferred the baptism, etc . records from the ‘old’ IGI to the England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975 database makes a lot of sense. However, there are Suffolk records I found in the ‘old’ IGI that I cannot find in the new FamilySearch. For example: Charles Cracknell, christened 04 July 1779, Laxfield, Suffolk. Also: John Pretty, christened 27 Feb 1677, Eye, Suffolk. The latter, by the way cites a batch number: 8221132 – a click on this cycles back to the FamilySearch site, with the message that there are no records for this batch number! Perhaps they are still transferring records from the IGI?

    I think you’re right Pam - I need to contact the LDS for some answers. I’ve also just signed up for an online course: ‘So You Think You Know Family Search?’ Obviously I don’t, and a little more education never hurt!

    Thanks again,

    Pam

  8. #8
    Coromandel
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PamG View Post
    However, there are Suffolk records I found in the ‘old’ IGI that I cannot find in the new FamilySearch. For example: Charles Cracknell, christened 04 July 1779, Laxfield, Suffolk. Also: John Pretty, christened 27 Feb 1677, Eye, Suffolk.
    These two entries aren't 'extracted' from parish registers but submitted by members of the LDS church. Such entries are often unreliable and have not been transferred into FamilySearch. You could try checking original parish registers to see if they're there, but I'm afraid that submitted entries can be no more than guesses.

  9. #9
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coromandel View Post
    These two entries aren't 'extracted' from parish registers but submitted by members of the LDS church. Such entries are often unreliable and have not been transferred into FamilySearch. You could try checking original parish registers to see if they're there, but I'm afraid that submitted entries can be no more than guesses.
    The Cracknell entry is definitely in the original Laxfield parish records. I haven't been able to get hold of the Eye records, so I don't know if the Pretty entry is there.

    Pam

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: