GENBRIT-L Archives

Archiver > GENBRIT > 2004-03 > 1078254909


From: "Peter Crosland" <>
Subject: Re: 1901 On Line Census
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 19:15:09 -0000
References: <su60c.13073$h44.1374154@stones.force9.net> <c1ur39$spt$1@thorium.cix.co.uk>


> > My tally so far shows around 19% of entries have errors. You need
> to
> > do some
> > really creative setting of search criteria. Perseverence may pay
> off.
> >
> Interesting. This is a similar figure to the small-sample
> statistics I compiled when as a 1901 checker I had the chance to
> recheck some of the "checked and verified" data.

The claim by anyone that it was checked and verified is a gross distortion!
My "small sample" is from over 1000 entries. Given that many of the records
were as close to random as one might get it suggests to me that the whole
project is a farce. QuinetiQ (Spelling) deserve to have made large loss for
their incompetence and attempt to con the public.


This thread: