Deciding between multiple birth names and dates?How can I learn about a Trade Union activist in the South Wales coalfield in the 1890s and 1900s?How can I assess the statistical probability that an individual is the one I seek?Dating and identifying Penzance photos – are they of George and Fanny Wills?How accurate are birth dates on the 1939 Register?Can I determine the relationship between Mary Anne Wright (nee Harper) and Charles William Kimmons?Tracing ancestor CF Evans who died in World War 2 (aged 39 in 1945)?Identifying Norwegian parents of Hulda Marie Olsen who was born 1892 in North Dakota?Looking for marriage of Annie Elizabeth to James Spencer Ward, ca 1900 in Cheshire?Finding records of professional athlete and trainer who married 1911 at Cardiff, Wales?Similar info on death info, but a different middle name shown

"listening to me about as much as you're listening to this pole here"

I see my dog run

Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?

Is this food a bread or a loaf?

What does it exactly mean if a random variable follows a distribution

Is there a familial term for apples and pears?

Can I find out the caloric content of bread by dehydrating it?

Can I legally use front facing blue light in the UK?

Is ipsum/ipsa/ipse a third person pronoun, or can it serve other functions?

Are cabin dividers used to "hide" the flex of the airplane?

Does the average primeness of natural numbers tend to zero?

How to move the player while also allowing forces to affect it

Email Account under attack (really) - anything I can do?

Is there a way to make member function NOT callable from constructor?

What does 'script /dev/null' do?

COUNT(*) or MAX(id) - which is faster?

Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?

aging parents with no investments

Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?

How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?

Is it wise to focus on putting odd beats on left when playing double bass drums?

Eliminate empty elements from a list with a specific pattern

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

Where to refill my bottle in India?



Deciding between multiple birth names and dates?


How can I learn about a Trade Union activist in the South Wales coalfield in the 1890s and 1900s?How can I assess the statistical probability that an individual is the one I seek?Dating and identifying Penzance photos – are they of George and Fanny Wills?How accurate are birth dates on the 1939 Register?Can I determine the relationship between Mary Anne Wright (nee Harper) and Charles William Kimmons?Tracing ancestor CF Evans who died in World War 2 (aged 39 in 1945)?Identifying Norwegian parents of Hulda Marie Olsen who was born 1892 in North Dakota?Looking for marriage of Annie Elizabeth to James Spencer Ward, ca 1900 in Cheshire?Finding records of professional athlete and trainer who married 1911 at Cardiff, Wales?Similar info on death info, but a different middle name shown













2















I have some differences on the certificates and census information.



Birth Certificate:



1892




Name: Edith Nellie Hardiman



Birth Date: 16 Sep 1892



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




1901 Census



I do not have access to this census entry but I think it will be her:



Census 1901



It seems to indicate 1893 there but I assume it could theoretically calculate to 1892. Depends what the image states.



1911 Census



1911




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 17 Years Old



Birth Location: Compton, Wiltshire, England





  • Nellie could be considered Ellen I assume?


  • Compton could be considered Compton Chamberlayne I assume?

  • Being 17 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

Marriage Certificate 1



1912



She married my Great Grandfather in 1912 and it states:




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 20 Years Old




So this calculates to 1892 again.



Marriage Certificate 2



1931



My Great Grandfather died unexpectedly and thus Edith remarries in 1931:




Name: Edith Ellen Truckle



Birth Date: 37 Years Old





  • Truckle is correct and this was her first married surname.

  • Being 37 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

1939 Register



1939




Name: Edith E Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1895




  • Smith is correct as that is her new married surname.


  • 1895 is yet another year!


1939 Register Addendum



Here are all entries on the register for the household:



1939 Extra



This is my tree:



My Tree



Although my father has dementia now he over the years he told me that my Grandfather (Frederick George) had three brothers. Note that all of them have passed away thus I can present this information.




Death Certificate



She died in 1977:



1977




Name: Edith Nellie Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1894



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




So we have two names:



  • Edith Nellie Hardiman

  • Edith Ellen Hardiman

And we have a few birth entries:



  • 16 Sep 1892

  • 1893 (maybe - 1901 census - could be 1892)

  • 24 Sep 1894

  • 24 Sep 1895

Since I have the actual certificates I can confirm that her father remains the same Samuel Hardiman throughout.



At the moment I have used the latter date of 1894 since this is what they all thought:



Overview 1



My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused. But then my gut also tells me that I should really use the 1892 date as the preferred since it is when she was born:



Overview 2



So my question is two-fold really:



  1. Is Nellie / Ellen interchangeable?

  2. Which birth date should be preferred? Birth or death?









share|improve this question



















  • 3





    A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

    – AndyW
    10 hours ago






  • 2





    Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

    – ColeValleyGirl
    10 hours ago







  • 1





    Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

    – ColeValleyGirl
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago















2















I have some differences on the certificates and census information.



Birth Certificate:



1892




Name: Edith Nellie Hardiman



Birth Date: 16 Sep 1892



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




1901 Census



I do not have access to this census entry but I think it will be her:



Census 1901



It seems to indicate 1893 there but I assume it could theoretically calculate to 1892. Depends what the image states.



1911 Census



1911




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 17 Years Old



Birth Location: Compton, Wiltshire, England





  • Nellie could be considered Ellen I assume?


  • Compton could be considered Compton Chamberlayne I assume?

  • Being 17 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

Marriage Certificate 1



1912



She married my Great Grandfather in 1912 and it states:




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 20 Years Old




So this calculates to 1892 again.



