WHITNEY-L Archives

Archiver > WHITNEY > 2002-03 > 1015596697


From: "Tim Doyle" <>
Subject: RE: [WHITNEY-L] Errors in Pierce
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 08:11:37 -0600
In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20020307183737.00abec70@pop3.norton.antivirus>


Robert:

This is excellent information! It's unfortunate that there are so many
errors here. Hopefully there weren't too many additional ones added by the
transcription project. In your review, did you use the actual book or the
online transcription?

Thanks again for all of your hard work!

Tim Doyle



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Ward [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2002 5:57 PM
> To:
> Subject: [WHITNEY-L] Errors in Pierce
>
>
> Dear WRG:
>
> We have all been saying for years that Pierce has errors. Now we
> have some measure of just how bad it is.
>
> I have just finished trying to find ALL the errors in the accounts
> of the first three generations in Pierce, covering pages 22 to 40.
> You can find the results at
> <http://www.whitneygen.org/archives/extracts/pierce/errors.html>;.
> I was appalled to see how many errors there are, of all different
> kinds: typographical, date errors, inclusions of extra children,
> omissions of children, combining two real people into one account,
> expanding one real person into two accounts, wrong identifications,
> etc., etc. It is obvious to me that I cannot have found all of
> them, despite my best efforts.
>
> One reviewer once wrote that if he was researching a family treated
> by Pierce, came to some conclusion, checked with Pierce, and found
> agreement, he would go back and reverify his own work! Sounds
> prudent to me!
>
> I welcome any further errors which others are able to find, and
> corrections to them, if known. I also welcome any discussion of my
> suggested corrections. Once the group agrees that what I have
> written is pretty close to accurate, I'll cross-link the
> corrections and the extracted pages.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
> Mr. Robert L. Ward
>
> http://www.whitneygen.org/home.html

This thread: