Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m frustrated

1939 National Register for England and Wales

Digital images are not viewable for the 1939 National Register of England and Wales. It was recently reported that this database is now on Familysearch, and it can be found via search. however an error message pops up when trying to connect to view those records. I am searching from home on a PC using my login ID.
2 people like
this idea
+1
Reply
  • Same collection - different issue (maybe?):

    When I go to https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... to have a look at this, I see the "England and Wales National Register, 1939" page with a "Description" para and a "Citing this Collection" para.

    There is no Search form.

    Didn't we have this recently on something else???
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly

  • Yes we did. That other collection was subsequently removed from the site.

    There are images which cannot be accessed at all and there are no transcriptions to be searched, so the collection is completely useless at the moment.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly

  • This reply was removed on 2019-06-10.
    see the change log
  • I was able to open a search box and do a search from home. This is a restricted index collection and when I tried to open with my public account it gave me a warning indicating so. I opened one of the index records and it gave me an indication the images come from findmypast.co.uk. I checked and you can see the index from a FHC using a public account.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • All

    I suspect that a restriction for "FamilySearch" applies because that there are, records of the "National Registration Act, 1939" of "England and Wales" for "World War II" in:

    (1) a very basic precis (only) "Transcript" (ie, Name & Birth Year) available in/through "FindMyPast"; and,

    (2) BOTH, a great "Transcript"; and, an "Image" available in/through "Ancestry.com".

    (3) a GREAT "Transcript" (only) available in/through "MyHeritage.com"

    I also suspect that there would be much involved with any "Contractual" Agreement with regard to the "National Registration Act, 1939" of "England and Wales" for "World War II".

    I could; but, have not bothered to "Created" any of my own "User Defined" such "Sources" for the "National Registration Act, 1939" of "England and Wales" for "World War II", I simply add the detail in the "Other Information" under "Residence"; and, include, both, the "Transcript" URL from "FindMyPast"; and, the "Image" URL from "Ancestry.com", within the "Reason Statement"; and "Save" the "Source" from "MyHeritage.com" to the "Sources" in "Family Tree" (ie. "FamilySearch" ) for the individual/person concerned.

    We will just have to wait and see what transpires in/with any "Contractual" Agreement arrangements with regard to the "National Registration Act, 1939" of "England and Wales" for "World War II" with/for/by "FamilySearch".

    Just my thoughts.

    Brett
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • Re restricted index collection: Oh. You know I'm not at all sure that I'd even heard of restricted indexes before! I guess it makes sense that they could exist but whereas we see appropriate warnings when images are restricted, I'm not seeing any warning that this is a restricted index.

    Phil said: "I was able to open a search box and do a search from home. This is a restricted index collection and when I tried to open with my public account it gave me a warning indicating so"

    The situation I see is different from you Phil (I'm non-LDS accessing from home).

    When I go to https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... and view the collections for England, the 1939 is down in the "Image-Only Historical Records".

    When I go to the landing page for the 1939 Collection on https://www.familysearch.org/search/c... it says "The index was provided by Findmypast, and users will be directed to images on findmypast.com." (Which kinda contradicts this being an Image-only collection).

    At no point can I do a search of this collection and at no point do I see any warning that it's a restricted index collection. Both of which sound completely different from your experience, Phil! It is also contradicted by the statement on that landing page "The index was provided by Findmypast". What index??

    I need to be clear that I am not complaining about the contractual situation re the 1939. But I'm not seeing any information to explain to me what's going on. I suggest that the 1939 landing page needs to be amended to say that access to the search facility is restricted to FHCs or whatever it is and access to the images is also restricted. Or... If the restriction is to LDS members, then the 1939 collection needs to be hidden altogether from non-LDS in the same way that I know (from this forum) that other collections are.
    • view 3 more comments
    • Thanks - that matches my experience now.
    • Just to be clear - I still believe that non LDS users accessing the collection search page outside an FHC need to be told that they will not be seeing the search dialogue. Presumably this applies to any restricted Index collection.

      As it is, it looks like FS simply forgot to code the search dialogue on the collection landing page. Which I know now to be unfair.

