Field Value Correction Note |
2 |
|
105 |
Heisey | Elisabeth |
F |
|
Wife |
M |
Jan 1 |
1859 |
42 |
On line 2,
the value for the givens
field is "Elisabeth",
the suggested correction is "Elizabeth".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
7 |
|
106 |
Woodard | Amos |
M |
|
labour |
S |
Feb 2 |
1881 |
20 |
On line 7,
the value for the otherRelationship
field is "labour",
the suggested correction is "Laborer".
The following comment was attached: the 'u' is actually an 're'
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
8 |
|
107 |
Bennis | John |
M |
|
Head |
M |
Jan 20 |
1851 |
50 |
On line 8,
the value for the surname
field is "Bormis",
the suggested correction is "Dennis?". Submitted anonymously.
The following comment was attached: Its definitely not Bormis!
|
This correction was evaluated by Christie Williamson:
A change other than the suggested correction has been made, I have checked the image of the original form and agree with the current value
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
8 |
|
107 |
Bennis | John |
M |
|
Head |
M |
Jan 20 |
1851 |
50 |
On line 8,
the value for the surname
field is "Bennis",
the suggested correction is "Rennie".
The following comment was attached: another vote for Rennie, although the name is actually Rainey. This is the way enumerator writes "R", there is an extra loop on the tail. Make sure you correct everyone in the household when you do a surname correction
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
8 |
|
107 |
Bennis | John |
M |
|
Head |
M |
Jan 20 |
1851 |
50 |
On line 8,
the value for the surname
field is "Bormis",
the suggested correction is "Rennie". Submitted anonymously.
The following comment was attached: Definitely RENNIE!
|
This correction was evaluated by Christie Williamson:
I have checked the image of the original form and am very sure that the suggested correction does not reflect the original.
This comment was added: I DON'T THINK SO! The first letter looks just like the B on line 6 for Bolton. The last letter is not an e like in line 7 for AmoS.
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
11 |
|
107 |
Bormis | William F |
M |
|
Son |
S |
Jan 2 |
1886 |
15 |
On line 11,
the value for the givens
field is "William F",
the suggested correction is "William L".
The following comment was attached: William Leonard
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
12 |
|
107 |
Bormis | Irene |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
Jan 22 |
1890 |
11 |
On line 12,
the value for the givens
field is "Irene",
the suggested correction is "Irene E".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
18 |
|
108 |
Tupper | Harry |
M |
|
Servant |
S |
Nov 28 |
1876 |
24 |
On line 18,
the value for the year
field is "1876",
the suggested correction is "1856".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
18 |
|
108 |
Tupper | Harry |
M |
|
Servant |
S |
Nov 28 |
1876 |
24 |
On line 18,
the value for the givens
field is "Harry",
the suggested correction is "Harvy".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
23 |
|
109 |
Stickley | Martha L |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
Oct 30 |
1897 |
3 |
On line 23,
the value for the year
field is "1897",
the suggested correction is "1893".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
23 |
|
109 |
Stickley | Martha L |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
Oct 30 |
1897 |
3 |
On line 23,
the value for the age
field is "3",
the suggested correction is "7".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
32 |
|
110 |
Meyer | Bertha |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
Dec 3 |
1893 |
7 |
On line 32,
the value for the givens
field is "Bertha",
the suggested correction is "Ruth".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
38 |
|
111 |
Smith | Margaret |
F |
|
Wife |
M |
Jun 1 |
1845 |
56 |
On line 38,
the value for the year
field is "1845",
the suggested correction is "1844".
The following comment was attached: looks like a 4 was written over the 5
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
42 |
|
112 |
Risebrough | Elia |
F |
|
Wife |
M |
Jul 3 |
1870 |
30 |
On line 42,
the value for the givens
field is "Elia",
the suggested correction is "Eliza".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
46 |
|
112 |
Risebrough | Gladys |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
Nov 7 |
1900 |
|
On line 46,
the value for the age
field is "[?]",
the suggested correction is "11/12".
|
|
Field Value Correction Note |
50 |
|
115 |
Gower | Louisa |
F |
|
Daughter |
S |
May 28 |
1900 |
|
On line 50,
the value for the age
field is "[?]",
the suggested correction is "11/12".
|
|