Marriage Certificate 2



1931



My Great Grandfather died unexpectedly and thus Edith remarries in 1931:




Name: Edith Ellen Truckle



Birth Date: 37 Years Old





  • Truckle is correct and this was her first married surname.

  • Being 37 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

1939 Register



1939




Name: Edith E Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1895




  • Smith is correct as that is her new married surname.


  • 1895 is yet another year!


1939 Register Addendum



Here are all entries on the register for the household:



1939 Extra



This is my tree:



My Tree



Although my father has dementia now he over the years he told me that my Grandfather (Frederick George) had three brothers. Note that all of them have passed away thus I can present this information.




Death Certificate



She died in 1977:



1977




Name: Edith Nellie Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1894



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




So we have two names:



  • Edith Nellie Hardiman

  • Edith Ellen Hardiman

And we have a few birth entries:



  • 16 Sep 1892

  • 1893 (maybe - 1901 census - could be 1892)

  • 24 Sep 1894

  • 24 Sep 1895

Since I have the actual certificates I can confirm that her father remains the same Samuel Hardiman throughout.



At the moment I have used the latter date of 1894 since this is what they all thought:



Overview 1



My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused. But then my gut also tells me that I should really use the 1892 date as the preferred since it is when she was born:



Overview 2



So my question is two-fold really:



  1. Is Nellie / Ellen interchangeable?

  2. Which birth date should be preferred? Birth or death?









share|improve this question



















  • 3





    A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

    – AndyW
    10 hours ago






  • 2





    Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

    – ColeValleyGirl
    10 hours ago







  • 1





    Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

    – ColeValleyGirl
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago













2












2








2








I have some differences on the certificates and census information.



Birth Certificate:



1892




Name: Edith Nellie Hardiman



Birth Date: 16 Sep 1892



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




1901 Census



I do not have access to this census entry but I think it will be her:



Census 1901



It seems to indicate 1893 there but I assume it could theoretically calculate to 1892. Depends what the image states.



1911 Census



1911




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 17 Years Old



Birth Location: Compton, Wiltshire, England





  • Nellie could be considered Ellen I assume?


  • Compton could be considered Compton Chamberlayne I assume?

  • Being 17 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

Marriage Certificate 1



1912



She married my Great Grandfather in 1912 and it states:




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 20 Years Old




So this calculates to 1892 again.



Marriage Certificate 2



1931



My Great Grandfather died unexpectedly and thus Edith remarries in 1931:




Name: Edith Ellen Truckle



Birth Date: 37 Years Old





  • Truckle is correct and this was her first married surname.

  • Being 37 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

1939 Register



1939




Name: Edith E Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1895




  • Smith is correct as that is her new married surname.


  • 1895 is yet another year!


1939 Register Addendum



Here are all entries on the register for the household:



1939 Extra



This is my tree:



My Tree



Although my father has dementia now he over the years he told me that my Grandfather (Frederick George) had three brothers. Note that all of them have passed away thus I can present this information.




Death Certificate



She died in 1977:



1977




Name: Edith Nellie Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1894



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




So we have two names:



  • Edith Nellie Hardiman

  • Edith Ellen Hardiman

And we have a few birth entries:



  • 16 Sep 1892

  • 1893 (maybe - 1901 census - could be 1892)

  • 24 Sep 1894

  • 24 Sep 1895

Since I have the actual certificates I can confirm that her father remains the same Samuel Hardiman throughout.



At the moment I have used the latter date of 1894 since this is what they all thought:



Overview 1



My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused. But then my gut also tells me that I should really use the 1892 date as the preferred since it is when she was born:



Overview 2



So my question is two-fold really:



  1. Is Nellie / Ellen interchangeable?

  2. Which birth date should be preferred? Birth or death?









share|improve this question
















I have some differences on the certificates and census information.



Birth Certificate:



1892




Name: Edith Nellie Hardiman



Birth Date: 16 Sep 1892



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




1901 Census



I do not have access to this census entry but I think it will be her:



Census 1901



It seems to indicate 1893 there but I assume it could theoretically calculate to 1892. Depends what the image states.



1911 Census



1911




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 17 Years Old



Birth Location: Compton, Wiltshire, England





  • Nellie could be considered Ellen I assume?


  • Compton could be considered Compton Chamberlayne I assume?

  • Being 17 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

Marriage Certificate 1



1912



She married my Great Grandfather in 1912 and it states:




Name: Edith Ellen Hardiman



Birth Date: 20 Years Old




So this calculates to 1892 again.



Marriage Certificate 2



1931



My Great Grandfather died unexpectedly and thus Edith remarries in 1931:




Name: Edith Ellen Truckle



Birth Date: 37 Years Old





  • Truckle is correct and this was her first married surname.

  • Being 37 indicates a birth year of approx. 1894.

1939 Register



1939




Name: Edith E Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1895




  • Smith is correct as that is her new married surname.


  • 1895 is yet another year!


1939 Register Addendum



Here are all entries on the register for the household:



1939 Extra



This is my tree:



My Tree



Although my father has dementia now he over the years he told me that my Grandfather (Frederick George) had three brothers. Note that all of them have passed away thus I can present this information.




Death Certificate



She died in 1977:



1977




Name: Edith Nellie Smith



Birth Date: 24 Sep 1894



Birth Location: Compton Chamberlayne, Wiltshire, England




So we have two names:



  • Edith Nellie Hardiman

  • Edith Ellen Hardiman

And we have a few birth entries:



  • 16 Sep 1892

  • 1893 (maybe - 1901 census - could be 1892)

  • 24 Sep 1894

  • 24 Sep 1895

Since I have the actual certificates I can confirm that her father remains the same Samuel Hardiman throughout.



At the moment I have used the latter date of 1894 since this is what they all thought:



Overview 1



My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused. But then my gut also tells me that I should really use the 1892 date as the preferred since it is when she was born:



Overview 2



So my question is two-fold really:



  1. Is Nellie / Ellen interchangeable?

  2. Which birth date should be preferred? Birth or death?






england birth-records 1890s wiltshire






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago









PolyGeo

7,04052049




7,04052049










asked 10 hours ago









Andrew TruckleAndrew Truckle

35311




35311







  • 3





    A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

    – AndyW
    10 hours ago






  • 2





    Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

    – ColeValleyGirl
    10 hours ago







  • 1





    Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

    – ColeValleyGirl
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago












  • 3





    A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

    – AndyW
    10 hours ago






  • 2





    Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

    – ColeValleyGirl
    10 hours ago







  • 1





    Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago






  • 2





    Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

    – ColeValleyGirl
    9 hours ago






  • 1





    Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

    – AdrianB38
    9 hours ago







3




3





A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

– AndyW
10 hours ago





A little drift in stated birth years isn't unusual over seven decades. I'm more surprised at the shift in birth day from the 16th to the 24th. I've seen the birth year change quite often in people's records, but they tended to keep the day the same.

– AndyW
10 hours ago




2




2





Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

– ColeValleyGirl
10 hours ago






Ellen and Nellie are different forms of the same name. I agree with AndyW about dates -- don't forget that when you subtract an age from a year to get a birth year you could be a year out so age 17 in 1911 means born 1893-1894. And if her birth certificate is dated 1892 she can't have been born after that, so use that date. (As confirmation she was baptised in September 1892).

– ColeValleyGirl
10 hours ago





1




1





Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

– AdrianB38
9 hours ago





Using a census and an age to come up with a single year is always wrong because they might or might not have had their birthday that year. Entering 1892/93 into Ancestry is another matter! Try "abt 1892" if you have to. In this case, I'd enter the date from the birth certificate and nothing else - no alternatives. If you search Ancestry records from the tree, the search routine will offer you flexibility. I'd also link all those sources to the one birth date because a little flakiness is understood and expected!

– AdrianB38
9 hours ago




2




2





Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

– ColeValleyGirl
9 hours ago





Birth dates can be wrong on birth certificates but it's less common than finding wrong birth dates on death certificates or elsewhere. One cause of date 'errors' on birth certificate is a flat lie -- the birth date was 'massaged' to avoid a fine for late registration.

– ColeValleyGirl
9 hours ago




1




1





Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

– AdrianB38
9 hours ago





Yes Andrew - potentially lots of notes, especially for that 1939 date. Probably not with the censuses because float is expected.

– AdrianB38
9 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4














Part of your difficulty lies in the way the big data sites like Ancestry encourage us to 'do genealogy' -- we look for our 'people' by cherry-picking the most likely matches to the person we're seeking, then we try to assemble all the bits we've found into a recognizable portrait of a person.



Hint-based or index-driven searching encourages us to take the records we find out of context. We lose valuable clues that way. We can better make use of the information if we understand the sources are looking at -- which agency created them, and for what purpose -- and if we evaluate the information in each source after we have considered the source itself.



Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map gives us one method of evaluating sources and the information inside them.




  • Sources are the documents and other items you've found. They are containers for information.


  • Information is what we learn from each source.

  • Information becomes Evidence when we use it to answer a specific research question such as When was Edith Nellie Hardiman born?

To answer research questions, we can use the Genealogical Proof Standard:




To reach a sound conclusion, we need to meet all five components of
the GPS.



  1. Reasonably exhaustive research.

  2. Complete and accurate source citations.

  3. Thorough analysis and correlation.

  4. Resolution of conflicting evidence.

  5. Soundly written conclusion based on the strongest evidence.



When building a case, keep in mind what Dr. Thomas W. Jones says about the Perils of Source Snobbery. It's easy to assume that primary sources which have direct evidence about our research question are the best sources and call it a day, but those can be wrong.



Statements such as this are a red flag:




My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused.




Have you studied how the 1939 Register was created? Do you understand its purpose? Do you know who the informant is for the information contained within?



We tend to assume that all documents have information reported by the person whose information it is, but in actuality, we don't always know who the informant was. You say "They must have been confused." -- who do you mean by "they"?



Let's assume that your identification is correct and this is the right entry for your person. Now consider -- do any of us know what our birth date is? We were there, to be sure, but we weren't capable of reading a clock or a calendar! We only know our own birth date or age because someone else told us -- it is secondary information. It is also more distant in time from the birth than the birth certificate is (to pick the most extreme example). And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person? A good proof statement accounts for all of these things.



If you can't make an explicit statement about what your 'gut' is telling you, then it may be that you aren't confident yet because:



  • You haven't made a reasonably exhaustive search. Adding a baptism record, school records, a family notice, and considering the larger context, such as her place in the sibling set, can help you make a stronger case. Don't discount indirect evidence -- where you combine information from several sources. In some instances you can make a strong case with the indirect evidence even when direct evidence is lacking.

  • You don't understand your sources well enough.

  • You haven't analyzed your sources enough.

