CWGC vs SDGW

[leigh]

Hi all,

Stupid question #1254...

After trawling through the SDGW at my local library I have got addition information on most of the 296 soldiers in my database.

I have found discrepancies between the two referances including surnames, forenames, dates of death, Regt. number etc.

At this early stage of my research, can I assume that the CWGC data is going to be more accurate seeing as I believe the SDGW was transcribed?

Regards

Leigh

[Guest Brummy]

Mostly I have to agree usualy the CWGC records are the more accurate. But remember that the CWGC are looking after the graves and memorials of about one and a half million people from two World Wars, with those kind of figures mistakes are inevitable although happily infrequent.

Brum

[Terry Denham]

There are thousands of discrepancies between the two sources. They were produced by different people at different times and from different records. Both sets of information have been through several 're-writes' over the years and transcription errors are understandable.

Both sources can be right on occasions and the other wrong.

On balance, I usually take CWGC's data in preference especially where name spellings are concerned. Where the CWGC records contain next-of-kin info, it means that the details were verified by the relatives on their Final Verification Form and are more likely to be correct as a result.

However, none of this is guaranteed and any serious differences should be checked with independent sources (which could also be wrong!). Also, you have to allow for the fact that, at the time, many families varied the spelling of names at different times within the family. Also men enlisted under assumed names, their mother's maiden name, with their middle name only etc, etc. It can all be very confusing.

[leigh]

Thanks for that Terry and Brummy, Kind of my thoughts.

I am having to research all the lads more thourgoughly (sp) but just knowing both sources can all be wrong helps.

I am researching varients of one name and cross refferencing to other databases outside of mine and the CWGC/SDGW so I will solve all errors in the end....

Terry,

Should I proove any glaring errors (ie misspelling of surname etc) with the CWGC data will anyone want to know?

Many thanks for your replies to my inane q's

Many regards

Leigh

[John_Hartley]

Leigh

I know from experience that the burden of proof for CWGC is, quite rightly, very high.

You may think you've gathered sufficient evidence to convince yourself that a particular spelling is wrong, but if you cannot support this all the way through with official documentation (like birth/death certificates), CWGC is unlikely to change its records. One of the chaps I have researched has his name spelt very strangely on the CWGC record (Minchall). All the info I have, which includes press cuttings, name on war memoria, etc supports the usul spelling of the name as Minshall. What I don't have is definate proof linking the name I have with the name in the CWGC records. In essence, I can't 100% prove it's the same guy.

On that basis, CWGC feels unable to change the record. Frustrating as it is, I support their position about burden of proof (and not rewriting history). If , on the other hand, you can evidence it, then you'll find CWGC will respond positively and quickly.

John

[Terry Denham]

Leigh

John is absolutely correct.

You not only have to prove the revised name but also that it is the same person as in the record.

Birth and death certificates are usually accepted as being correct (although they do have errors as well!).

Yes, CWGC will want to know of a name correction but, as John says, you must prove it to their satisfaction. Email any such finding to CWGC on casualtyenq@cwgc.org.

It is always worth checking first that a possible error is not simply a scanning or clerical error (they happen) which they can easily check and may save a lot of time.

[leigh]

John,

I know what you are saying, I am not going out of my way to try and find wrong information, just it might turn up.

There is a society formed 20 years ago to research all varients of my family name and there are people from all over the globe who are members. The society database has 100,000 + name references and links to trees, BM and D certs etc.

I am compiling a database of all the great war dead soldiers of the same name. If I find anything odd I will leave it to the society to proove anything should they wish.

My mother is the family historian, my interest is the war.

Regards

Leigh.

[leigh]

Terry,

Thanks for the reply, (when I bore you too much just poke me )

Like I said I understand the proof required, I just was interested to know if they would be interested in the info.

Many regards

Leigh

[sandyford]

Leigh

I have been havering about similarly amongst differences of spelling and such things as George Edward/Edwin, between CWGC, MIC online and SDGW.

First I thought the CWGC would be the most likely to be correct because relatives have sent information and it is 'set in stone'.

