Proformat News

Newsletter 71

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 02:15:00 +0000

Newsletter 71 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Reading old writing

Newsletter 70

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 07:27:00 +0000

Newsletter 70

Newsletter 70 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Numbering systems in family history

Newsletter 69

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:11:00 +0000

Newsletter 69 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Pedigree charts and family sheets

Newsletter 68

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:32:00 +0000

Newsletter 68 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Using the online option for storing family trees.

Newsletter 67

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 05:20:00 +0000

Newsletter 67 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Missing census records in England and Wales.

Newsletter 66

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:01:00 +0000

Newsletter 66 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Goodbye IGI, hello HRC

Newsletter 65

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 05:51:00 +0000

Newsletter 65

Newsletter 65 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

Two topics this time:

Online names at onlinenames.net.au.

Surnames variants

Newsletter 64

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 01:02:00 +0000

Newsletter 64 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: Land and the General Registry Office

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Wed, 11 May 2011 21:29:00 +0000

Newsletter 63 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website.

The main topic features: The role of social media in family history

Newsletter 62

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 07:41:00 +0000

Newsletter 62 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Standard abbreviations for the genealogist.

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:54:00 +0000

Newsletter 61

Newsletter 61 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Sanctity of the published word.

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 08:42:00 +0000

Newsletter 60

Newsletter 60 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Using web translatorss.

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 04:38:00 +0000

Newsletter 59

Newsletter 59 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Finding cousins.

Newsletter 58

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 01:17:00 +0000

Newsletter 58

Newsletter 58 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Update on NAA Adelaide—a dog's breakfast.

Newsletter 57

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 03:04:00 +0000

Newsletter 57 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: South Australian Scottish ancestors.

Newsletter 56

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 22:33:00 +0000

Newsletter 56 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: 1841 Census in Australia.

Newsletter 55

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:08:00 +0000

Newsletter 55 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Adoptions in South Australia.

Newsletter 54

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 15 Aug 2010 22:51:00 +0000

Newsletter 54 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website The main topic features: *Writing down your family history*.

Newsletter 53

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 23:31:00 +0000

Newsletter 53 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Civil Registration records across Europe.

News on National Archives of Australia co-location

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 04:54:00 +0000

On 23 February 2010 Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig, Cabinet Secretary and Special Minister of State with responsibility for the Archives, gave a guarantee that the National Archives will maintain face to face services in each state and territory by co-locating with other local institutions.

He also advised that the offices currently operating in Darwin, Adelaide and Hobart will remain open until a permanent co-location solution has been reached.

Negotiations with local organisations in Darwin, Adelaide and Hobart to reach co-location agreements are well underway. On Tuesday 8 June, the Archives' Director-General, Ross Gibbs, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the Northern Territory Government and the Archives.

The MoU follows Senator Ludwig’s visit to Darwin on Tuesday 13 April where an in-principle agreement for co-location was reached with the Northern Territory Minister responsible for Arts and Museums, the Hon Gerry McCarthy MLA. For more information read the Minister's media release. This is a significant step toward the co-location of the Darwin office and the Northern Territory Archives Service.   The key aim of co-location is to improve operational efficiencies and to make the Archives sustainable for the long term. In making decisions on co-location, the Archives must consider a number of factors, including how the agreements can most advantage the users of the Archives' services, budgetary constraints, and a growing preference for accessing records online.

The Archives will be pursuing further co-location options in the other states.

Some frequently asked questions

How many of the records will be retained in each location? How is this being decided?

No decisions have been made yet as to the number of records to be retained. Any decisions about the location of records are being made in consultation with stakeholder organisations through the National Archives' Consultative Forums in each state and territory.

How many staff will be retained in the state offices under co-location arrangements?

The number of staff in each location will largely depend on the outcomes of co-location negotiations including the amount of records to be retained and the functions to be performed in each location.

Will co-location arrangements be considered for other Archives offices?

Yes. In his 23 February announcement the Minister noted that the Archives will pursue further co-location arrangements in all states and territories.

What's the latest

Adelaide

The National Archives is currently in negotiations with the State Records of South Australia about possible co-location arrangements. The Adelaide Consultative Forum met on 29 June at which this was an item for discussion.

Darwin

On Tuesday 8 June, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the Northern Territory Government and the Archives. This is a significant step toward the co-location of the Darwin office with the Northern Territory Archives Service.

The MoU follows Senator Ludwig’s visit to Darwin on Tuesday 13 April where an in-principle agreement for co-location was reached with the Northern Territory Minister for Arts and Museums, the Hon Gerry McCarthy MLA. For more information read the Minister's media release

Representing the NT Government was Dr Diana Leeder, Executive Director, Natural Resources Division in the Department of Natural Resources, Environment, the Arts and Sport.