Attempting to write a proof statement can help you find your hidden assumptions and the 'holes' in your research. Evidentia is a program that can walk you through the process of extracting the claims from a source, analyzing the information inside, and writing a proof statement about what you've found (or recording that you still aren't sure yet). Another aid for evidence analysis is the online application Lineascope.



A note on Documentation:



Even though Ancestry allows us to have variant birth events in our online trees and mark one as preferred, recent changes to the tree system make that unwieldy. If you Show the Family Events in a person's profile, Ancestry now shows you all of the different birth and death events, not just the preferred one. In a recent 'Barefoot Genealogist' video, Tidying Up Your Genealogy, Crista Cowan suggests that best practice is to have only one birth and death event, rather than have multiples to keep track of variants. (It may be that it is better for Ancestry if we clean up our trees, but that discussion is outside the scope of this question and answer.)



So if you want to keep track of variant information, what are ways you can do so?



  • In the Notes on our tree (but a caution: since the recent introduction of MyTreeTags™, the auto-save on Notes has become unreliable for some users)

  • In the description of the (single) birth or death event on our online tree

  • In a separate file (your research report you've written to yourself) on your desktop computer, and/or in your genealogy software

  • In programs like Evernote or OneNote, Evidentia, Lineascope, etc.

  • In a research journal, using a program like Scrivener, Word, RedNotebook Portable etc.

  • In an old-school paper notebook, such as a bullet journal.

You've made a good start by writing up the question for this site -- now take advantage of that and look for clues in what you already have, plus be on the lookout for more sources that might give you more confidence in your conclusion.



It may sound stupid, but it really helps to keep some kind of journal or notes where you write out what you learned about each record (the parts that pertain to the question you're trying to answer) and why you think that document belongs to your research subject. Leaving an explicit, detailed record of what you were thinking makes it much easier to go back later and pick up where you left off.



A journal is one way to record information on name variants such as this excerpt from A Dictionary of First Names (second edition), by Hanks, Hardcastle, and Hodges (2006) from Oxford University Press (page 203):




Nell, Medieval short form of Eleanor, Ellen, and Helen. For the initial N, compare Nan and Ned.
...
PET FORMS: Nelly, Nellie




In the resources list below, I included some links for research guides to the 1939 Register as an example, but you can find guides for any record set you discover. In addition to all the general articles, the Family Search Research Wiki has an article about every collection at FamilySearch -- follow the Learn More link on the catalog description page for the collection.



Resources:




  • England Record Finder at the FamilySearch Wiki


  • Strategic Research Logs -- England at the FamilySearch Wiki

  • GenGuide - UK and Irish Genealogy Sources, Aids and Contacts


  • 1939 Register Research Guide at TNA


  • Inside the 1939 Register guide from Lost Cousins


  • How the Genealogical Proof Standard Can Help Your Research by Amy Johnson Crow, posted on April 3, 2019





share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    "And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago











  • @AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

    – Jan Murphy
    25 mins ago












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "467"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgenealogy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15358%2fdeciding-between-multiple-birth-names-and-dates%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4














Part of your difficulty lies in the way the big data sites like Ancestry encourage us to 'do genealogy' -- we look for our 'people' by cherry-picking the most likely matches to the person we're seeking, then we try to assemble all the bits we've found into a recognizable portrait of a person.



Hint-based or index-driven searching encourages us to take the records we find out of context. We lose valuable clues that way. We can better make use of the information if we understand the sources are looking at -- which agency created them, and for what purpose -- and if we evaluate the information in each source after we have considered the source itself.



Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map gives us one method of evaluating sources and the information inside them.




  • Sources are the documents and other items you've found. They are containers for information.


  • Information is what we learn from each source.

  • Information becomes Evidence when we use it to answer a specific research question such as When was Edith Nellie Hardiman born?

To answer research questions, we can use the Genealogical Proof Standard:




To reach a sound conclusion, we need to meet all five components of
the GPS.



  1. Reasonably exhaustive research.

  2. Complete and accurate source citations.

  3. Thorough analysis and correlation.

  4. Resolution of conflicting evidence.

  5. Soundly written conclusion based on the strongest evidence.



When building a case, keep in mind what Dr. Thomas W. Jones says about the Perils of Source Snobbery. It's easy to assume that primary sources which have direct evidence about our research question are the best sources and call it a day, but those can be wrong.



Statements such as this are a red flag:




My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused.




Have you studied how the 1939 Register was created? Do you understand its purpose? Do you know who the informant is for the information contained within?



We tend to assume that all documents have information reported by the person whose information it is, but in actuality, we don't always know who the informant was. You say "They must have been confused." -- who do you mean by "they"?



Let's assume that your identification is correct and this is the right entry for your person. Now consider -- do any of us know what our birth date is? We were there, to be sure, but we weren't capable of reading a clock or a calendar! We only know our own birth date or age because someone else told us -- it is secondary information. It is also more distant in time from the birth than the birth certificate is (to pick the most extreme example). And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person? A good proof statement accounts for all of these things.



If you can't make an explicit statement about what your 'gut' is telling you, then it may be that you aren't confident yet because:



  • You haven't made a reasonably exhaustive search. Adding a baptism record, school records, a family notice, and considering the larger context, such as her place in the sibling set, can help you make a stronger case. Don't discount indirect evidence -- where you combine information from several sources. In some instances you can make a strong case with the indirect evidence even when direct evidence is lacking.

  • You don't understand your sources well enough.

  • You haven't analyzed your sources enough.