Then I decided that medals would have to be correct because soldiers families actually saw their medals whereas relatives may never have been to see the gravestones to see the spelling.

Then I realised that although the objects, gravestones and medals, may have been correct the registers, cards etc. may have transcription errors.

Then I decided that the only way to be sure would be to go for Birth/ Death or certificates and census info. An impossible task for large numbers of men.

Then I remembered that in family history research the names are often spelled incorrectly on these too.

Now I put the CWGC spelling as first choice and then put MIC/SDGW/newspaper alternative beside it.

Not very satisfactory but the best I can think of at the moment.

Kate

[andy 1]

On balance, I usually take CWGC's data in preference especially where name spellings are concerned. Where the CWGC records contain next-of-kin info, it means that the details were verified by the relatives on their Final Verification Form and are more likely to be correct as a result.

at the risk of seeming daft,where did the nok get there information from.

if a soldier went overseas in 1914 was kia in 1916 and never went home in between these dates.how did his next of kin know his details ie what battalion he was in,what was his date of death etc.

as you know in my case terry cwgc say one thing presumably verified by the next of kin,yet the soldiers death certificate says another.

surely the soldier would have kept details of his n o k in his pay book,so couldn't the cwcg have got the n o k details from this or other army records.

regards

andy

[Terry Denham]

Andy

CWGC were supplied with certain data by the military - name, number, rank, unit, date of death, awards and the n-o-k address that the serviceman had registered with them.

CWGC then sent a Final Verification Form to this address bearing the details which they had. They asked for any correction to spelling etc and for any additional info which the relatives wished to give (age, schooling, achievements etc).

Where these forms came back with corrections to name spelling, they were checked and adopted as being correct. Also, the address of the n-o-k was amended if it proved to be different - where mail had been forwarded to a new address etc. (the addresses that appear on CWGC are those from the 1920s when the forms were returned and not neccessarily those during the war).

Where no form was returned to CWGC, only the bare military details appear - name, rank, number, regt, unit, date of death, awards. Forms could have not been returned for numerous reasons.

[leigh]

Andy,

In the case of my great uncle, in his service records, is a copy of the form returned to the army by his mother after his death. It was to show next of kin's, parents, brothers, sisters, addresses etc. His mothers name and address match that on the CWGC list. I dont know how this fits in with the CWGC though, but Terry will

There is also several pieces of corespondance between various members of the family and the Army from 1915 to 1920's. some to the RGA specifically and others querying the date of death, his personal effects etc I presume direct to the army.

There is even corespondance there of his mother writing to the Army in the mid 20's to ask for his medals and them writing back that they had sent them out and they had her signiture on the recipt when she signed for them.

To cut my rambling short.. In this case, the relatives seemed to know about this lads Army info etc and the army the next of kin information etc.

How the CWGC fit into the equation I dont know.

Regards

Leigh

[Michael]

Terry

Do you know if the CWGC still have the details supplied by the military, in particular the NOK address ?

Mick

[andy 1]

terry

so what your saying,is that if the n o k details are on the cwgc site,they can only have come from the verification form sent back by the n o k.is this right.

if thats the case i am very confused why my soldiers parents would have okayed the info that the cwgc sent them to verify,when his death certificate said something different.

do you think that his parents would have had a copy of his death certificate,or do you think they would have relied on what the cwgc told them.and would a copy of his death certificate have been sent to his parents or would they have had to have asked for a copy from wherever.

one more thing when the n o k got the telegram informing them of there sons death,would that of told them is regimental details and the date of his death.

andy

[Terry Denham]

Andy

The nok details given on the CWGC site mainly come from the returned Final Verification Forms. A small number come from subsequent correspondence - especially those casualties only recently added.

Whether the relatives bothered to check the details carefully - who knows. They may not have had a copy of the death certificate or at least the member of the family who returned the FVF may not have had one. I imagine that the person registering the death would have got a copy of the death certificate as you do today.

Unfortunately, these Forms were destroyed for WW1 when CWGC moved offices in the early 1970s.