Obituary shell game
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
clifto
Obituary shell game
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
-
singhals
Re: Obituary shell game
clifto wrote:
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
-
clifto
Re: Obituary shell game
singhals wrote:
I didn't realize there was a difference, but the things in the dead trees
paper have the same format as the stuff I've gotten off AO&DN, so I
assumed it was all the same. In any event, if AO&DN has both, and
Ancestry says one exists, isn't it logical I'd find it on AO&DN?
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
I didn't realize there was a difference, but the things in the dead trees
paper have the same format as the stuff I've gotten off AO&DN, so I
assumed it was all the same. In any event, if AO&DN has both, and
Ancestry says one exists, isn't it logical I'd find it on AO&DN?
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
-
Sir Creep
Re: Obituary shell game
singhals wrote:
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
-
singhals
Re: Obituary shell game
Sir Creep wrote:
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and
death notices are handled differently, are indexed
differently, and are catalogued differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art
Buchwald.
Cheryl
singhals wrote:
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and
death notices are handled differently, are indexed
differently, and are catalogued differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art
Buchwald.
Cheryl
-
Bruce Remick
Re: Obituary shell game
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:Y6ydnYj9RIOxaS3YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@rcn.net...
I find that a local death notice usually appears first, then an obit appears
a day or so later, if one was submitted. My experience shows that most
local deaths don't result in an obituary, only a death notice.
Bruce
news:Y6ydnYj9RIOxaS3YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@rcn.net...
Sir Creep wrote:
singhals wrote:
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I
find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and death notices
are handled differently, are indexed differently, and are catalogued
differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art Buchwald.
Cheryl
I find that a local death notice usually appears first, then an obit appears
a day or so later, if one was submitted. My experience shows that most
local deaths don't result in an obituary, only a death notice.
Bruce
-
Sir Creep
Re: Obituary shell game
Bruce Remick wrote:
You guys are probably right...different publishers handle it
differently. In the Detroit News the large obits are printed wihtin a
page of the death notices, so I am jaded. I DO rememeber a time the
death notices were somehow assocaited with the classified ads, like the
first entries. Odd. Now that you mention it, it is possible the obits
ar published only on Sundays.
You know, I'll quit now while I'm behind LOL.
SC
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:Y6ydnYj9RIOxaS3YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@rcn.net...
Sir Creep wrote:
singhals wrote:
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I
find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and death notices
are handled differently, are indexed differently, and are catalogued
differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art Buchwald.
Cheryl
I find that a local death notice usually appears first, then an obit appears
a day or so later, if one was submitted. My experience shows that most
local deaths don't result in an obituary, only a death notice.
Bruce
You guys are probably right...different publishers handle it
differently. In the Detroit News the large obits are printed wihtin a
page of the death notices, so I am jaded. I DO rememeber a time the
death notices were somehow assocaited with the classified ads, like the
first entries. Odd. Now that you mention it, it is possible the obits
ar published only on Sundays.
You know, I'll quit now while I'm behind LOL.
SC
-
Claude J
Re: Obituary shell game
In article <Y6ydnYj9RIOxaS3YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@rcn.net>, singhals@erols.com
says...
My recollection is that obits of newsworthy notables are published by the media
as news items, and death notices are treated like advertising, published after
a fee is paid.
--
Claude
says...
snip
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and
death notices are handled differently, are indexed
differently, and are catalogued differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art
Buchwald.
Cheryl
My recollection is that obits of newsworthy notables are published by the media
as news items, and death notices are treated like advertising, published after
a fee is paid.
--
Claude
-
Huntersglenn
Re: Obituary shell game
clifto wrote:
local paper provides free death notices and charges for obituaries, but
both appear on the same page, under the heading of Obituaries. The only
way you can tell the difference is that the death notices are extremely
brief, giving just the name, date of death and when the funeral will be
held. The obituaries give a lot more information, but again, those are
paid for by the families.
When comparing what's at ancestry.com and elsewhere (and vice versa),
pay attention to the dates covered. Is it possible that the AO&DN
doesn't cover the same dates as ancestry's listing did? Another thing
would be where does AO&DN get their information? Is it directly from
the newspapers, and if so, then does the newspaper that is referenced at
Ancestry for this person provide information to the AO&DN?