Attempting to write a proof statement can help you find your hidden assumptions and the 'holes' in your research. Evidentia is a program that can walk you through the process of extracting the claims from a source, analyzing the information inside, and writing a proof statement about what you've found (or recording that you still aren't sure yet). Another aid for evidence analysis is the online application Lineascope.



A note on Documentation:



Even though Ancestry allows us to have variant birth events in our online trees and mark one as preferred, recent changes to the tree system make that unwieldy. If you Show the Family Events in a person's profile, Ancestry now shows you all of the different birth and death events, not just the preferred one. In a recent 'Barefoot Genealogist' video, Tidying Up Your Genealogy, Crista Cowan suggests that best practice is to have only one birth and death event, rather than have multiples to keep track of variants. (It may be that it is better for Ancestry if we clean up our trees, but that discussion is outside the scope of this question and answer.)



So if you want to keep track of variant information, what are ways you can do so?



  • In the Notes on our tree (but a caution: since the recent introduction of MyTreeTags™, the auto-save on Notes has become unreliable for some users)

  • In the description of the (single) birth or death event on our online tree

  • In a separate file (your research report you've written to yourself) on your desktop computer, and/or in your genealogy software

  • In programs like Evernote or OneNote, Evidentia, Lineascope, etc.

  • In a research journal, using a program like Scrivener, Word, RedNotebook Portable etc.

  • In an old-school paper notebook, such as a bullet journal.

You've made a good start by writing up the question for this site -- now take advantage of that and look for clues in what you already have, plus be on the lookout for more sources that might give you more confidence in your conclusion.



It may sound stupid, but it really helps to keep some kind of journal or notes where you write out what you learned about each record (the parts that pertain to the question you're trying to answer) and why you think that document belongs to your research subject. Leaving an explicit, detailed record of what you were thinking makes it much easier to go back later and pick up where you left off.



A journal is one way to record information on name variants such as this excerpt from A Dictionary of First Names (second edition), by Hanks, Hardcastle, and Hodges (2006) from Oxford University Press (page 203):




Nell, Medieval short form of Eleanor, Ellen, and Helen. For the initial N, compare Nan and Ned.
...
PET FORMS: Nelly, Nellie




In the resources list below, I included some links for research guides to the 1939 Register as an example, but you can find guides for any record set you discover. In addition to all the general articles, the Family Search Research Wiki has an article about every collection at FamilySearch -- follow the Learn More link on the catalog description page for the collection.



Resources:




  • England Record Finder at the FamilySearch Wiki


  • Strategic Research Logs -- England at the FamilySearch Wiki

  • GenGuide - UK and Irish Genealogy Sources, Aids and Contacts


  • 1939 Register Research Guide at TNA


  • Inside the 1939 Register guide from Lost Cousins


  • How the Genealogical Proof Standard Can Help Your Research by Amy Johnson Crow, posted on April 3, 2019





share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    "And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago











  • @AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

    – Jan Murphy
    25 mins ago
















4














Part of your difficulty lies in the way the big data sites like Ancestry encourage us to 'do genealogy' -- we look for our 'people' by cherry-picking the most likely matches to the person we're seeking, then we try to assemble all the bits we've found into a recognizable portrait of a person.



Hint-based or index-driven searching encourages us to take the records we find out of context. We lose valuable clues that way. We can better make use of the information if we understand the sources are looking at -- which agency created them, and for what purpose -- and if we evaluate the information in each source after we have considered the source itself.



Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map gives us one method of evaluating sources and the information inside them.




  • Sources are the documents and other items you've found. They are containers for information.


  • Information is what we learn from each source.

  • Information becomes Evidence when we use it to answer a specific research question such as When was Edith Nellie Hardiman born?

To answer research questions, we can use the Genealogical Proof Standard:




To reach a sound conclusion, we need to meet all five components of
the GPS.



  1. Reasonably exhaustive research.

  2. Complete and accurate source citations.

  3. Thorough analysis and correlation.

  4. Resolution of conflicting evidence.

  5. Soundly written conclusion based on the strongest evidence.



When building a case, keep in mind what Dr. Thomas W. Jones says about the Perils of Source Snobbery. It's easy to assume that primary sources which have direct evidence about our research question are the best sources and call it a day, but those can be wrong.



Statements such as this are a red flag:




My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused.




Have you studied how the 1939 Register was created? Do you understand its purpose? Do you know who the informant is for the information contained within?



We tend to assume that all documents have information reported by the person whose information it is, but in actuality, we don't always know who the informant was. You say "They must have been confused." -- who do you mean by "they"?



Let's assume that your identification is correct and this is the right entry for your person. Now consider -- do any of us know what our birth date is? We were there, to be sure, but we weren't capable of reading a clock or a calendar! We only know our own birth date or age because someone else told us -- it is secondary information. It is also more distant in time from the birth than the birth certificate is (to pick the most extreme example). And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person? A good proof statement accounts for all of these things.



If you can't make an explicit statement about what your 'gut' is telling you, then it may be that you aren't confident yet because:



  • You haven't made a reasonably exhaustive search. Adding a baptism record, school records, a family notice, and considering the larger context, such as her place in the sibling set, can help you make a stronger case. Don't discount indirect evidence -- where you combine information from several sources. In some instances you can make a strong case with the indirect evidence even when direct evidence is lacking.

  • You don't understand your sources well enough.

  • You haven't analyzed your sources enough.

