Doug and Bill -- John Graham replied to the original email on 1/1/17 and
he said:
Paul,
I would add the Les entry, maybe with a bit extra.
It's only a year since his death, so the chance of Eva re-marrying
in that time is low, and that increases the chances of SMITH being
his name.
There is no existing Ryerson entry for a Les SMITH in Dec 1998.
However, is it a small paper or a large paper? If a small paper, it
won't be hard to find the notice, but if it's a large paper, I'd add
Eva as a Prev Name for Les so a cross-ref entry is generated
pointing to the correct entry. (This is another case of asking for
help without giving us ALL the available information! It's
impossible to give a definitive answer.)
John
On 7/1/17 20:00, Bill wrote:
Dear Doug and Paul,
I have had a busy time of late so have missed a few things.
In reality Les is not the subject of this notice, so should be left out.
While there is no entry in the Ryerson Index for SMITH, Leslie or SMITH, Les there is no guarantee that the paper that his Death Notice was published has been indexed into the Ryerson Index.
Regards, Bill
G'day All,
Happy New year!!
I have a notice that reads, in part
"SMITH, Eva May... on Dec 12 1999 .... wife of Les (deceased Dec 10
1998) ..." So, should I make an entry for Les, to do so would assume
his surname was also Smith. A reasonably logical conclusion, but not
certain. Also, a researcher looking through the paper would not find
the entry if they were looking for "SMITH, Les". Any thoughts ..Paul
Nobody seems to have answered this one.
Les's death is well and truly more than 1 month ago. I would leave him
right out. The decider is probably "a researcher looking through the
paper would not find the entry if they were looking for "SMITH, Les."
Doug.