Cathy
I didn't realize there was a difference, but the things in the dead trees
paper have the same format as the stuff I've gotten off AO&DN, so I
assumed it was all the same. In any event, if AO&DN has both, and
Ancestry says one exists, isn't it logical I'd find it on AO&DN?
Some newspapers do publish death notices separately from obituaries. My
local paper provides free death notices and charges for obituaries, but
both appear on the same page, under the heading of Obituaries. The only
way you can tell the difference is that the death notices are extremely
brief, giving just the name, date of death and when the funeral will be
held. The obituaries give a lot more information, but again, those are
paid for by the families.
When comparing what's at ancestry.com and elsewhere (and vice versa),
pay attention to the dates covered. Is it possible that the AO&DN
doesn't cover the same dates as ancestry's listing did? Another thing
would be where does AO&DN get their information? Is it directly from
the newspapers, and if so, then does the newspaper that is referenced at
Ancestry for this person provide information to the AO&DN?
Cathy
-
Bruce Remick
Re: Obituary shell game
"Huntersglenn" <huntersglenn@cox.net> wrote in message
news:ak9sh.22168$cv2.5635@newsfe13.lga...
In the Washington Post Metro Section, all the agate-type death notices
recently have been grouped together, many with photos, after the obit
section. I believe the death notice insertions are part of the funeral home
package. The home also can arrange for an obit if the survivors wish one
and can provide the data.
Some years ago, before most papers went online, I was a "volunteer
submitter" on the Obituary Daily Times web page
http://www.rootsweb.com/~obituary/ where I would record data from each
(Wash Post) death notice and obit every day and submit it to the site.
Although this allowed me access to any other submitted obit from around the
country, it also meant that I had to keep my original newspapers for a week
or so and be ready to fully transcribe any obit that another "volunteer"
might request. This offer expired after a week or so, and I then could trash
the obit section. I must say that at least two hours every night was spent
doing my "volunteer work", and I never got to take advantage of a lookup and
transcription. I finally had to bow out in order to get my vision back.
The site is still going strong, as far as I can tell. With not-too-old
obits, it's often possible to check the newspaper name and date of insertion
in the header info and to find an obit still accessible, either for free or
for a fee.
Bruce
news:ak9sh.22168$cv2.5635@newsfe13.lga...
clifto wrote:
I didn't realize there was a difference, but the things in the dead trees
paper have the same format as the stuff I've gotten off AO&DN, so I
assumed it was all the same. In any event, if AO&DN has both, and
Ancestry says one exists, isn't it logical I'd find it on AO&DN?
Some newspapers do publish death notices separately from obituaries. My
local paper provides free death notices and charges for obituaries, but
both appear on the same page, under the heading of Obituaries. The only
way you can tell the difference is that the death notices are extremely
brief, giving just the name, date of death and when the funeral will be
held. The obituaries give a lot more information, but again, those are
paid for by the families.
In the Washington Post Metro Section, all the agate-type death notices
recently have been grouped together, many with photos, after the obit
section. I believe the death notice insertions are part of the funeral home
package. The home also can arrange for an obit if the survivors wish one
and can provide the data.
Some years ago, before most papers went online, I was a "volunteer
submitter" on the Obituary Daily Times web page
http://www.rootsweb.com/~obituary/ where I would record data from each
(Wash Post) death notice and obit every day and submit it to the site.
Although this allowed me access to any other submitted obit from around the
country, it also meant that I had to keep my original newspapers for a week
or so and be ready to fully transcribe any obit that another "volunteer"
might request. This offer expired after a week or so, and I then could trash
the obit section. I must say that at least two hours every night was spent
doing my "volunteer work", and I never got to take advantage of a lookup and
transcription. I finally had to bow out in order to get my vision back.
The site is still going strong, as far as I can tell. With not-too-old
obits, it's often possible to check the newspaper name and date of insertion
in the header info and to find an obit still accessible, either for free or
for a fee.
Bruce
-
singhals
Re: Obituary shell game
Sir Creep wrote:
The *POINT* is not where the blasted thing is located
physically by the layout guys; the *POINT* is that the two
terms are _not_ interchangable and if what was published was
a paid "death notice", it will not be found in a search for
an "obituary".