Attempting to write a proof statement can help you find your hidden assumptions and the 'holes' in your research. Evidentia is a program that can walk you through the process of extracting the claims from a source, analyzing the information inside, and writing a proof statement about what you've found (or recording that you still aren't sure yet). Another aid for evidence analysis is the online application Lineascope.



A note on Documentation:



Even though Ancestry allows us to have variant birth events in our online trees and mark one as preferred, recent changes to the tree system make that unwieldy. If you Show the Family Events in a person's profile, Ancestry now shows you all of the different birth and death events, not just the preferred one. In a recent 'Barefoot Genealogist' video, Tidying Up Your Genealogy, Crista Cowan suggests that best practice is to have only one birth and death event, rather than have multiples to keep track of variants. (It may be that it is better for Ancestry if we clean up our trees, but that discussion is outside the scope of this question and answer.)



So if you want to keep track of variant information, what are ways you can do so?



  • In the Notes on our tree (but a caution: since the recent introduction of MyTreeTags™, the auto-save on Notes has become unreliable for some users)

  • In the description of the (single) birth or death event on our online tree

  • In a separate file (your research report you've written to yourself) on your desktop computer, and/or in your genealogy software

  • In programs like Evernote or OneNote, Evidentia, Lineascope, etc.

  • In a research journal, using a program like Scrivener, Word, RedNotebook Portable etc.

  • In an old-school paper notebook, such as a bullet journal.

You've made a good start by writing up the question for this site -- now take advantage of that and look for clues in what you already have, plus be on the lookout for more sources that might give you more confidence in your conclusion.



It may sound stupid, but it really helps to keep some kind of journal or notes where you write out what you learned about each record (the parts that pertain to the question you're trying to answer) and why you think that document belongs to your research subject. Leaving an explicit, detailed record of what you were thinking makes it much easier to go back later and pick up where you left off.



A journal is one way to record information on name variants such as this excerpt from A Dictionary of First Names (second edition), by Hanks, Hardcastle, and Hodges (2006) from Oxford University Press (page 203):




Nell, Medieval short form of Eleanor, Ellen, and Helen. For the initial N, compare Nan and Ned.
...
PET FORMS: Nelly, Nellie




In the resources list below, I included some links for research guides to the 1939 Register as an example, but you can find guides for any record set you discover. In addition to all the general articles, the Family Search Research Wiki has an article about every collection at FamilySearch -- follow the Learn More link on the catalog description page for the collection.



Resources:




  • England Record Finder at the FamilySearch Wiki


  • Strategic Research Logs -- England at the FamilySearch Wiki

  • GenGuide - UK and Irish Genealogy Sources, Aids and Contacts


  • 1939 Register Research Guide at TNA


  • Inside the 1939 Register guide from Lost Cousins


  • How the Genealogical Proof Standard Can Help Your Research by Amy Johnson Crow, posted on April 3, 2019





share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    "And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago











  • @AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

    – Jan Murphy
    25 mins ago














4












4








4







Part of your difficulty lies in the way the big data sites like Ancestry encourage us to 'do genealogy' -- we look for our 'people' by cherry-picking the most likely matches to the person we're seeking, then we try to assemble all the bits we've found into a recognizable portrait of a person.



Hint-based or index-driven searching encourages us to take the records we find out of context. We lose valuable clues that way. We can better make use of the information if we understand the sources are looking at -- which agency created them, and for what purpose -- and if we evaluate the information in each source after we have considered the source itself.



Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map gives us one method of evaluating sources and the information inside them.




  • Sources are the documents and other items you've found. They are containers for information.


  • Information is what we learn from each source.

  • Information becomes Evidence when we use it to answer a specific research question such as When was Edith Nellie Hardiman born?

To answer research questions, we can use the Genealogical Proof Standard:




To reach a sound conclusion, we need to meet all five components of
the GPS.



  1. Reasonably exhaustive research.

  2. Complete and accurate source citations.

  3. Thorough analysis and correlation.

  4. Resolution of conflicting evidence.

  5. Soundly written conclusion based on the strongest evidence.



When building a case, keep in mind what Dr. Thomas W. Jones says about the Perils of Source Snobbery. It's easy to assume that primary sources which have direct evidence about our research question are the best sources and call it a day, but those can be wrong.



Statements such as this are a red flag:




My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused.




Have you studied how the 1939 Register was created? Do you understand its purpose? Do you know who the informant is for the information contained within?



We tend to assume that all documents have information reported by the person whose information it is, but in actuality, we don't always know who the informant was. You say "They must have been confused." -- who do you mean by "they"?



Let's assume that your identification is correct and this is the right entry for your person. Now consider -- do any of us know what our birth date is? We were there, to be sure, but we weren't capable of reading a clock or a calendar! We only know our own birth date or age because someone else told us -- it is secondary information. It is also more distant in time from the birth than the birth certificate is (to pick the most extreme example). And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person? A good proof statement accounts for all of these things.



If you can't make an explicit statement about what your 'gut' is telling you, then it may be that you aren't confident yet because:



  • You haven't made a reasonably exhaustive search. Adding a baptism record, school records, a family notice, and considering the larger context, such as her place in the sibling set, can help you make a stronger case. Don't discount indirect evidence -- where you combine information from several sources. In some instances you can make a strong case with the indirect evidence even when direct evidence is lacking.

  • You don't understand your sources well enough.

  • You haven't analyzed your sources enough.