Hobart

The Archives' Hobart office recently hosted a visit by the Minister, Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig, who spoke to staff and addressed the Consultative Forum about the co-location of the Hobart office.

The Archives is currently discussing co-location options with Tasmanian Archives and Heritage Office.

Source: www.naa.gov.au/about-us/offices/index.aspx

Cost of vital record certificates

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 01:57:00 +0000

1 July and we see yet again another increase in the cost of birth, marriage and death certificates by the South Australian Registry of BDM.
Not their fault of course as they have to do as State Treasury directs.
How can the government justify these increases? The process involves accessing a register and photocopying the appropriate certificate on to a pre-printed page.
What do you think?

Privacy Laws

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 23:46:00 +0000

What do you think about privacy laws as experienced in Australia and elsewhere when it comes to your family history?

In Australia you cannot obtain a birth certificate until it is at least 80 years old and in some states 100 years old, or marriage certificate more recent than about the 1930s. Even dead people have privacy and death certificates are not readily available for at least 30 years. Yet English certificate are available after just one year!

Even more draconian is the growing trend to extend embargoes. Consider the item in the last Proformat News:

More privacy paranoia

State Records of SA have withdrawn access to Series GRG21/1: 1885 Land Tax Returns. This series was particularly valued by family history researchers, not only because in one listing every land owner in the colony was listed, but because of the extensive information contained within the records. The material has been withdrawn because someone has realised that the South Australia Taxation Administration Act 1996 Div 3—Secrecy 77–80 Prohibition has certain disclosures that makes it illegal for the public to access this material compiled over 120 years ago in case someone's privacy is compromised!

Do you have some thoughts on this topic? Have these laws made your research more difficult?

Newsletter 52

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 06:38:00 +0000

Newsletter 52 is now available at the newsletter archive on Adelaide Proformat's website

The main topic features: Cemetery and burial records in South Australia.

National Archives Adelaide Office compromise

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 22:21:00 +0000

The latest news on the negotiations to ensure the Adelaide Office of the NAA remains reveals that plans are well in hand to co-locate with State Records of SA. The solution will not please everyone although one cannot deny that the objective to retain a NAA presence in Adelaide has been successful.

The plan is to reopen the mothballed Collinswood repository vacated by NAA for their current premises almost a decade ago. The owner of the Collinswood premises is delighted as he has not been able to secure a tenant since NAA departed. It must be stressed that it is only a plan at this stage because the responsible State Minister is not prepared to fall into line without seriously considering the decisions by bureaucrats.

The material held by the NAA in the Angas Street repository will be returned to Collinswood and that facility will also accept material from State Records. Both groups will share the Leigh Street reading room as their CBD site. The reading room at Collinswood will be reopened but the reading room at Gepps Cross will be closed.

The writer has two significant issues with these arrangements.

Firstly the closure of the Gepps Cross reading room will be a major impediment to researchers using the material stored there. They will have to use another reading room and order the material in. This currently takes half a day. While this is not a problem for research when the material required is known, it becomes a major issue for ongoing research when the researcher is not aware of the material available to use or where using one series of records reveals the need to pursue another series. When this happens, the researcher will have to sit back and wait until the next delivery! The fact that archivists rightly refuse to allow fragile material to be transported may mean access denied as will the issues regarding oversized and heavy items. The irony is that in accommodating the NAA, whose records at Collinswood will remain readily accessible. the State's material held by State Records will become less accessible! There is of course a simple solution to the problem—keep the Gepps Cross reading room open. Even if we have to restrict the opening hours of both Gepps Cross and Collinswood, that would be a preferable, if not perfect, compromise.

The second issue relates to the revived campaign to bring back the South Australian records, the 30 shelf km of material taken interstate when the Collinswood repository was closed. Obviously, under this plan that cannot happen! If the material was returned, then there would be no room at Collinswood for State Records material. The announcement that the arrangement will allow the two collections ten-years of growth before they have to address the need for more space, clearly indicates that the stolen SA records will never return in at least the next decade. For some, this is no big deal, but no other state has a significant part of their records stored beyond their borders and certainly none have a significant part of their colonial material beyond access in their capital city. Digitisation may be the answer but of course, despite promises, the program has only concentrated on so-called popular or heavily accessed records. While this is quite understandable, where does this leave researchers of South Australian material? Apart from the major shortcomings outlined in the previous blog, digitisation of material is currently undertaken at a low resolution, and while this is fine for viewing on a monitor, it leaves a lot to be desired when printed out.

noreply@blogger.com (Adelaide Proformat) — Thu, 06 May 2010 05:49:00 +0000

National Archives of Australia Adelaide Office update

The point of this special newsletter to all subscribers is to bring you up to date on the campaign to stop the plans by the National Archives of Australia to close the Adelaide office in particular but also alert those concerned about the Hobart and Darwin closures. Many seem to have been misled into thinking that the decision taken earlier this year was a victory for the campaign. Well a victory of sorts it was but we know that the management of the National Archives is still keen to reduce the collection held in South Australia.