Cheryl
Bruce Remick wrote:
"singhals" <singhals@erols.com> wrote in message
news:Y6ydnYj9RIOxaS3YnZ2dnUVZ_umlnZ2d@rcn.net...
Sir Creep wrote:
singhals wrote:
clifto wrote:
So I'm at the library using Ancestry.com, and as I'm tooling along I
find
a record for an obit in the Chicago Tribune, 20-Mar-95, for DeGrazia,
Virginia M. So I head on over this morning to America's Obituaries &
Death Notices to get a copy, and it's not there.
Phooey.
I then ask for all obits in the Tribune for that day, and I get 8.
So I head on over to the Chicago Tribune dead trees edition for January
11, 2007, and there are easily 50 obituaries there.
So I sez to myself, "Self," I sez, "something ain't right here."
At the risk of being wrong _again_ this week ;} -- are you
sure you're making the same distinction the newspaper made
between an obit and a death notice?
Cheryl
Sure, by definition there is a difference, but am I being presumptuous
if I suggest that in 99.9% of all cases the Obits are printed on the
same or adjacent page as the Death Notices? If scanning a microfilm, I
can't imagine how you could miss it? What paper puts one in Section
'B' and the other in Section 'C'? or 14 pages apart? Maybe in the old
days (1895), but not in 1995. They would all be together....er...I
think (lol).
My take on this is that it is possible the obit/death notice were
actually published the day before/after that given. I'd cast a 3-5 day
'net' around 20-Mar-95 and see what I catch. Not to be
condescending....I am most certain the poster has done this.
SC
My point, apparently obscure as always, is: obituaries and death notices
are handled differently, are indexed differently, and are catalogued
differently.
See the Washington POST of Friday 19 Jan 2007 in re Art Buchwald.
Cheryl
I find that a local death notice usually appears first, then an obit appears
a day or so later, if one was submitted. My experience shows that most
local deaths don't result in an obituary, only a death notice.
Bruce
You guys are probably right...different publishers handle it
differently. In the Detroit News the large obits are printed wihtin a
page of the death notices, so I am jaded. I DO rememeber a time the
death notices were somehow assocaited with the classified ads, like the
first entries. Odd. Now that you mention it, it is possible the obits
ar published only on Sundays.
You know, I'll quit now while I'm behind LOL.
SC
The *POINT* is not where the blasted thing is located
physically by the layout guys; the *POINT* is that the two
terms are _not_ interchangable and if what was published was
a paid "death notice", it will not be found in a search for
an "obituary".
Cheryl
-
clifto
Re: Obituary shell game
Huntersglenn wrote:
Well, I tried to find out. Last time I asked for all they had in Illinois
on June 12, 1996. Today I asked for all Illinois from June 10 to June 14.
It appears there are at least 131 over those five days, but as so often
happens in my experience with this product, in the middle of looking at
the results it just stopped responding altogether. Maybe if they reboot
Windows 3.0 or put another meg of memory in their '286 I can try
another day.
I did think I had it the first time, though, as Ancestry said 12-Jun-96
and I asked for all AO&DN had on that date. But it's hard to believe
they'd have only eight items for the one day and no less than 131 for
the five-day period, so I suspect the problem was just an AO&DN
malfunction.
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb
When comparing what's at ancestry.com and elsewhere (and vice versa),
pay attention to the dates covered. Is it possible that the AO&DN
doesn't cover the same dates as ancestry's listing did?
Well, I tried to find out. Last time I asked for all they had in Illinois
on June 12, 1996. Today I asked for all Illinois from June 10 to June 14.
It appears there are at least 131 over those five days, but as so often
happens in my experience with this product, in the middle of looking at
the results it just stopped responding altogether. Maybe if they reboot
Windows 3.0 or put another meg of memory in their '286 I can try
another day.
I did think I had it the first time, though, as Ancestry said 12-Jun-96
and I asked for all AO&DN had on that date. But it's hard to believe
they'd have only eight items for the one day and no less than 131 for
the five-day period, so I suspect the problem was just an AO&DN
malfunction.
--
All relevant people are pertinent.
All rude people are impertinent.
Therefore, no rude people are relevant.
-- Solomon W. Golomb