Attempting to write a proof statement can help you find your hidden assumptions and the 'holes' in your research. Evidentia is a program that can walk you through the process of extracting the claims from a source, analyzing the information inside, and writing a proof statement about what you've found (or recording that you still aren't sure yet). Another aid for evidence analysis is the online application Lineascope.



A note on Documentation:



Even though Ancestry allows us to have variant birth events in our online trees and mark one as preferred, recent changes to the tree system make that unwieldy. If you Show the Family Events in a person's profile, Ancestry now shows you all of the different birth and death events, not just the preferred one. In a recent 'Barefoot Genealogist' video, Tidying Up Your Genealogy, Crista Cowan suggests that best practice is to have only one birth and death event, rather than have multiples to keep track of variants. (It may be that it is better for Ancestry if we clean up our trees, but that discussion is outside the scope of this question and answer.)



So if you want to keep track of variant information, what are ways you can do so?



  • In the Notes on our tree (but a caution: since the recent introduction of MyTreeTags™, the auto-save on Notes has become unreliable for some users)

  • In the description of the (single) birth or death event on our online tree

  • In a separate file (your research report you've written to yourself) on your desktop computer, and/or in your genealogy software

  • In programs like Evernote or OneNote, Evidentia, Lineascope, etc.

  • In a research journal, using a program like Scrivener, Word, RedNotebook Portable etc.

  • In an old-school paper notebook, such as a bullet journal.

You've made a good start by writing up the question for this site -- now take advantage of that and look for clues in what you already have, plus be on the lookout for more sources that might give you more confidence in your conclusion.



It may sound stupid, but it really helps to keep some kind of journal or notes where you write out what you learned about each record (the parts that pertain to the question you're trying to answer) and why you think that document belongs to your research subject. Leaving an explicit, detailed record of what you were thinking makes it much easier to go back later and pick up where you left off.



A journal is one way to record information on name variants such as this excerpt from A Dictionary of First Names (second edition), by Hanks, Hardcastle, and Hodges (2006) from Oxford University Press (page 203):




Nell, Medieval short form of Eleanor, Ellen, and Helen. For the initial N, compare Nan and Ned.
...
PET FORMS: Nelly, Nellie




In the resources list below, I included some links for research guides to the 1939 Register as an example, but you can find guides for any record set you discover. In addition to all the general articles, the Family Search Research Wiki has an article about every collection at FamilySearch -- follow the Learn More link on the catalog description page for the collection.



Resources:




  • England Record Finder at the FamilySearch Wiki


  • Strategic Research Logs -- England at the FamilySearch Wiki

  • GenGuide - UK and Irish Genealogy Sources, Aids and Contacts


  • 1939 Register Research Guide at TNA


  • Inside the 1939 Register guide from Lost Cousins


  • How the Genealogical Proof Standard Can Help Your Research by Amy Johnson Crow, posted on April 3, 2019





share|improve this answer















Part of your difficulty lies in the way the big data sites like Ancestry encourage us to 'do genealogy' -- we look for our 'people' by cherry-picking the most likely matches to the person we're seeking, then we try to assemble all the bits we've found into a recognizable portrait of a person.



Hint-based or index-driven searching encourages us to take the records we find out of context. We lose valuable clues that way. We can better make use of the information if we understand the sources are looking at -- which agency created them, and for what purpose -- and if we evaluate the information in each source after we have considered the source itself.



Elizabeth Shown Mills' QuickLesson 17: The Evidence Analysis Process Map gives us one method of evaluating sources and the information inside them.




  • Sources are the documents and other items you've found. They are containers for information.


  • Information is what we learn from each source.

  • Information becomes Evidence when we use it to answer a specific research question such as When was Edith Nellie Hardiman born?

To answer research questions, we can use the Genealogical Proof Standard:




To reach a sound conclusion, we need to meet all five components of
the GPS.



  1. Reasonably exhaustive research.

  2. Complete and accurate source citations.

  3. Thorough analysis and correlation.

  4. Resolution of conflicting evidence.

  5. Soundly written conclusion based on the strongest evidence.



When building a case, keep in mind what Dr. Thomas W. Jones says about the Perils of Source Snobbery. It's easy to assume that primary sources which have direct evidence about our research question are the best sources and call it a day, but those can be wrong.



Statements such as this are a red flag:




My gut tells me to just ignore the 1939 Register. They must have been confused.




Have you studied how the 1939 Register was created? Do you understand its purpose? Do you know who the informant is for the information contained within?



We tend to assume that all documents have information reported by the person whose information it is, but in actuality, we don't always know who the informant was. You say "They must have been confused." -- who do you mean by "they"?



Let's assume that your identification is correct and this is the right entry for your person. Now consider -- do any of us know what our birth date is? We were there, to be sure, but we weren't capable of reading a clock or a calendar! We only know our own birth date or age because someone else told us -- it is secondary information. It is also more distant in time from the birth than the birth certificate is (to pick the most extreme example). And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person? A good proof statement accounts for all of these things.



If you can't make an explicit statement about what your 'gut' is telling you, then it may be that you aren't confident yet because:



  • You haven't made a reasonably exhaustive search. Adding a baptism record, school records, a family notice, and considering the larger context, such as her place in the sibling set, can help you make a stronger case. Don't discount indirect evidence -- where you combine information from several sources. In some instances you can make a strong case with the indirect evidence even when direct evidence is lacking.

  • You don't understand your sources well enough.

  • You haven't analyzed your sources enough.