At the last meeting of the Adelaide Consultative Forum early in April NAA Director-General Ross Gibbs was keen to get the forum members to identify particular records to remain in Adelaide. This would suggest that the reduction of record holdings and thus storage and staff costs is still on the agenda. While the current campaign's goal was to retain the collection in Adelaide there were some other considerations, not least the retention of our very knowledgeable staff. We all know that the staff and their experiential knowledge of the collection is paramount in accessing any archival collection. Very few researchers can depend on the scope of the series descriptions to locate material.

To date there has been no formal announcement on where the collection will be located and until this happens we need to continue the pressure. The current facility is due to close in a short 10 months. The current suggested plan is for the NAA and State Records [SRSA} to reopen the former NAA repository at Collinswood. The facility has remained empty since previously vacated by the NAA. Of course while this is welcomed, we have to understand that the main reason for the involvement of SRSA is that they need the storage space for their collection. They probably see sharing the facility with NAA as a cost savings exercise too. The problem the writer has with this arrangement is that this compromise will mean that the stolen records of 2001 will not come home and the SA collection of NAA records will remain incomplete!

We know that in spite of what he might say (and he is a politician after all), the Minister does not attach much importance to this matter. He was due to attend the April Adelaide Consultative Forum but failed to appear. Moreover, we know he is still advocating that the future is the digitisation of the collection. He clearly is not listening to researchers and archivists on the impact this will have on serious research and academic pursuits. He continues to cite usage statistics without much consideration of their validity in his point of view. The Ministers continues to wrongly quote that 1.9 million records were accessed online in 2008/09 but only 57,000 were accessed in NAA reading rooms (see Newsletter 49a). Any IT person can tell you that 1.9 million refers to the number of hits on the web site (for one second or more) by anyone using the NAA’s RecordSearch database in any location for any reason. Clicking quickly in and out of a record on a monitor can never be equated with the use made of records in NAA reading rooms. Further we all know that the collection holds material difficult to digitise not to mention a multitude of records whose current usage is low and unlikely to be digitised any time soon. Requesting digital copies of NAA records is not as straightforward as it might sound: • only records that are listed at item/file level on RecordSearch can be requested (currently about only 10% of the total NAA collection);
• only records that have been access examined and determined as Open or Open with exception can be requested;
• records that are volumes, photographs or index cards are not included in the digitisation service;
• records that are large format (over A3) are not included in the digitisation service;
• records that are deemed fragile may not be digitised;
• records will only be digitised if users pre-pay a minimum of $16.50 per record sight unseen or if they have been selected by NAA for free proactive digitisation (currently mostly name-identified C20 migration records);
• People who need proof of their arrival in Australia for various entitlements need certified copies of original passenger lists not able to be digitised with our current scanning equipment;
• Requests for identical copies of records such as plans, drawings and letters with postmarks and/or stamps that are full-scale and original colour cannot be undertaken due to limitations with the current digitisation equipment;
• Some containers of the record cannot be digitised and they may give extra contextual clues to researchers;
• The quality of the digital images that NAA provides is poor.

Management continues to use access figures to the Adelaide Office to justify their thinking. When these are considered in context with other offices they are in fact quite healthy. The frequently cited statistic that of the 22,290 visits nationally only 720 researchers visited Adelaide ignores reality. For example:

• 60% of all visitor numbers are recorded for Canberra simply because they have significant exhibitions and are located in a heritage building.

• Adelaide visits represent about 3% of the total visitor numbers while Sydney the most populous city of the most populous state with the largest portion of the total collection by far (41% to Adelaide’s 0.8%) only gets 7%.

• In this current financial year Adelaide has already passed last year’s total with 731 visits to the end of March 2010.

• In October 2006, Adelaide office (like all State offices other than Melbourne) was required to close its reading room on Mondays and Tuesdays but uncounted visitors continue to visit on the closed days. These total another 111 visitors to Adelaide over the last 2 years.

What can you do? Write a letter or visit your local Federal Member and make sure they are aware of the issues and your opinions. It is an election year and politicians are more receptive at this time.