AutomatedGenealogy.com

http://www.automatedgenealogy.com/censu ... jsp?id=384 This is for Halifax #42 and beginning of #43
The transcriber has really botched the numbering. Sometime she uses the Dwelling # for the HH# and at times switches back to using the HH#. I have
proofed a few pages but it's too difficult. I have checked #43 and it starts off badly - I only checked the first few pages. Halifax 44 looks better so I'll continue proofing there. just thought I should inform someone.
Thanks.

Hi Cheryl -

I've started by accepting the hh# corrections you've put on the first 3 pages and will review the other pages tomorrow to see if I can think of a shortcut rather than adjusting almost every number.

However I disagree with your adjustment of hh# 31 on page 3. The enumerator treated this as a single household, they are at a single civic address and they have the same surname. It is odd that two of them are listed as 'Head' but it will be more useful to users of the index, and true to the original, to keep them together rather than treat them as 2 different households.

Thanks. Mark

I remember that #31 and I agree they are likely Mother and Daughter and should use 1 number but the way it was written was odd. I'll go in and remove the notes. Thanks for taking a look. I thought the numbers would eventually start following the HH#s but they didn't in a consistent manner. Too bad - the actual transcribing of names etc was really good.
Interested in hearing back, Mark.

Hi Cheryl -

I have now gone through sub-district 42 from page 4 onward. What I have suggested (by way of correction notes), once the first 3 families are dealt with to avoid duplication with hh numbers used on the previous page, is to keep the existing numbering but add 1000 any time I found a 2nd family in the same dwelling. This way we get unique hh numbers even if they aren't always sequential and we don't have to adjust every single line.

If you are generally comfortable with this format I'll ask someone to accept the corrections.

I've started reviewing sub-district 43 but am only a few pages in so far.

Thanks. Mark

Thank you, Mark. I will try that method. I am currently working on #44 and it is very well done. I'll come back to 43 when I'm done 44. As long as someone knows why and what we have done so they'll accept the corrections at some future time. I appreciate your stepping up and helping.

Cheryl