Attempting to write a proof statement can help you find your hidden assumptions and the 'holes' in your research. Evidentia is a program that can walk you through the process of extracting the claims from a source, analyzing the information inside, and writing a proof statement about what you've found (or recording that you still aren't sure yet). Another aid for evidence analysis is the online application Lineascope.



A note on Documentation:



Even though Ancestry allows us to have variant birth events in our online trees and mark one as preferred, recent changes to the tree system make that unwieldy. If you Show the Family Events in a person's profile, Ancestry now shows you all of the different birth and death events, not just the preferred one. In a recent 'Barefoot Genealogist' video, Tidying Up Your Genealogy, Crista Cowan suggests that best practice is to have only one birth and death event, rather than have multiples to keep track of variants. (It may be that it is better for Ancestry if we clean up our trees, but that discussion is outside the scope of this question and answer.)



So if you want to keep track of variant information, what are ways you can do so?



  • In the Notes on our tree (but a caution: since the recent introduction of MyTreeTags™, the auto-save on Notes has become unreliable for some users)

  • In the description of the (single) birth or death event on our online tree

  • In a separate file (your research report you've written to yourself) on your desktop computer, and/or in your genealogy software

  • In programs like Evernote or OneNote, Evidentia, Lineascope, etc.

  • In a research journal, using a program like Scrivener, Word, RedNotebook Portable etc.

  • In an old-school paper notebook, such as a bullet journal.

You've made a good start by writing up the question for this site -- now take advantage of that and look for clues in what you already have, plus be on the lookout for more sources that might give you more confidence in your conclusion.



It may sound stupid, but it really helps to keep some kind of journal or notes where you write out what you learned about each record (the parts that pertain to the question you're trying to answer) and why you think that document belongs to your research subject. Leaving an explicit, detailed record of what you were thinking makes it much easier to go back later and pick up where you left off.



A journal is one way to record information on name variants such as this excerpt from A Dictionary of First Names (second edition), by Hanks, Hardcastle, and Hodges (2006) from Oxford University Press (page 203):




Nell, Medieval short form of Eleanor, Ellen, and Helen. For the initial N, compare Nan and Ned.
...
PET FORMS: Nelly, Nellie




In the resources list below, I included some links for research guides to the 1939 Register as an example, but you can find guides for any record set you discover. In addition to all the general articles, the Family Search Research Wiki has an article about every collection at FamilySearch -- follow the Learn More link on the catalog description page for the collection.



Resources:




  • England Record Finder at the FamilySearch Wiki


  • Strategic Research Logs -- England at the FamilySearch Wiki

  • GenGuide - UK and Irish Genealogy Sources, Aids and Contacts


  • 1939 Register Research Guide at TNA


  • Inside the 1939 Register guide from Lost Cousins


  • How the Genealogical Proof Standard Can Help Your Research by Amy Johnson Crow, posted on April 3, 2019






share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 13 mins ago

























answered 7 hours ago









Jan MurphyJan Murphy

18.5k33797




18.5k33797







  • 1





    "And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago











  • @AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

    – Jan Murphy
    25 mins ago













  • 1





    "And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

    – Andrew Truckle
    7 hours ago











  • @AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

    – Jan Murphy
    25 mins ago








1




1





"And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

– Andrew Truckle
7 hours ago





"And might it be possible that someone else gave the information, or that the 1939 Register entry belongs to a different person?" - No, her husband is there and she still has my two uncles living with her.

– Andrew Truckle
7 hours ago




1




1





I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

– Andrew Truckle
7 hours ago





I updated the question to show the reasons why I know the 1939 Register entry is for the correct household.

– Andrew Truckle
7 hours ago













@AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

– Jan Murphy
25 mins ago






@AndrewTruckle I've added a few notes and references to the last part of the answer. P.S. Searching the 1901 Census at FamilySearch, or at Findmypast, will give you more information than the redacted search results at Ancestry.

– Jan Murphy
25 mins ago


















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Genealogy & Family History Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgenealogy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15358%2fdeciding-between-multiple-birth-names-and-dates%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Oświęcim Innehåll Historia | Källor | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmeny50°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.2213950°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.221393089658Nordisk familjebok, AuschwitzInsidan tro och existensJewish Community i OświęcimAuschwitz Jewish Center: MuseumAuschwitz Jewish Center

Valle di Casies Indice Geografia fisica | Origini del nome | Storia | Società | Amministrazione | Sport | Note | Bibliografia | Voci correlate | Altri progetti | Collegamenti esterni | Menu di navigazione46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)Sito istituzionaleAstat Censimento della popolazione 2011 - Determinazione della consistenza dei tre gruppi linguistici della Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige - giugno 2012Numeri e fattiValle di CasiesDato IstatTabella dei gradi/giorno dei Comuni italiani raggruppati per Regione e Provincia26 agosto 1993, n. 412Heraldry of the World: GsiesStatistiche I.StatValCasies.comWikimedia CommonsWikimedia CommonsValle di CasiesSito ufficialeValle di CasiesMM14870458910042978-6

Typsetting diagram chases (with TikZ?) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to define the default vertical distance between nodes?Draw edge on arcNumerical conditional within tikz keys?TikZ: Drawing an arc from an intersection to an intersectionDrawing rectilinear curves in Tikz, aka an Etch-a-Sketch drawingLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themHow to place nodes in an absolute coordinate system in tikzCommutative diagram with curve connecting between nodesTikz with standalone: pinning tikz coordinates to page cmDrawing a Decision Diagram with Tikz and layout manager