[APG Public List] Assigned township or locality names

Richard A. Pence richardpence at pipeline.com
Tue Oct 6 09:57:36 MDT 2009


Rhondina:

You aren't imagining things. Depending on how you have set "Zoom," the 
margins will not show on your screen. But there is a real easy way to fix 
this: Put your pointer anywhere on the census image and left click. This 
"grabs" the image and you can move it to the top or bottom or to the left or 
right.

I think the image reader that was available a couple years ago (Mr. Sam??) 
worked this same way.

The more I use this near reader the better I like it. Sharp image, easy to 
manipulate. And it "remembers" your setting so you don't have to adjust the 
size each time you access it.

Richard

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rondina Muncy" <rondina.muncy at gmail.com>
To: <apgpubliclist at apgen.org>
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [APG Public List] Assigned township or locality names


> Michael,
>
> I have noticed these descriptions also, but have ignored them for the most
> part. I just wrote a private email mentioning another thing that seems to 
> be
> linked to the new image viewer. It may be my imagination, but are the 
> images
> being cropped closer in? I'm beginning to compare back and forth with HQ
> because I swear I'm seeing information on the HQ image that is not on the
> Ancestry image. I recently replaced some HQ census images with clearer
> Ancestry images and I'm noticing this. When I have done this in the past, 
> I
> did not notice missing information.  I'm seeing information disappear from
> the margins. I'm sorry that I don't have an example of this to post. I 
> would
> like to know if anyone else has noticed this.
>
> Rondina
> ________________________
> Rondina P. Muncy
> Ancestral Analysis
> 2960 Trail Lake Drive
> Grapevine, Texas 76051
> 817.481.5902
> rondina.muncy at gmail.com
> www.ancestralanalysis.com
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Michael Hait 
> <michael.hait at hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>> In my experience, Ancestry tries to assign township names for all of its
>> censuses, even when they may only appear on the first page, or not at 
>> all.
>> Where they do not have a township name, in the later censuses they will 
>> use
>> the enumeration district, but in earlier censuses, they may use the 
>> election
>> district.  They call both simply "District" which leaves much to be 
>> desired
>> in terms of specificity.
>>
>> Personally, when citing Ancestry's images, I identify the locality 
>> exactly
>> as it appears *on that page* and never identify the enumeration district 
>> as
>> anything but an enumeration district, or an election district as anything
>> but an election district.
>>
>> I have also noticed that lately, Ancestry itself has been providing short
>> descriptions for some districts, but they do not cite the sources of 
>> these
>> descriptions.  This has just started since they instituted the new image
>> viewer.  So far, I have only seen it in Baltimore city (which they
>> erroneously identify as being part of Baltimore County - big problem if 
>> you
>> try to look for the city records there - but that is another story
>> entirely), but wonder if they have also done this with other urban areas 
>> or
>> even rural areas.
>>
>>
>> Michael Hait
>>
>> http://www.haitfamilyresearch.com
>> Author, The Family History Research 
>> Toolkit<http://www.genealogical.com/products/The%20Family%20History%20Research%20Toolkit/7545.html?ref=1778>
>> Instructor, "African-American Genealogy", 
>> GenClass<http://www.genclass.com/african-american.htm>
>>
>> African-American Genealogy 
>> Examiner<http://www.examiner.com/x-8873-African-American-Genealogy-Examiner>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> From: rondina.muncy at gmail.com
>> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 10:02:40 -0500
>> To: apgpubliclist at apgen.org
>> Subject: Re: [APG Public List] Assigned township or locality names
>>
>>
>> Harold,
>>
>> I believe the description may be an anomaly, however, I'm wondering if 
>> the
>> practice of assigning township names when none is specified on the return 
>> by
>> Ancestry is. From reading your article, I suspect it is more common than 
>> I
>> previously thought. The 1810 census page with the description can be 
>> found
>> at:
>>
>>
>> http://search.ancestry.com/iexec/?htx=view&r=0&dbid=7613&iid=4433425_00081&fn=Michael&ln=Welch&st=r&ssrc=&pid=454008
>>
>> The image shows two pages. The description is on the lower portion (page
>> 104, lower right corner). I went back to the image on HeritageQuest and 
>> ran
>> through several images for this county. I noted that they had an image
>> mislabeled also. I depend on the image to give me the information I need 
>> for
>> the location. If I don't find the information I need, I begin the hunt
>> backwards and forwards to find the location. If I still have problems I
>> access the NARA publication. My surprise may be due to the fact that all 
>> my
>> census images up until about January 2006 originally came from NARA
>> microfilm publications. I was in the habit of looking at the images and
>> relying solely on them for my information. I'm behind the curve in 
>> noticing
>> this.
>>
>> Rondina
>>
>> ________________________
>> Rondina P. Muncy
>> Ancestral Analysis
>> 2960 Trail Lake Drive
>> Grapevine, Texas 76051
>> 817.481.5902
>> rondina.muncy at gmail.com
>> www.ancestralanalysis.com
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:38 AM, <hhsh at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> Rondina --
>>
>> Is that land description a little-noticed common fact, or a gift of that
>> enumerator (much like the 1850 US census returns for Edgar County,
>> Illinois,
>> which give counties of birth)?
>>
>> Not sure this is on point, but I wrote up a botched township assignment 
>> in
>> the
>> Ancestry.com rendition of the 1865 Illinois state census for Kane County,
>> in
>> the summer Illinois State Genealogical Society Quarterly. (Now also at
>> http://www.midwestroots.net/?page_id=729 thanks to the kind permission of
>> the
>> editor.)
>>
>> Harold
>>
>> >
>> > Whilewe are discussing web site images, I would like to bring up
>> something I
>>  > caught this week. Michael John Neill writes a newsletter called
>> *Casefile
>> > Clues.* This past week he discussed a census record from 1810.
>> Ancestry.com
>> > clearly labels the record as being from a specific township. If I go 
>> > over
>> to
>> > the image on HeritageQuest, no such township is cited. *No Twp Listed* 
>> > I
>> > clicked on the browse feature and the enumerator gave a description of
>> the land
>> > on the first page (which I have never seen before). The land 
>> > description
>> itself
>> > did not match with the topography of the area, but this is beside the
>> point.
>> > What I was concerned about was the assignment of a fictitious 
>> > *township*
>> name
>> > based on this description. I'm wondering if anyone else has taken note 
>> > of
>> such
>> > cases.
>> >
>> > Rondina________________________
>> > Rondina P. Muncy
>> > Ancestral Analysis
>> > 2960 Trail Lake Drive
>> > Grapevine, Texas 76051
>> > 817.481.5902
>> > rondina.muncy at gmail.com
>> > www.ancestralanalysis.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Harold Henderson
>> Research and Writing from Northwest Indiana
>> hhsh at earthlink.net
>> home office 219/324-2620
>> http://www.midwestroots.net
>> http://midwesternmicrohistory.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it 
>> now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222986/direct/01/>
>>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> _______________________________________________
> APG Public Mailing List
> http://apgen.org/publications/publiclist/
> 




More information about the APGPublicList mailing list