Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Boards

Quick Search

Single word search

Tools

Findmypast DNA Banner

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Nil returns on census

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Pauline

Pauline Report 8 Feb 2012 21:15

I hope I have chosen the correct board for this query.

Can anyone tell me why I should get a 'Nil' result on the census, say for 1851, when I search on the Genes Reunited site. I know the people concerned were where I said they were, and on Ancestry the results come up for me. Is it that Genes R have incomplete census data? Or perhaps I am doing something wrong. I started out just to re-confirm data that I have held for a lot of years, and which was, for this family, researched at Essex Records Office, so I am not in doubt about the veracity of my information in this respect - I am just curious why I don't get a result on Genes Reunited.

Thank you
Pauline Denmark nee Clarke

:-S

Christine

Christine Report 8 Feb 2012 21:34

no this also happened to me today i found rels i was looking and tried to find them on genes as i like to print out their occupation where as on ancestry you have to view the census page but couldnt find them on genes

mgnv

mgnv Report 8 Feb 2012 23:08

My guess is that they're transcribed differently

Here's an Ancestry search

Exact Search Results - 1901 England Census
Name Parent or spouse names Birth Year Birthplace Relation Residence View Image
Harriett M Parvis abt 1869 city, Northumberland, England relation city, Durham

Now a look up on GR gets no hits in 1901.

Fortunately, when I had an Ancestry sub, I noted more details, including the census reference:
Source Citation: Class: RG13; Piece: 4759; Folio: 49; Page: 36.


Now I can go to http://www.findmypast.co.uk/ (whose transcriptions GR uses), then click on Search - Census etc., then Search by person's name in 1901, then do a census ref search (in bottom left of search box) and enter the page ref. I get:

Piece Folio Page Registration District
RG13/4759 49 36 PURVIS, Harriett M Gateshead
RG13/4759 49 36 PURVIS, Elsie Gateshead
etc

So now I can look up Harriett Purvis in GR

Surname Forename Born in Place of birth Location in 1901
Purvis Harriett M 1869 Northumberland Walker Gateshead

In this case, the image does say Purvis (as I know it ought to), and GR has the correct name, and Ancestry doesn't.
In your case, I guess it's the other way round.

Pauline

Pauline Report 26 Feb 2012 12:09

Many thanks. It gives me an alternative way to check on information I hold, for which I am grateful. Pauline

Braken

Braken Report 26 Feb 2012 20:58

I have found info on other sites that I can't find on genes weierd ;-)

Researching:
Stockton-on-tees North Yorkshire Durham & North East