      Quite where this warning should appear is up to FS - my initial thought is that the collection landing page needs to be altered but there might be better, more generic ways than recoding all the restricted Index collection pages.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I am seeing the same as Adrian (also non-LDS accessing from home), using Safari.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • After reading the Blog item at https://www.familysearch.org/blog/en/... in April, I knew I had to attend an FHC to view these indexes, add the sources to Family Tree, then download the images from Find My Past.

    I find I did all that on 1 May 2019 for all the close relatives I could find.



    Screenshot of source in a Family Tree individual's Sources section;



    Perhaps a little surprised I can view these from home - unlike when I get home from an FHC and try to view IMAGES, through links I had attached whilst there.
    • view 3 more comments
    • I don't know about useless as you can see it at a FHC. Attachments should work at home and I have a bug open as to why they aren't working.
    • Yes but my point is that at an FHC you can see the data anyway through Ancestry and Findmypast. You can also see the images on those sites as well.

      So what is the actual utility of the database? It is limited to those cases, such as PID L8WG-RV5 highlighted above where someone has actually attached the source. That is the only time it is actually particularly useful. What fraction of those at an FHC are going to attach a source from that particular database? Fairly small number I'd suggest.

      In another thread it has already been highlighted how the FHC network is withering on the vine as its primary raison d'etre of microfilm has been removed, and the marginal benefit of going there and getting access to the institutional database subscriptions and also to transcribed record databases like this is pretty small.

      My local FHC has opening hours on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays according to the wiki. During the day is useless due to work. That leaves the 7-9 pm sessions. The easiest public transport option is a bus that has stops about 5-10 minutes' walk from both where I live and the FHC. So when does that bus run during those hours? Well the penultimate bus stops near the FHC at 18:19 and the last bus stops near the FHC at 19:45. What about getting home? Well the last bus that stops near the FHC arrives at 20:00. Hardly particularly practical is it. For those with cars things are considerably easier, but I suspect that my experience with public transport in the UK is repeated for those with cars in many other places.

      So like I said if both images and transcriptions can already be accessed via institutional subscriptions at an FHC, what is the point of having an index that is only accessible at an FHC? If I wanted to get access to institutional subscriptions to things like Ancestry and FMP I could equally well do so at my local library, which is an awful lot easier to get to than the FHC and has much longer opening hours. I already have personal subscriptions to Ancestry and FMP anyway, so that reduces the marginal benefit for me even further.

      Restricted images are one thing. Restricted transcriptions are quite another, especially when the said restricted transcriptions can be easily accessed through institutional genealogy website subscriptions that the vast majority of public library systems will have access to. Simply put if transcriptions are going to have restrictions like this in place then it's just not worth the bother of having them online at all. The opportunity cost of the resources expended in putting the transcriptions online exceeds the opportunity benefit of having the transcriptions online.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly

  • I'm not arguing against the thrust of David's argument but do see there is at least some benefit in this index, for those of us who can get to an FHC. Unlike restricted images that I can attach to individuals' Sources sections in Family Tree, at least I can view some valuable detail when I get home. So one could argue that images / digitised films only available at FHCs are pretty useless, too, if the only time they can be viewed is on a return visit to the FHC.

    I have not come across a restricted index collection before and hope this practice will not spread but, as I don't have access to the 1939 register from home (having no subscription to Ancestry, FMP, etc.), I am pleased I am now able to view this information from the comfort of my living room.
    • view 2 more comments
    • Adrian

      Yes, that's true. Fortunately, I also downloaded the respective images from FMP, so I have the missing DOBs and full addresses detail, which is missing from the indexed versions.

      I'm glad I still have the Hyde Park FHC to attend, following closure of the FHC at Kew. As David comments, hours of opening are generally very limited and at least Hyde Park has extended its hours. Sadly, on the day I turned-up there were only two other patrons - with that level of support no wonder they are disappearing.
    • Oh I don't have a problem with FMP restricting the index - they put a lot of time and effort into its creation, especially given the need to redact people still believed to be living. I'm not expecting a different stance for some time - maybe in 2039 when all the data is unredacted???
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly