Recording Reference Numbers 1911

[History_Hunter]

All you should need is the reference as per the examples quoted above. Both Ancestry and FMP have boxes in which you can enter the piece/folio/page number. On FMP, you have to search the specific census so in the top banner, click search, and from the drop-down menu select A-Z records sets, then search/select (year) England and Wales census.

I made another post that addresses this specifically:
https://www.british-genealogy.com/th...ferrerid=90848

Now it makes sense to me why Evidence Explained citations use more than just the RG/piece/folio/page number. Yes, you can go straight to the image on many sites, but the extra info helps to document the item you've found. Basically, it puts names to the RG/piece/folio/page number.

[History_Hunter]

[Can you provide an example of the type of document you mean? e.g. was it a census image, WWI soldier's service record

I'm looking at the UK Census records at the moment.

[History_Hunter]

The answer to that is a resounding and emphatic 'no'.
I assumed that was the PRO is now The National Archives (TNA). Confirmed by
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Record_Office

FMP is a purely commercial company which, like Ancestry and other commercial sites, has a licence to use images of documents held by TNA.
I think all documents held by TNA are Crown Copyright, which is why you see the copyright trademark followed by 'Crown copyright Images reproduced by courtesy of The National Archives, London, England' on every image page. Usually in the bottom left-hand corner.

Actually; I didn't say that Findmypast is the government website. I know they are a private venture. I have received emails at each incarnation saying that they were taking over from the previous site and that my account and credits would be transferred. The National archives site in fact points you to Findmypast, just as the Canadian government has farmed out the management of the most recent Canadian Census to Ancestry. So Findmy past is the endorsed source for users wanting to see the census data. My concern is whether the images I downloaded from the old PRO site are exactly the same ones I'd now see on Findmypast. If management was simply transferred, they ought to be.

[Pam Downes]

With you, now.

A census image for Joe Bloggs, aged 8, living in Paddock Wood, in 1871, census ref RG10/ 678 folio 29 page 34 will be the same regardless of whether you downloaded it fifty years ago or fifty seconds ago.
The only thing I would say is perhaps check out an online version now as it might be clearer than one you got years ago from another source. Strangely, I find the quality of an image can differ between FMP and Ancestry.

Pam

[History_Hunter]

The only thing I would say is perhaps check out an online version now as it might be clearer than one you got years ago from another source. Strangely, I find the quality of an image can differ between FMP and Ancestry.

Pam;

To which site are you referring as seeming to be clearer. I can get Ancestry at the library, but FMP would cost.

Regards;
Gary

[Pam Downes]

Pam;

To which site are you referring as seeming to be clearer. I can get Ancestry at the library, but FMP would cost.

Regards;
Gary

In that case, check out Ancestry.
Most times, the images are equally clear, just occasionally one's a little less clear than the other.
Remember that I'm asking you to compare today's online image to one you obtained x number of years ago, possibly from a different source. Just look at the image you already have with a critical eye. Is it a clear image, or a bit blurry? If the latter, check out the online image available today to see if it's a better one..

Pam

[History_Hunter]

Pam;

Thanks for explaining.

I just finished poking around the sites that are archived on the National Archive website (What a goldmine!!!) and also had a chat with one of their research advisors. The site I originally used in 2003 was the "1901 Census Online". At that time the PRO had just hired a company to put their 1901 Census info from their official "Image Library" online. Also, about that time, responsibility for this site was transferred from the PRO to the National Archives. It appears that this site only lasted a short while. I was told that the "Image Library" images that I purchased in 2003 are the same ones now offered by the National Archives current partner, "Findmypast".

Just located this extra bit on Findmypast. It helps explain things a bit more:

"
1901censusonline.com has moved to Findmypast

Since the 1901 Census was launched in 2002 , millions of people have searched the dedicated site. The 1901 Census has been fully searchable on Findmypast for several years, and to make sure everyone can take advantage of the search improvements and new features Findmypast offers, we’ll be closing down 1901censusonline.com on 23 July 2015.
"

The images I have are amazingly clear "TIF"-format images and, given they came directly from the official "Image Library", that's not surprising. Based on what I'm told, the Findmypast ones should be every bit as good. Not sure how Ancestry obtains it's images, but maybe they're a lossy-compressed version such as a JPG?

[History_Hunter]

Is this change in citing the source applicable to previous census years?

I read over the material in the National Archives site that explains the breakdown of named RD, SD and EDs. This seems to correlate with the piece and folio numbers, but I’ve yet to find mention of the numeric designator for the named RD, SD and ED. That said, I believe l’ve seen them used before 1911 (but could be mistaken). Can one accurately infer the names and numbers from the RG, piece and folio designator assigned to the image?

[Pam Downes]

Pam;

Thanks for explaining.

I just finished poking around the sites that are archived on the National Archive website (What a goldmine!!!) and also had a chat with one of their research advisors. The site I originally used in 2003 was the "1901 Census Online". At that time the PRO had just hired a company to put their 1901 Census info from their official "Image Library" online. Also, about that time, responsibility for this site was transferred from the PRO to the National Archives. It appears that this site only lasted a short while. I was told that the "Image Library" images that I purchased in 2003 are the same ones now offered by the National Archives current partner, "Findmypast".

Just located this extra bit on Findmypast. It helps explain things a bit more:

"
1901censusonline.com has moved to Findmypast

Since the 1901 Census was launched in 2002 , millions of people have searched the dedicated site. The 1901 Census has been fully searchable on Findmypast for several years, and to make sure everyone can take advantage of the search improvements and new features Findmypast offers, we’ll be closing down 1901censusonline.com on 23 July 2015.
"

The images I have are amazingly clear "TIF"-format images and, given they came directly from the official "Image Library", that's not surprising. Based on what I'm told, the Findmypast ones should be every bit as good. Not sure how Ancestry obtains it's images, but maybe they're a lossy-compressed version such as a JPG?

I'd forgotten about the 1901 census having its 'own' site. Not surprising since that it's sixteen years ago since it was released! Though now I think about it, I have a feeling that the 1911 might have been released a similar way but without the shambles of the 1901 when the system broke for months.

I don't have a clue what format Ancestry use for their images. However, thinking about it, the1901 and 1911 images (on any site) should be much clearer than the the earlier censuses which were obviously filmed many years ago, before all the latest gadgetry and high-resolution stuff came into being.

Pam

[Pam Downes]

Is this change in citing the source applicable to previous census years?

Do you mean the actual census reference and the way it's written in 1911, or do you mean something else?

I read over the material in the National Archives site that explains the breakdown of named RD, SD and EDs. This seems to correlate with the piece and folio numbers, but I’ve yet to find mention of the numeric designator for the named RD, SD and ED. That said, I believe l’ve seen them used before 1911 (but could be mistaken).

I can't say that I've ever seen the RD, SD, and ED referred to numercial terms in any census before the 1911. Only name-wise in indexes. I'm prepared to be told I'm totally wrong, but I wouldn't have thought many people are fanatical about recording those these items. I've only ever seen street addresss, town/village, county quoted along with the census reference number (e.g. RG11/1234 folio 56 page 78).

Can one accurately infer the names and numbers from the RG, piece and folio designator assigned to the image?

Sorry, i'm being a bit thick today. Not quite sure what you mean by this sentence.

Pam