<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 15 days – 15 FREE* collections!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/</link>
	<description>The official Ancestry.co.uk blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2013 18:23:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: FREE* today – American Obituaries</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1699</link>
		<dc:creator>FREE* today – American Obituaries</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 06:02:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1699</guid>
		<description>[...] ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown reaches its climax today. As a final treat, we’ve made our United States Obituary [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown reaches its climax today. As a final treat, we’ve made our United States Obituary [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FREE* today – 1901 England Census</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1696</link>
		<dc:creator>FREE* today – 1901 England Census</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 06:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1696</guid>
		<description>[...] the penultimate day of our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown! Today, we’ve made our 1901 England Census , completely free for everyone to use. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the penultimate day of our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown! Today, we’ve made our 1901 England Census , completely free for everyone to use. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FREE* today – 1930 USA Census</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1692</link>
		<dc:creator>FREE* today – 1930 USA Census</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 10:37:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1692</guid>
		<description>[...] nearing the end of our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown! Today, we’ve made our 1930 United States Federal Census, completely free for [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] nearing the end of our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections’ countdown! Today, we’ve made our 1930 United States Federal Census, completely free for [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis Payne</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1689</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis Payne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:19:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1689</guid>
		<description>Josh - where on the birth indexes does it give a specific month ? You will find Oct-Nov-Dec, Jan-Feb-Mar, etc but not &quot;October&quot;. I&#039;m sure if you click on the image it will be the dates as transcribed. Don&#039;t blame Ancestry for what&#039;s on the original index !

If we&#039;re going to criticise Ancestry, let&#039;s criticise them for something they can fix !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Josh &#8211; where on the birth indexes does it give a specific month ? You will find Oct-Nov-Dec, Jan-Feb-Mar, etc but not &#8220;October&#8221;. I&#8217;m sure if you click on the image it will be the dates as transcribed. Don&#8217;t blame Ancestry for what&#8217;s on the original index !</p>
<p>If we&#8217;re going to criticise Ancestry, let&#8217;s criticise them for something they can fix !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Angela Bolton</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1688</link>
		<dc:creator>Angela Bolton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:59:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1688</guid>
		<description>Yes, I agree with everything being said. As for Josh saying his birth wasn&#039;t Oct, is that because he was registered in a later quarter, or maybe it was just a mistake ? I was born Dec 1950 but wasn&#039;t registered until Jan Qtr 1951.
I pay into findmypast too so now retired, was wondering if I could get rid of ancestry. Just decided to renew another year on both sites. Having said that, if I do, will my tree be deleted? Anyone know?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I agree with everything being said. As for Josh saying his birth wasn&#8217;t Oct, is that because he was registered in a later quarter, or maybe it was just a mistake ? I was born Dec 1950 but wasn&#8217;t registered until Jan Qtr 1951.<br />
I pay into findmypast too so now retired, was wondering if I could get rid of ancestry. Just decided to renew another year on both sites. Having said that, if I do, will my tree be deleted? Anyone know?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1687</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:32:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1687</guid>
		<description>And apparently I was born in October, when I definitely wasn&#039;t. For what some people are paying, its ridiculous they can&#039;t sort the basics out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And apparently I was born in October, when I definitely wasn&#8217;t. For what some people are paying, its ridiculous they can&#8217;t sort the basics out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1686</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1686</guid>
		<description>I was looking forward to searching for newspaper articles on my relatives, but I found its only American newspapers. What good is that to me, ancestry?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was looking forward to searching for newspaper articles on my relatives, but I found its only American newspapers. What good is that to me, ancestry?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FREE* today – Quebec church records</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1680</link>
		<dc:creator>FREE* today – Quebec church records</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 06:03:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1680</guid>
		<description>[...] you keeping up with our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections&#8217; countdown? Remember, there are now a whopping 12 free collections for you to search! Today, we’ve [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] you keeping up with our ‘15 minutes with 15 collections&#8217; countdown? Remember, there are now a whopping 12 free collections for you to search! Today, we’ve [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Francis Payne</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1679</link>
		<dc:creator>Francis Payne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1679</guid>
		<description>My birth has Southampton being in Oxfordshire. Just that one page is full of other geographical errors. The whole index is so bad that when searching for a birth NEVER enter a county name - otherwise you probably won&#039;t find what you are after. Really needs sorting out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My birth has Southampton being in Oxfordshire. Just that one page is full of other geographical errors. The whole index is so bad that when searching for a birth NEVER enter a county name &#8211; otherwise you probably won&#8217;t find what you are after. Really needs sorting out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Database accuracy</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/2011/09/30/15-free-collections/#comment-1678</link>
		<dc:creator>Database accuracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:53:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ancestry.com/uk/?p=2772#comment-1678</guid>
		<description>ND O&#039;Brien makes the point that the database is inaccurate.  This arises as the transcription has been handled and cross-checked but the people so doing may not be familiar with the geography.  The issue of Dover, London, Middlesex is the result of a &#039;best guess&#039; of inferred county which is wrong.

The solution is for the user to post a correction.

In one instance I corrected two complete pages of census where SAUGHALL and been published as SANDHALL.  As Saughall is an odd name I only recognised the error from local knowledge.

In another &#039;error&#039; place of birth was given as MAKER, Devon.  No such place exists on maps however Maker was the parish and not the place.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ND O&#8217;Brien makes the point that the database is inaccurate.  This arises as the transcription has been handled and cross-checked but the people so doing may not be familiar with the geography.  The issue of Dover, London, Middlesex is the result of a &#8216;best guess&#8217; of inferred county which is wrong.</p>
<p>The solution is for the user to post a correction.</p>
<p>In one instance I corrected two complete pages of census where SAUGHALL and been published as SANDHALL.  As Saughall is an odd name I only recognised the error from local knowledge.</p>
<p>In another &#8216;error&#8217; place of birth was given as MAKER, Devon.  No such place exists on maps however Maker was the parish and not the place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
